Dr. Erasmus Darwin, Don't Tie the Cord, 1801
How long have the doctors known hasty umbilical cord clamping endangers the newborn infant, the neonate? Concerns of Donna Young, Mother and Grandmother.
The answer is, "Before 1801!" The quotation of
Dr. Erasmus Darwin is in red below.
and other links. Dr. E. Darwin was the
champion of survival of the fittest theory, promoted by his Grandson, Charles. We have no
idea how many medical persons took
facts of good medical science and used it deleterious to those they did not respect or value to having
best practice possible and
least risk of harm, but could be exploited by breach of trust, no one in the medical profession would
stop them by secrecy of their
Oath, that also had secrecy of the medical arts and practices in that Oath.
Since we have logically and intuitively known not to clamp the functioning and
pulsating lifeline cord, why, then, have many,
medical persons, including midwives, that go into the homes for homebirths, continue to do, and many
in secret, early umbilical
cord clamping?
In most instances, this is imposed on the child without informed consent. The medical facts of no harm done is by no clamping, or tying off the cord, or cutting it. This trend, a tradition, need not be done at all, unless, (1) the cord tore or (2) for placenta previa? All other reasons are not good reasons, and must be seen to be justified by facts of medical evidence. However, the evidence of fact are often destroyed by the involvement of all medical persons of a child's birth. The professionals groups are collaborating with one another.
The truth revealed is that our grandparents, prior to the 1920's, did not do anything with the umbilical cord or the placenta. They simply kept the placenta in a warmed towel, and the baby in another. Then they put the placenta in a diaper, and it fell off in a day's time. The mother birthed in the warmest room possible. The obvious benefits to the child were: If the baby's was kept warm and allowed full blood transfusion from the placenta to his/her expanding lungs, there was the benefit too, of no cord or navel infections. The baby had healthy lungs, no interruption of the oxygenized blood and volume to the brain.
In most instances, the babies were undamaged by drugs and hasty clamping, and the imposed on faulty birth positions, flat on the back and semi-sitting positions. These harmful birth positions control the birth of most children, even to this day. They are imposed on women if they have a medical persons attend their birth.
Mothers of long ago, knew the benefits to manage labor discomforts safely, they used a nice warm tub. The mother's wisely birthed on her side, or in any gravity position of comfort to her, trusting in her own instincts. Such trusts in our own bodies and the baby to know what to do have had medical interventions that must be justified, before a court of law. If we allow the medical persons to have the power of control on the child's lifeline, we may have a form of social Darinism , in concealed form. We would never know our weakened babies by sex, by race, by color, by faith, were imposed on by the clamp of the controlling medical persons, for whatever motives they conceal. Who can know the heart of man or intentions. Only God can. by Donna Young
Quotation of Dr. Erasmus Darwin:
"Another thing very injurious to the child, is the tying and cutting of the
navel string too soon; which should always be left till the child has not
only repeatedly breathed but till all pulsation in the cord ceases. As
otherwise the child is much weaker than it ought to be, a portion of the
blood being left in the placenta, which ought to have been in the child."
Erasmus Darwin, Zoonomia, 1801, Vol III, page 302.
Reference originally from: Dr. Mavis Gunther, UK, 1957.
Gunther M. M.A., M.D. Camb. Obstetric Hospital, University College Hospital, London,
The transfer of blood between the baby and the placenta in the minutes after birth. Lancet 1957;I:1277-1280
Dr. E. Darwin, the Grandfather of Charles, both supported survival of the fittest, when he said, "Another
thing . . . " I wonder
what more he was trying to tell us that were harmful to women and the newborn child? Did he know
the logic of gravity birth
positions, and how flat on the back and semi-sitting birth positions closed the birth canal by up to
30 percent? And the benefits of
no drugs or that even herbal teas can have molds and viruses in them and side reactions? Will
we ever have the rest of the
research made available to us?
Perhaps, unnecessary experimentation on the human being, the vulnerable, naive and trusting female,
and the helpless child,
totally dependent on high ethics and duty for his/her care and development. Experiments on raising
the child excessively and
lowering the child excessively were done. What moves the baby's blood from the placenta to the
infant's internal needs,
particularly, the lungs. The heart!. If the heart is drugged the baby will have a harder time
drawing blood into the heart, by the
veins, which have valves.
The arteries, has the blood go away from the heart, and in the fetus circulation, the blood running
back to the placenta, by the
arteries in the umbilical cord and connections internally, is alleged not to have valves. Logically,
the blood in the arteries is going
to run faster down hill then blood coming back from the placenta, drawn up hill by the child's heart. But, if drugged, the pumping
up hill, will take longer. The baby held down excessively, will have more blood in the placenta
then ought to be in the child.
Also, some doctors were also hand-squeezing and letting go the cord, in experiments or tying off the
placenta and untying it.
Sneaky, eh? It is alleged there are no valves in the vein of the umbilical cord. I must
take that on trust, as I have no means of
knowing the truth on that issue, so we must trust some of the things said to us by professional experts,
and what is written in most
biology textbooks. Many women and men do not study biology because of the evolutionary content
in them. They can only hear
the word of God, in creation. Few public textbooks are neutral an teach empirical biology, what we see
and the purpose and
design of living things. How things are, not necessarily, how we "think" they became
that way. But how we think something came
to be, is not empirical science of what is. It is philosophy for what or Whom, we give our thankfulness
for being as we are, alive
and living this day.
Perhaps, Dr. E. Darwin knew of drugs crossing the placenta, or cutting the woman's body to give birth
caused infections, or
harmful birth positions such as flat on the back and in semi-sitting birth positions, rather then to
birth lying on your side for the
human baby, or in any gravity birth position if the mother had the support to do this.
NO DISCRIMINATION TO THE WOMAN OR THE CHILD:
Over 100 Nations have ratified a Declaration to protect all children in all government and tax-supported institutions, education and health care to be the best practices, least risk of harm, to our abilities. This protection is not happening during the birth and care and treatment of the neonate.
Will we ever know the rest of the story what Dr. Erasmus Darwin was trying to warn about and the fact
this warning was not
heeded by doctors who took over the maternity care of most pregnant mothers?
Was this intentional as you can see children going into distress by early cord clamping. Were
they not observant? Were they
ignorant? Or, did they not care about that particular child or race or color,now internally injured? What then about the Oath, Do
No Harm?
Since the Darwins are associated with Survival of the Fittest -- was this a test performed on some babies
by some doctors? If
so, it was most cruel to do hasty clamping on some babies and test them on their means to become able
and achieve to their
fullest potential. That would almost the as though intentional like the fictional story written
by another intellect of the times, whose
family supported survival of the fittest, Julian Huxley. His book, "Brave New World"
mentions creating simple-minded persons
who would be happy to do the physical work of man's needs, the slaves, eh?
All of us have our potential genius abilities. But were many of the common folk's abilities then
compromised to the degree of
deprived oxygen and blood to vital organs? If so, how long has medical deception being going on? I would think as far back as
to British and Western Societies having their ladies birth in hospitals, many even today, behind closed
doors, and without
witnesses.
And, even today, with witnesses in the birth room of the newborn child, besides the doctor and his/her
nurse, we are none the
wiser on the issue of the "clamping" off the cord. It is the clamp, not the cutting that first
stops the circulation between the blood
flow from the placenta to the child's internal needs to have adequate and steady flow of blood and oxygen
by volume and
pressure.
If we are informed, the militancy for the power of control of the medical person(s) midwives, registered-nurse-midwives
or doctors
or surgeons, and now the ambulance medic, and the doula intend to have the decision making power and
control of the quality of
life of the child, and the timing of the clamping of the cord. That can only have checks and balances
if the mother is educated and
has a signed birth "contract", that only she can change her mind to the care and treatment
she and her baby receive.
The medical person(s) alternating no clamping of the cord or cutting from the placenta, can NOT be done
for any reason other
than the cord tore or for placenta previa, and both requiring an investigation if medical error and
judgement caused the
compromising of the infant. And how quickly the medical staff or person was knowledgeable to correct
blood volume, pressure
and oxygen need so the child was not seriously impaired. Any revived child is going to be impaired
for the length of time blood
and oxygen were deprived, even one cell, that may have controlled 10,000 cells. An example of
damage connections of cells
might be: ............. . . ............. . . . .............. . . . This will cause
the child to process information longer and may not have a good
memory or recall as well as an undamaged child at birth. Here is how undamaged cell connections
might be:
..................................................................................................................zillion of cells working in harmony, if not interrupted in oxygen and nutrients of the fluids and components of blood. Blood is essential to life, as well as the quality of our oxygen. If we make one or the other toxic, we do suffer for it, to the degree we can dispel toxicity, and the child is the most little and compromised to do that. We adults must care for it to the best chance of his her survival, and avoiding endangering the child, as much as it depends on us and our informed abilities.
Just like a pressure pump whether in a car or any machinery, stop the flow of fuel and oxygen, and it
stalls. We can damage the
motor if we try to keep it running without adequate pressure and volume. The human machine needs
the same logical care and
attention. It is by necessity of Design, not the whim of man. If man tampers with Design,
we live, but with many regrets.
__________________________
Note: PETITION www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814
Please ask this site to have a Medical Alert Petition Site: petitions@earth.case2.com
We need support, Internationally, to help Canada correct or investigate present training of all medical persons who will or intend to be at a mother's birth.
We need support for informed choices, of both parents, that our babies are not being harvested by methods of Active Management.
Search this www.lotusbirth.com web site for
: AAP policy, SOGC policy, ACOG policy; Placenta; Fetus to Neonate
Circulation; 30-second clamping; World Health Organization and Dupont ; Circumcision ; Dr. Sarah Buckley's
Declaration ;
Canadian Criminal Codes and when a baby is a person; and any other subject you may be interested in
child birth.
Search
Lotusbirth
(Reference from Protect Babies
http://www.123-baby-birth.com)
Search at Google this web site for the " No Policies " on equal
protection to babies at from the various government officials who appointed representatives to protect
the public on medical
policies and practices; also the "No policies" of the various medical associations, societies,
and colleges did not live up to no
form of discrimination to women or the child of any kind. It is believed they had a duty to have
a policy of equal protection and
security of person, regardless of: age, mental or physical disadvantages ; race, color, social
or marital status of the pregnant
lady ; or belief or faith of the family, or genetic type of blood sought for by medical researchers,
for stem cell matching, and use of
white cells, mature red cells, platelets, enzymes, hormones, and plasma.
contact:
Donna Young, Mother and Grandmother
Home: www.lotusbirth.com
References of research: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-110.htm
A medical web site to visit:
