While I'm not disagreeing with your post as a whole, I want to address this one question...and I'll start with a question of my own: How many babies have been lost just this year (and just on this site) despite not being cut?
Speaking for myself, I cut 3 - well, unless you count the Savu eggs that I cut at day 65 because they hadn't even dented, and the eggs were candling green....but all of those lived, quite possibly because I cut them - and, yes, all 3 of those babies died. BUT, so did every baby in the 7 egg clutch laid on the same day as those, and they slit the eggs themselves; and every baby in the 7 egg clutch that was about 10-14 days from hatching; another 6 egg clutch due about the same time; a 12 egg clutch (not BP) that was dented and should have started pipping within 2 days; and a 14 egg clutch that was probably 3 weeks from hatching. All of those babies were - I'm assuming - lost within a 36 hr period, due to something that transpired.
I'll admit that it's a fairly big assumption, but I have my reasons...those reasons being the obvious deaths of the 3 eggs I cut, and the 7 that had self pipped, the suspected death of the other 7 egg clutch (because after noting that the others were dead, I candled them and saw no movement...but I don't know for a fact that they were dead at that point). Those 7, and all the other unhatched eggs in the incubator started to change color and show clear signs that the babies were dead about 4-5 days later.
Perhaps my cutting those 3 eggs ultimately did them in - obviously, I can't deny that possibility. But...and this is a serious question...could that act have somehow been related to all the others dying? Certainly seems like a stretch, but I'm open to theories.
First of all, I apologize if my comment sounded like I was pointing fingers at people. That wasn't my intent--I just wanted to make a point. (For the record, I had no idea about your clutches, Harald.)
I have no problem with cutting an egg or two if something seems wrong. No issue with that at all. And yes, it's a good point: what about those who die even if they aren't cut (or because they aren't cut)?
There are two ways to answer this. One is that perhaps they were supposed to die for one reason or another. It's entirely possible that there was something wrong with them--genetically or otherwise. For example, perhaps the snakes that are unable to slit the egg and drown have some kind of genetic problem that manifests this way. Perhaps this is a way to cleanse the gene pool in wild pythons? I don't know. I spoke with a friend on this matter once, and she was conflicted because she understood the desire to save a snake that might not survive if someone doesn't intervene, but there's also the view that perhaps if the baby can't get out, it shouldn't. It's kind of a hard line approach, but it's a point that can't be completely ignored.
The other way of looking at it (and this is what I tend toward) is that I'd rather a snake die because I didn't cut it than because I did. This is why I do still cut the other eggs after the first one has pipped: I would feel absolutely terrible if a baby died and I could have saved it by cutting. Yes, a part of me still wonders if there's some reason the baby was supposed to die, but I'd rather give the snake a chance and see how it goes from there. But that's just based on personal preference.
Above all, though, if a snake dies because I didn't cut it, that's really not my fault, no matter how guilty I'd feel about it. (Yes, it could be my fault from an incubator problem or something similar, but that's a different issue.)
It's also difficult, as you mention, to prove whether cutting would save babies in certain circumstances.
As for your final question, I have no idea why cutting those three eggs would've resulted in the deaths of the others, and it seems highly unlikely to me. Other than maybe an incubator issue of some sort, I have no idea what would cause that. It could easily be something out of your control...which makes it really frustrating. :-(
