Submitted by Todd Gastaldo (not verified) on Sun, 14/12/2008 - 22:08.
"SCIENTIFIC" BABY ASPHYXIATION: SOME MIDWIVES ARE WHORING FOR OBs....
I noted that immediate cord clamping is baby asphyxiation - obvious child abuse.
I noted that this obvious crime is "performed" in most c-sections and most "cord blood banking" births, according to retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG...
See It's BABY ASPHYXIATION - was Re: Cord Blood Banking
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2770
PREGNANT WOMEN: This is an EASY crime to avoid - it's easy to give your baby the "extra" up to 50% of blood volume....
See SIMPLE RULE below.
LESSCA suggested in reply that because midwives are committing the child abuse, it's OK to abuse...
"These days [even - TDG] midwives seem to clamp the cord straight away so this argument of baby asphyxiation no longer holds water. Our five girls had their cords clamped within 30 seconds of delivery."
http://just4families.com/drupal/Cord+Blood+Banking+And+Cord+Blood+Stem+Cells+Save+Lives
Les,
I would suggest that most midwives - esp. homebirth midwives - do NOT have cords "clamped within 30 seconds of delivery."
There are, however, some midwives - CNMwives/hospital midwives - who have been clamping within 30 seconds of delivery...
>
> JUDITH MERCER, CNM IS "SCIENTIFICALLY" WHORING FOR OBGYNs - BABIES BE
> DAMNED
>
>>>>>BEGIN excerpt of Amy: OBs are robbing LOTS of baby blood...
> http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about83706.html
>
> In 2001, CNMwife Judy Mercer wrote that early cord clamping behavior "can
> reduce the red
> blood cells an infant receives at birth by more than 50%." (!)
>
> In the same paper, she wrote that she reviewed the medical literature from
> 1980 to 2001...
>
> See Mercer JS^^^. Current best evidence: a review of the literature on
> umbilical cord
> clamping.J Midwifery Womens Health. 2001 Nov-Dec;46(6):402-14. PubMed
> abstract
>
> ^^^Nurse-Midwifery Program, University of Rhode Island College of Nursing,
> Kingston 02881-2021, USA.
>
> HERE'S A 1992 STUDY THAT CNMwife MERCER MUST HAVE SEEN...
>
> "Neonatal blood volume...was 50% higher in the late cord-clamped infants
> than in the early cord-clamped infants. [Linderkamp et al. ^^^Acta
> Paediatr.
> 1992 Oct;81(10):745-50. PubMed abstract]
LATE CLAMPING **WAS** 3 MIN...
>
> (Early clamping was < 10 seconds and and late clamping was 3 min.)
>
> ^^^ Linderkamp O, Nelle M, Kraus M, Zilow EP Department of Pediatrics,
> University of Heidelberg, Germany.
>
>
> NOW **30 SECONDS** IS "DELAYED" CORD CLAMPING!
>
>
> I RECENTLY WROTE (as above)...
>
> How about we all go out and "donate" 50% of *our* blood volumes!
>
> Donna Young replied:
>
> Today, Todd, the new delayed is 30-second clamping. did you read Judith S.
> Mercer's article...she counted, 10, 20, 30 seconds clamp. The mothers were
> given the choice delayed clamping (30-second) or instant.......tricky eh.
> NO informed choice for no clamping, ever, primal birth rights... Why
> not?...
>
>
> My thanks to Donna Young (www.lotusbirth.com) for calling my attention to
> the immediate cord clamping child abuse.
>
> It's BIZARRE that 30 seconds was defined as "delayed" cord clamping.
>
> It's almost as if the cord blood banking interests RECRUITED the CNMwives
> to
> help "scientifically" DEFINE "delayed" to mean IT'S OK TO ROB BLOOD FROM
> BABIES.
>
>
> In 2002: Judith Mercer, CNM (and Skovgaard) suggested early cord clamping
> can cause DEATH...
>
> "Early clamping of the umbilical cord at birth...causes neonatal blood
> volume to vary 25% to 40%. Such a massive change occurs at no other time
> in
> one's life without serious consequences, even death."
> [J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2002 Mar;15(4):56-75. PubMed abstract]
>
> In 2003: Judith Mercer, CNM et al. REPORTED ON (participated in?) early
> cord
> clamping...
>
> HERE'S THE ABSTRACT EXCERPT:
>
> ....A randomized controlled trial recruited 32 infants between 24 and 32
> weeks. Immediately before delivery, mothers were randomized to ICC (cord
> clamped at 5 to 10 seconds) or DCC (30- to 45-second delay in cord
> clamping)
> groups. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analyses revealed that the DCC group
> were more likely to have higher initial mean blood pressures (adjusted OR
> 3.4) and less likely to be discharged on oxygen (adjusted OR 8.6). DCC
> group
> infants had higher initial glucose levels (ICC=36 mg/dl, DCC=73.1 mg/dl;
> p=0.02). CONCLUSION: The research design is feasible. The immediate
> benefit
> of improved blood pressure was confirmed and other findings deserve
> consideration for further study.
>
> Mercer et al.^^^J Perinatol. 2003 Sep;23(6):466-72. PubMed Abstract
>
> ^^^Mercer JS, McGrath MM, Hensman A, Silver H, Oh W. College of Nursing,
> University of Rhode Island, White Hall, 2 Heathman Road, Kingston, RI
> 02881-2021, USA.
>
>>>>>END excerpt of Amy: OBs are robbing LOTS of baby blood...
> http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about83706.html
LES WROTE:
"The more people discuss this subject the more it will become
acceptable. All parents should be encouraged to collect cord blood"
I REPLIED:
I, too, would encourage all parents to collect cord blood - but without
asphyxiating the baby - only after the baby is done with his/her cord blood.
SIMPLE RULE: Do not clamp/cut the cord until the baby is pink and breathing
and not in need of resuscitation. There are minor exceptions to this simple
rule. For example, immediate cord clamping may be necessary if the cord
rips. Talk to your doctor or midwife.
This post will be archived for global access. Search for it at
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/
Reply
Featured Advertisers
We are happy to consider link exchanges and to publish guest posts - contact us for more information at: lessca01@bigpond.com
'Scientific' baby asphyxiation: Some midwives are whoring for...
"SCIENTIFIC" BABY ASPHYXIATION: SOME MIDWIVES ARE WHORING FOR OBs....
I noted that immediate cord clamping is baby asphyxiation - obvious child abuse.
I noted that this obvious crime is "performed" in most c-sections and most "cord blood banking" births, according to retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG...
See It's BABY ASPHYXIATION - was Re: Cord Blood Banking
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/message/2770
PREGNANT WOMEN: This is an EASY crime to avoid - it's easy to give your baby the "extra" up to 50% of blood volume....
See SIMPLE RULE below.
LESSCA suggested in reply that because midwives are committing the child abuse, it's OK to abuse...
"These days [even - TDG] midwives seem to clamp the cord straight away so this argument of baby asphyxiation no longer holds water. Our five girls had their cords clamped within 30 seconds of delivery."
http://just4families.com/drupal/Cord+Blood+Banking+And+Cord+Blood+Stem+Cells+Save+Lives
Les,
I would suggest that most midwives - esp. homebirth midwives - do NOT have cords "clamped within 30 seconds of delivery."
There are, however, some midwives - CNMwives/hospital midwives - who have been clamping within 30 seconds of delivery...
>
> JUDITH MERCER, CNM IS "SCIENTIFICALLY" WHORING FOR OBGYNs - BABIES BE
> DAMNED
>
>>>>>BEGIN excerpt of Amy: OBs are robbing LOTS of baby blood...
> http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about83706.html
>
> In 2001, CNMwife Judy Mercer wrote that early cord clamping behavior "can
> reduce the red
> blood cells an infant receives at birth by more than 50%." (!)
>
> In the same paper, she wrote that she reviewed the medical literature from
> 1980 to 2001...
>
> See Mercer JS^^^. Current best evidence: a review of the literature on
> umbilical cord
> clamping.J Midwifery Womens Health. 2001 Nov-Dec;46(6):402-14. PubMed
> abstract
>
> ^^^Nurse-Midwifery Program, University of Rhode Island College of Nursing,
> Kingston 02881-2021, USA.
>
> HERE'S A 1992 STUDY THAT CNMwife MERCER MUST HAVE SEEN...
>
> "Neonatal blood volume...was 50% higher in the late cord-clamped infants
> than in the early cord-clamped infants. [Linderkamp et al. ^^^Acta
> Paediatr.
> 1992 Oct;81(10):745-50. PubMed abstract]
LATE CLAMPING **WAS** 3 MIN...
>
> (Early clamping was < 10 seconds and and late clamping was 3 min.)
>
> ^^^ Linderkamp O, Nelle M, Kraus M, Zilow EP Department of Pediatrics,
> University of Heidelberg, Germany.
>
>
> NOW **30 SECONDS** IS "DELAYED" CORD CLAMPING!
>
>
> I RECENTLY WROTE (as above)...
>
> How about we all go out and "donate" 50% of *our* blood volumes!
>
> Donna Young replied:
>
> Today, Todd, the new delayed is 30-second clamping. did you read Judith S.
> Mercer's article...she counted, 10, 20, 30 seconds clamp. The mothers were
> given the choice delayed clamping (30-second) or instant.......tricky eh.
> NO informed choice for no clamping, ever, primal birth rights... Why
> not?...
>
>
> My thanks to Donna Young (www.lotusbirth.com) for calling my attention to
> the immediate cord clamping child abuse.
>
> It's BIZARRE that 30 seconds was defined as "delayed" cord clamping.
>
> It's almost as if the cord blood banking interests RECRUITED the CNMwives
> to
> help "scientifically" DEFINE "delayed" to mean IT'S OK TO ROB BLOOD FROM
> BABIES.
>
>
> In 2002: Judith Mercer, CNM (and Skovgaard) suggested early cord clamping
> can cause DEATH...
>
> "Early clamping of the umbilical cord at birth...causes neonatal blood
> volume to vary 25% to 40%. Such a massive change occurs at no other time
> in
> one's life without serious consequences, even death."
> [J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2002 Mar;15(4):56-75. PubMed abstract]
>
> In 2003: Judith Mercer, CNM et al. REPORTED ON (participated in?) early
> cord
> clamping...
>
> HERE'S THE ABSTRACT EXCERPT:
>
> ....A randomized controlled trial recruited 32 infants between 24 and 32
> weeks. Immediately before delivery, mothers were randomized to ICC (cord
> clamped at 5 to 10 seconds) or DCC (30- to 45-second delay in cord
> clamping)
> groups. RESULTS: Intention-to-treat analyses revealed that the DCC group
> were more likely to have higher initial mean blood pressures (adjusted OR
> 3.4) and less likely to be discharged on oxygen (adjusted OR 8.6). DCC
> group
> infants had higher initial glucose levels (ICC=36 mg/dl, DCC=73.1 mg/dl;
> p=0.02). CONCLUSION: The research design is feasible. The immediate
> benefit
> of improved blood pressure was confirmed and other findings deserve
> consideration for further study.
>
> Mercer et al.^^^J Perinatol. 2003 Sep;23(6):466-72. PubMed Abstract
>
> ^^^Mercer JS, McGrath MM, Hensman A, Silver H, Oh W. College of Nursing,
> University of Rhode Island, White Hall, 2 Heathman Road, Kingston, RI
> 02881-2021, USA.
>
>>>>>END excerpt of Amy: OBs are robbing LOTS of baby blood...
> http://www.groupsrv.com/science/about83706.html
LES WROTE:
"The more people discuss this subject the more it will become
acceptable. All parents should be encouraged to collect cord blood"
I REPLIED:
I, too, would encourage all parents to collect cord blood - but without
asphyxiating the baby - only after the baby is done with his/her cord blood.
SIMPLE RULE: Do not clamp/cut the cord until the baby is pink and breathing
and not in need of resuscitation. There are minor exceptions to this simple
rule. For example, immediate cord clamping may be necessary if the cord
rips. Talk to your doctor or midwife.
This post will be archived for global access. Search for it at
http://health.groups.yahoo.com/group/chiro-list/