C-SECTION BABIES & IRDS by early umbilical cord clamping research by T. Peltonen
The Research excerpts, below, is from the information from the research of Dr. T. Peltonen, in 1981. by Donna Young
This url for references is: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-225.htm Revised April 12, 2004
Dr. Peltonen (1) discovered that c-sectioned babies who had no infant respiratory distress
syndrome (IRDS) were not umbilical
cord clamped, but the babies, of any size, were allowed to remain attached to their placenta and not
cut from it. The babies
remained what I call a biological reciprocal sealed unit. The baby's drew all their placenta
blood into their expanding lungs and
received all their whole blood of nutrients to assist in their survival. These babies were not
harvested for stem cells, as are most
premature babies, today. This is terrorists in the delivery room, as I see it, harvesting the
child for political reasons.
To stop the abuse to the child efforts must be made at the local level of each community in every hospital,
nation wide. Mothers
must do this. Fathers of the damaged children must do this. Any informed citizen must do this. You do this by filing a Writ to
allow for an action to commence fact finding by the courts. Discoveries and Interrogatories on
the policies of the hospital's ethic
committee for harvesting and selling the placenta and placenta blood are allowed . . .; the training
of the nurses and the doctors
and the surgeons are required . . . ; where the placenta went after storage in the coolers, and if blood
banks of tissues and blood
were involved . . . ; if the doctors or lab in the hospital or the hospital profited in any way from
the child's blood type or placenta
organ, by way of packaging and care of the organ, and/or sending it abroad.
Early cord clamping for the sake of harvesting the baby's stem cell trapped in the placenta is a most
cruel and unusual trend to do
hasty clamping on any neonate. During the c-section, the babies had been removed from the womb
intact with the placenta and
cord still kept together, during a c-section operation. I call this the sealed-unit choice of
the mother and a legal right for such a
signed birth contract, even if she must go into the court to obtain that contract.
The research indicates that all other babies who had early cord clamping and cutting of their cords
had the lung disorder, IRDS.
This is a common in c-section babies who are early umbilical cord clamped. It is a trend, wise
to stop, before criminal charges of
assault and battery, and even homicide if the baby dies begin to follow as the public get more informed
what the doctors are
currently organized to do. Not just here in Canada, and in the United States, but now done and taught
in all countries. The women
are being discriminated for equal protection and their babies of security of person.
The link, below is on a Canadian report of many c-section babies having IRDS.
The doctors do not know not to NOT clamp the
pulsating umbilical cord, so it appears:
Report on Hospital for
Sick Children Toronto
http://www.smw.ch/pdf200x/2003/19/smw-10121.PDF
Correspondence:
Matthias Roth-Kleiner, MD
Programme in Lung Biology Research
Hospital for Sick Children
555 University Avenue
Toronto Ontario, M5G 1X8 Canada
email:Matthias.
Roth@sickkids.ca
{HYPERLINK "mailto:Matthias.Roth@sickkids.ca"}
This research of, T. Peltonen, below, was apparently, not done on film to demonstrate how the infant's
placenta goes down, as
the baby's weight goes up. And can be seen as a fact of science. Why not? This missing film
would have been a valuable
educational tool? No film also exists of immediate cord clamping and the baby's deprived placenta blood
drained out the cord,
and the amount, is never on video either. Why not? This is if the trend of hasty clamping
is really done in good faith and a
measure of a benefit to the baby.
I have put up a C-section Blue Ribbon Offer, $500. as a bonus to any mother contracting for no harm
done to her baby, to be
removed with the placenta and cord together, to allow the baby full rights to his/her placenta blood
-- no harm done. The baby
and the placenta must be equally kept warm. As cold air will stop the pulsation cord, as will
the cold steel of a clamp. Please
see the list of contents, and please feel free to add to the cash offer, with evidence of a video. This
money will be paid to the
first woman who must have a c-section birth for medical reasons, and will have the birth on film or
video requesting the Lotus
Birth, no clamping or cutting of the infant's lifeline/hopeline, at all. She may go to a Court
to have this approved as no harm done,
whereas hasty clamping is known, logically, to endanger c-section babies and cause them lung disorders.
Vaginal babies are also injured by an abrupt hasty clamping before their umbilical cords cease to pulsate
too. This is all being
allowed by most or all College of Physicians and Surgeons and Colleges of Midwives across Canada, and
in the States, too, and
practiced in most public and private hospitals. Why is that? Are they not informed of the
criminal law and the Constitution to
protect the baby and not to do things without informed consent of the mother. She must be told
removal of the placenta and the
cord are only cosmetic removals, the same as the circumcisions, long ago, imposed on babies. Alleged
to be a medical benefit,
when no evidence, at the time that procedure was done, was a medical need. Mere trend, custom,
and belief.
The benefits of no clamping the baby's cord, ever, or cutting are the results of a healthy baby. That
is seen and logical, and most
obvious: no cord infections, no navel hernias, the baby gets all his /her blood volume,
and the more blood in the baby's body will
help dispel the drugs used during the c-section. The baby should NOT have any needles inserted
into his/her body to take blood
samples or to inject Vitamin K or Heb B or other vaccinations, either. The mother can insist and contract
that not be done to her
tiny baby, that can get virus injected to lurk in his/her blood system. Why chance that to the
baby?
This is a mother's legal right to have her baby treated according to what I call a Natural Sealed Unit. That means Lotus Birth is a
care and treatment for the benefit of "ALL" BABIES, whether born by vaginal birth or a c-section. The mother protecting her baby
from any insertions of his/her body endangering of viruses to enter the child's blood stream.
To quote the research
:
1. Dr. Peltonen's research was written up as Placenta Transfusion - Advantage and
Disadvantage. Euro. Journal of
Pediatrics 1981; 137: 141-146
Note. There is also a FILM, 1959 : Clamping Before the First Breath : I would appreciate receiving a copy of this film if that is possible for educational purposes or perhaps it can be aired on television.
T. Peltonen:
"Among early clamped infants, those clamped prior to the first breath can be distinguished as a separate group. In the Scandinavian congress of physiologists in 1959 we showed a film of the first breath (33). If the umbilical cord is tied prior to the first breath, the result is a decrease in the size of the heart during the first three or four cardiac cycles.
"Then the heart again increases in size, almost to that of the fetal heart. This change should be interpreted as due to the filling of the opened vascular system of the lungs in connection with aeration, which requires a considerable amount of blood. If the umbilical circulation is closed, the flow from the caudal caval vein through the via sinistra to the left heart will hardly suffice and for a moment the left heart will not have enough blood (33.34.46).
"Usually, however, the condition improves when adequate amounts of blood flow through the lungs to the left atrium (47).
"On the basis of these observations, it would seem that the closing of the umbilical circulation before the aeration of the lungs has taken place is a highly unphysiological measure, which should thus be avoided .
"Although the "normal infant" survives without harm, under certain unfavorable conditions the consequences may be fatal. This view is supported by Landau's observation that the high incidence of IRDS in cesarean section infants was associated with deprivation of placental transfusion due to the usual technique of immediate cord clamping.
"In order to prevent this, the authors suspended the placenta above the infant in 87 cases of cesarean section. IRDS was NOT observed in Any Case (28). Moss et al. (36) also found an increased incidence of IRDS in premature infants whose cords were clamped before the onset of respiration.
"The intact umbilical circulation also forms a reserve if the aeration of the lungs fails to begin normally. Born et al. (9) found in animal studies that if the cord is ligated before respiration begins, profound asphyxia results and there is a great increase in blood pressure partly due to asphyxia and partly because the systemic circulation of the limbs is cut off from the low peripheral resistance of the placenta.
"Working under similar experimental conditions with sheep, we found that
the placenta circulation functions as an
extracorporeal oxygenator of the blood, should the neonate become asphyxiated (20.47). the same
observations was made by
Boda and Guinea pigs (8). Correspondingly, with human beings we have found that in cesarean section
the uterine circulation
continues up to the separation of the placenta (5.21). There is thus good reason in cases
of resuscitation to keep the
umbilical circulation intact (22)."
Comments from Donna Young: These are experiments on human babies and I would assume the mothers are not informed of no clamping or cutting of the infant's cord in the cases where studies were done on early cord clamping. The animal studies show impairments in the animals.
Comments: Note the shrinkage of the heart. Surely the loss of steady pressure and volume is going to set the stage for future heart problems, such as leaking valves, or holes in the heart, and heart murmurs? And what about the brain not receiving adequate flow of blood and oxygen? (See Brain Lesions, The Magical Child, this web site).
Comments: When an obstetrician and surgeon was doing immediate cord clamping on c-section babies and reported to the BC College of Physicians and Surgeons, they gave an excuse not to spend $15,000 a day for an investigation of his training because they had found a defense on the American Internet, MDConsult, that quoted an physician, Dr. Gabbes, that alleged the babies deprived of their placenta blood, well it was not important of the blood deprived and clamping off the pulsating and functioning organ was total the convenience of the doctor(s) with the clamp. I suggest when a tool is not used wisely, it may be a weapon. This was reported to CPS-BC, as to a child hasty clamped in October 2000. This hasty clamping, as a new trend, was following, apparently, the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada (SOGC) Policy #89, May 2000. In this policy, they were directing all babies in Canada, be routinely immediate cord clamped, just for a pH test. They followed Policy #216, November 1995, of ACOG, now cancelled as of January-February 2002.
See Dr. Erasmus Darwin's Quotation, Don't Tie a Pulsating umbilical cord, at this web site in list of contents.
__________________________________
COULD THIS BABY HAVE SURVIVED BY THE T. PELTONEN METHOD?:
OP-ED CONTRIBUTOR
C-Sections and the Real Crime
By REBECCA JOHNSON
Full report and your opinions can be shared at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/12/opinion/12JOHN.html?ex=1082347200&en=9ea22c7ae3ded32b&ei=5062
Published: April 12, 2004
Forum: Join a Discussion on Op-Ed Contributors
Medicine and Health April 12, 2004
Pregnancy and Obstetrics
Johnson, Rebecca
Prosecutors in Salt Lake City announced last week that they had dropped charges of homicide against a woman who delayed a Cesarean section despite doctors' advice that it was necessary to save the lives of her twins. It was a step in the right direction, but the decision to criminalize the woman's choice — one of her twins was later delivered stillborn, the other survived with complications, and the mother has pleaded guilty to child endangerment — was wrong from the start. Not because it violated a patient's general right to privacy or a woman's specific right to make her own choices about reproduction (though it did). The charge was disturbing because it implied that the medical establishment can predict with certainty the best course of action for a fetus in distress. It cannot.
In March 2002, when I was about 25 weeks pregnant, I had a severe case of pregnancy-related
hypertension called pre-eclampsia. Like the woman in Utah, I went to the emergency room, where a
sonogram revealed that my baby was in distress
. My
doctor recommended an immediate C-section, saying it was "his best chance." The sonogram also
showed that the baby would
weigh about two and a half pounds. Unlike the woman in Utah, I took my doctor's advice.
Twenty-four hours later, when my son was removed from my uterus, he weighed a little more than a
pound. His eyes were still
shut, his skin was translucent and his limbs were thrashing in protest. From the moment I
saw him, I knew I'd made a
mistake. There was no way such a tiny, unformed creature could survive in this world. Four days
later, Luke died in the neonatal
intensive care unit.
Like any parent, I grieved over his death. But as I replayed the day over in my mind, what troubled
me most was how blindly I
had made my decision to have the C-section. Each day a premature baby remains in utero translates
into four fewer days in
the intensive care unit. Had I known this, I would have insisted that Luke stay in my womb longer.
But because I had
assumed my pregnancy would be normal, I was not well versed in the facts, or the unpredictable
nature, of obstetrics
— a field in which one of the two patients is separated from the doctor by a wall of flesh and blood.
Ultrasound readings can tell us an amazing amount about human gestation. But they are not
perfect. Developed around the
turn of the century and initially used to detect submarines in World War I, sonar technology was viewed
skeptically by
obstetricians until 1958, when a Scottish doctor used it to identify a large, easily removable cyst
in the stomach of a woman who
was thought to have terminal cancer. For tasks like identifying cysts, multiple gestations or an ectopic
pregnancy, ultrasound has
been a boon to the field. And what mother has not thrilled to the sight of her unborn child sloshing
around in a bath of amniotic
fluid?
But for more difficult jobs, like identifying defects or predicting fetal weight, the record for ultrasound
technology is mixed. In the
largest study to date, research sponsored by the National Institutes of Health in 1993 found that in
15,000 low-risk pregnancies,
ultrasound detected only 17 percent of fetal structural anomalies before 24 weeks. Human error accounts
for much of the
problem. Sonograms rely on precise measurements of the fetus. In an emergency-room setting, it's unlikely
the person
performing the ultrasound will have the expertise necessary to make highly accurate readings. When using
highly trained,
experienced personnel, more recent data shows, the success rate in detecting fetus abnormalities among
high-risk pregnant
women is 90 percent.
The difficult truth is that sometimes there is nothing doctors can do to save a fetus. Unfortunately,
because C-sections have
become so routine, the "cure" for a baby in trouble almost always means early delivery. Even
if my child had survived his
traumatic, early birth, there's a good chance he would have required special care for the rest of his
life, something my doctor did
not mention when she called delivery "his best chance."
The medical establishment has made extraordinary strides in preventing maternal and perinatal mortality
in the last 50 years. But
many hurdles remain. In the neonatal unit where my son died, roughly half the babies will not survive
their first year. The rise of
multiple births due to assisted reproduction has only exacerbated the problem. For parents, the uncertainties
of those difficult
births can be excruciating. For obstetricians, insurance premiums have soared as angry patients seek
answers in court.
Medicine can't yet fix everything that can go wrong inside the womb. Often, the best it can do is tell
parents what to expect — and
even then it isn't always right. We may fault the woman in Utah for her motives — she has admitted using
cocaine during her
pregnancy and has been accused of making a remark about the resulting scar of a C-section — but in the
end, she may have
made the right decision. At least one of her children survived.
Rebecca Johnson is on the advisory board at the Sloane Hospital for Women at the Columbia University
Medical Center.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
See a survival of a six-month gestation baby, or less, of a baby boy, who weighed one and one-half pounds by also an emergency c-section. Table of Contents, first "sugar" topic, at www.123-baby-birth.com
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:
