A Medical Journalist and a Mother and Grandmother advocate: Don't Clamp
the Umbilical cord - it internally injures babies.
For a medical journalist's dissent to umbilical cord clamping, please scroll down to the red title: " Potential Dangers of Childbirth Interventions "Early clamping of the umbilical cord: Cutting the ties that bind." This is if you wish to skip the commentaries and opinion of Donna Young, Mother and Grandmother, who believes the babies are being willfully harvested for cord stem cells.
Some babies were harvested unknowingly and without the consent of the legal guardians, the parent (s). The fathers must be part of informed decisions made on their child, too. The fathers had the traditional role of protecting both mother and child, guarding them from harm. The dad, too, must be skilled in child birth, ideally, how to watch an unassisted natural birth, and, just being with the mother of the child, for her encouragement.
We ladies are often ignored as we are not organized into a united front. We do not seem to bond together
as well as the
gentlemen do. Those that often impose on us are organized, they use the politicians, the law,
the educators, and the religion
leaders. Those organized do form societies, and the individual concerns are then,
mostly, going unheard. The organization in
medical trends, and bias was first revealed to me in a woman's study book, Witches, Midwives and
Nurses, written in the
1970's, and this 50 page booklet is available at most colleges.
Women, particularly us grandmothers and great grandmothers have often no positions, nor official titles
to our names. Therefore,
when things are shocking to us or the treatment to women or our children, the world ignores the situation
as normal, routine, and
acceptable, particularly, if the professional persons and the powers that be are involved.
If we are to have trust in our society, it has accountability, responsibility, and duty and will
not bar the individual from being heard.
Generally, that is what Constitutions for the people are all about. Trust will not stop injustices
from going unopposed, and this is
the spirit of the law. Truth by facts of evidence will be allowed to be seen and heard and the
proper corrections to be made.
One, even if in organization, does not continue in a wrongful policy, simply, because most are doing
it. Or, one of the members,
fears punishment to acknowledge false or inadequate training and education going on. Or, failure
for the group to acknowledge
of ethics and the law, Rule of Law, in particular, that requires all persons to be equally accountable.
Rule of Law applies to medical associations and their policies if they are directing endangering to
any one person, or group, by
sex, age, race, colour, social status, or by mental or physical disadvantage. The latter would
be the case of treatment to a child
being born, or care after birth.
You may also wish to jump to the official web site of Mr. Cory Mermer, the link given at the end.
Some history of my personal communication with Mr. Mermer:
Cory, contacted me as to my concerns posted on the net. Later, I learned that he was on the 72nd
floor of the first World Trade
Building. He got down safely, and the spiritual side of me believed he had a purpose in life. I requested he get in touch with Dr.
George M. Morley.
Dr. Morley I searched for, after reading his article not to clamp the umbilical cord, too soon. He
was now retired, but he, too, had
posted an article that shared my concerns and investigation on cord clamping, back in 1998. I
contacted him by telephone, and
he asked me to describe myself. I said, "I was trouble." He was silent, so I explained. I am mother only, and no medical training,
but I was already writing the British Columbia, Canada's, College of Physicians and Surgeons, on my
suspicions many children
were being harmed by early umbilical cord clamping, causing subtle to serious interruption of their
oxygen and volume of blood.
I agreed with his written articles as a professional Obstetrician and Gynecologists. I was in
shock but I would do as I could as a
Lay Person, to share my views and opinions, and the medical persons could not fire me for those views,
based in research and
facts of logic to be seen in a live birth of other mammals, who thrived, if man did not do interventions
and clamp the cord while it
was pulsating, if done at all.
We have agreed to agree on mutual facts of science. Dr. Morley follows the standard of cosmetic removal
of the placenta from
the child. I now disagree in favor of the Pioneer's traditional way of leaving the placenta with
the child. But when I first heard of
their wise and safe method, I, too, when I first learned of this custom, at age 14, 1957, and
being unskilled and with no biology on
human birth, and thought, at that time, "Oh, gross! I'm going State of the Art, and doing
cosmetic removal of the placenta."
Students in grade 9, often were asked to switch from the University programs to the Commercial programs,
and Science ended
for many of us. The science courses, of that time, did not deal with human reproduction and the
birth of the human baby. Little
was said in physical education and health and personal development. We just studied the
flower. We did not get to dissect the
frog, rat, or the pig, as some students did later in the biology classes.
I did not, at that time, appreciate the wisdom of the pioneers, my grandmother's time period. They
put the placenta in a diaper
and the placenta and cord were off the infant, naturally, in the day or two. Some monkeys do the
same thing, leave the placenta
alone. The wisdom was that the baby had no navel cord infections, or navel hernias, no blood infections
which were likely and
more risky by tying off the cord and cutting it. No germs got in because the baby remained a "sealed"
unit. It was most wise,
indeed, and the bonus, the baby was not shy of blood volume and pressure and immunities, as long as
the baby was kept warm,
when born. The cold air stops the pulsation of the umbilical cord, as effectively as a the cold
steel of a clamp.
The pioneers had no drugs to deal with tetanus. My grandmother's babies, my mother the first of
ten, were being born before the
1920's, for the first half of them. It was normal for babies to be born unassisted on the farms
with just a family member present or
a next door neighbor. They had no cutting of their bodies, (episiotomy). Therefore, the
unassisted birth for both mother and child
did not get staph infections. The babies were blue ribbon babies: they had all their blood in
their bodies, and full immunities, and
longer lives.
This is by the fact of my two living parents, today, my father age 89 and my mother just turning 90
on June 22, 2003 (born 1913). I
consider them the evidence of fact, longer living babies, who had all immunities to deal with the virus
of the times, and of today.
They have already buried their first born, a baby, a girl, my sister born at the beginning of the Second
World War, and I now think
many of her problems, were associated with early clamping, as we see in many babies of today. Night
and day sleep disorders,
eating disorders, extreme nervous disorders, lack of confidence. Beautiful looking babies, but
damaged internally by deprived
blood up to 20 to 50 percent of every child imposed on to give up the placenta blood for the trends
of the day, war or science.
How many of us can go back and ask our mother, what did they really do to you during birth? When asked,
even if they have had
fifteen babies, they do not know. We trusted blindly in the doctor to deliver of the baby. We
were grateful to leave the hospital
alive and with a living baby. What more might we have asked?
We now find out that the woman were drugged when they had institutional births. The drug that
was used was something like the
date-rape drug that removed their memories of the child birth experiences. It is not surprising,
then, that many women do not
really know what happened when their baby was born. So many unusual policies were imposed
on the women from the 1920's
on. False birth positions that were tradition and put the medical person in total control of our
bodies, flat on the back and in semi-sitting birth positions, drugs, cutting, and pulling our babies
from us, and the early umbilical cord clamping, vaccinations, blood
samples taken, this is now for genetic testing for PKU, imposed on most babies. Vaccinations imposed
are Vitamin K and Hep
B, and with them, the questionable preservatives and trace elements in such injections. We do
not know for sure what happens
to us, in the past, or the present. But the key of the past is the present, and hasty clamping
is the trend.
Living parents of unassisted births, prior to the 1920, have lived to a long age . . . but, many of
their offspring, today, we hear of
the babies dying of disease before the age of two, many at birth, and they are not investigated as to
their care and treatment, if
they were attended by a medical person. Was their care truly beneficial to both mother and child?
The increase of cancers, tumors, and learning disabilities in children, is not reviewed back to what
is common in their births.
There are millions of children, now adults, on drugs, like Ritalin. Millions more of our diabetic.
Our capacity to make or use insulin
damaged, but how? Were the drugs and vaccinations involved?
What more evidence do we need to go back to natural, no drugs, no cutting, no clamping, unassisted births
with family as birth
witnesses, but educated, today, of facts of logical biology: Leave the umbilical lifeline, the
cord, alone. Birth your baby,
undrugged, in warm water births, don't let others touch you the mother, or your baby in an invasive
manner, no one.
Please and Thank you for the consideration for helping your baby, or another's, be a blue ribbon baby,
as much as it depends on
your written and signed birth contract. If the medical person is not willing to sign a
birth contract, long before the baby is to be
born, it may be best to plan an unassisted birth in your own home, without any medical person, there. Or, they are not allowed in
the same room of the mother, unless called. All medical persons, including midwives, particularly,
registered-nurse-midwives,
are now being all trained to stop the pulsating cord, and for a variety of reasons.
This is true of all doctors and surgeons. The reasons, well, none are good reasons, unless the
cord tore or for placenta previa.
Both these excuses, too, must, like any other excuse used, be followed up with immediate care to protect
the child from being low
volume and jaundiced, and then anemic. And if those situations caused hasty clamping they must be investigated
if they were
medical negligence as to the cause of them.
Birth Contract: The mother puts a clause in the birth plan, she, only, can change her mind......but
the doctor cannot stray from the
contract. . .he she may only suggest of something previously discussed; or, does at her or his own peril,
if they interrupt the child's
lifeline and circulation without informed consent of the mother for what is done and when to a mother's
body or her baby's care
and treatment.
If you request unassisted births, even in a hospital, the $20 billion dollar medical fees for
assisted births in hospitals, can be
reduced and better spent in educating the child to their now fullest genius potential, not violated
by one cell damaged, that may
have guided 10,000 other cells, if deprived even a second of oxygen or blood to it. Think on the
side of caution for your baby's
benefit and the mother's, too.
Dr. Morley and Mr. Mermer, at this time, leave their site for the professional writers (www.cordclamping.com)
and the
professional persons concerned with this issue of hasty clamping on any child's cord, premature or full
term, and of any color or
race, or sex. This helps to train the new students in learning the proper medical
practices, known long ago, 1801 and from the
beginning of time.
To Quote: Dr. Eramus 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 to Dr. Mavis Gunther, UK, 1957. Original Articles, The Lancet
Wise doctors do know that there is visual damage to the child by early clamping, jaundice. Blood
tests reveal anemia. By
destroying the placenta and the amount of the blood trapped in the placenta has been an obstruction
of justice by destroying the
facts of evidence. There is also the failure to record the condition of the cord when clamped, the position
of the child's body when
clamped, and the time of birth when clamped, and the failure to weigh the child's placenta and drain
out the deprived blood of the
child, so violated. Again, an legitimate excuse may be, unless the cord tore or placenta previa
and investigated, why these
happened. Any drained blood from the placenta, that was deprived the baby should be legally recorded
on the child's own birth
chart. This is for the child's legal right of compensation for even minor internal latent damages,
that may not be evident in
physical appearance of the child, at birth.
HOSPITAL AND MEDICAL PERSONS DUTY TO RESTORE THE CHILD TO HEALTH, IF THEY CAN:
The duty to the child, if early clamped, is to restore the child to proper oxygen and blood volume and pressure. Most hospitals require that of the medical person (s) involved in interrupting the child's lifeline. But now the medical person (s) appear as the hero of the child, not putting the child in an endangered position, in the first cause of threat to the child.
Hasty clamping is assault by a perceived and known threat to the child to be bodily harmed. There
are the medical person's
concealed intentions, by policy or training of the many reasons not discussed with the mother of their
intentions to clamp a
pulsating and functioning organ. If they acted on that training, instead of reporting an
endangering policy, they took the risk. They
ought to be charged with battery. The research not to clamp a pulsating cord is overwhelming. They have no good excuse to
endanger any baby.
The transfusion of blood, for an weak baby, gasping for life, is not likely being done from the child's
own placenta blood being
transfused back into the baby's body by the placenta vein hooked up to the child's internal vein. Why
not? (See,
Chow-case-law, Sommers and Roth,
Ontario, Canada. In this case-law the child's deprived blood, trapped in the placenta "totally"
went
missing. That is not logical, to for placenta blood to disappear).
Or, the placenta immediately drained into a plastic bag for immediate transfusion back to the child
of whole blood. What
happens, if the child is found to be low in volume and blood? Is s/he is given cheaper blood,
like only plasma; or given volume of
fluids of Artificial blood, Ringer's Lactate? The baby's more valuable then gold, whole blood,
with many components is likely
drained from the placenta and sold to research, drug companies, and cosmetic companies.
The placenta is not always burned but is said in my local school library reference book, is sold to
cosmetic companies, but they,
in the 1980's alleged all doctors waited for full pulsation of the umbilical cord to cease. Not
so today. They clamp as a standard
routine care to all babies, with 30-seconds of birth, or do instant clamping. One in sixteen babies,
are documented to need
revival, but I think it to be a higher rate, then that.
HOSPITALS HAVE POLICIES OF ALLOWANCE OF DOCTORS DOING ENDANGERING EARLY CLAMPING, THEY
ALLOW IT:
Each hospital can be checked for their policies of no consent to do that with the baby's deprived blood. It has been a secret. For how long is for the courts to use the Evidence Act, for an investigation at each hospital and their policies on this issue, and how they governed the training of their medical students, who took no oaths of no harm done to what they saw and experienced and were encouraged to do, likewise. Why not check out the maternity care and treatment at your own local hospital. Ask about their policies, a general question, and the training of their new doctors and those of the past. How, do they differ?
However, in taking research and opinions of experts, please, do not leave out the concerns of those
who have had personal
experience, in child birth. These are us, the mothers and now the grandmothers. We are the
mothers with the experiences and
the hurt feelings and harmful cutting of our bodies. WE are the victims and have the memories
and no compensation of how we
were treated and our babies.
We, now the grandmothers, are now speaking out. We are no longer silenced by trends of the past
and the risks of the present,
and the future mother's to be. We are sharing what has happened to the past 3 and 4 generations
and only hope we can reach
the mothers of tomorrow to have gentle births. This may mean the choice of the mother to be informed
of her legal rights she may
birth her baby or babies in warm water.
The logic of warm water is that the baby or babies are not shocked to the cold air which will
surely prematurely stop the
circulation of flow of blood from the placenta to the baby. The baby needs the placenta blood
in the baby's now expanding lungs
to take over the exchange of gases that were done in the fetus circulation system, using the placenta. The placenta work is not
yet finished, until all pulsation naturally ceases and without clamping or using drugs.
Drugs are used to hurry up the natural process of the completion of the child's birth, the expulsion
of the placenta, the third stage
of labor. This human directed intervention may be viewed as an unnecessary intervention and violence
done to the child with
known risks to the mother. The mother is risked to the placenta bursting and her and her baby's
blood mixing. She may never
carry future children to full term.
Any unconsented care and treatment to the child is now considered as medical assault and battery. It
may cause a jail sentence
to any person (s) advocating that or actually doing that to a baby. It is for this reasons the medical
person (s) attempt to find a
medical fear or cause to have put the child in a vulnerable risk taking position and for risking internal
injury. Jaundice is a fact of
early cord clamping. see: Unskilled Fathers, this web site.
We must consider the risks involved in stopping the circulation of the blood from the placenta
to his / her body; by early
clamping, while the cord was pulsating, even just a tad. This is risk-taking to a baby who cannot
protect itself. It is best if the
mother is not drugged, nor the child's cord clamped, and no cutting of her body to give birth, to avoid
risk of infection to both. By
having and requesting a natural and gentle birth, and the mother spares her self of episiotomy, routinely
done, and advocated by
drug companies in their teaching to doctors (Example, Merck), to most new inexperienced mothers,
or having a c-section by a
drugging the mother, during labor.
The drugs, like oxytocin, likely forced the baby to come in a mispositioned birth and or was now in
distress from the cocktails of
drugs. The drugs are given by registered-nurses. They are following instructions of doctors
to give the woman, but the women
not told about the risks, nor do the hospitals give a list of risks known and associated with oxytocins,
an artificial man-made drug,
trying to copy the natural hormone. The birthing mother trusts blindly in a professional persons,
nurse or doctor, offering her a
drug. When she is not informed of any risks, at all, she has NOT made an informed choice. The
duty of the hospital, giving drugs
from its own source and billing for it, is implied, informed choice, even if the patient is the doctors.
It is the hospitals hiring the nurses, not the doctors. The nurses work for the hospital, not
the doctors. They have standards of
ethics for the best practice possible, and can and should report risk taking, even to the pregnant mother,
they are offering drugs
too.
The hospital pay the nurses, they bill for what treatment is done on their premises. They do have
implied vicarious liability, for any
court to decide a percentage of costs, if an award is sought for a damaged child, however, slightly,
impaired or compromised.
The degree of violation of informed choice and risk to the child, even for jaundiced and low blood volume,
even if corrected, is for
the court to award damages, for the risk taking, not consented to by the natural parents.
The parents will be the ones to pay the costs of special education an impaired child. This child
is generally a normally looking
child, who later shows evidence of latent injury by subtle to serious interruption of even one cell
damaged, that may have directed
10,000 other cells.
An example of damaged nerve cell connections that may have been connected to 10,000 cells: ..........
. . ... ..... .... Unless the
parents have their child analyzed and labeled, Attention Deficit Disorder or Autistic, they are not
going to be helped with the
child's education to sufficient needs of the child to have his / her chance of a normal career and occupation. The child's means to
higher paid employment is limited, in deed. Other children with IQ of 50 are not helped sufficiently
to increase their abilities and
potentials in the job markets and face unskilled labor positions.
Most interventions of man are harmful to both the birthing mother and the child. Why not go home
feeling good of a positive birth
experience and a blue ribbon baby. You can do this by having an waiver for an unassisted birth
and no clamping of your baby's
lifeline, ever, if you wish, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa.
The truth is no medical policy can take away a mother's legal right to self-determination and to say
no to any medical treatment to
her body or that of her baby or babies.
The medical persons, past or present, have no good excuse for continuing and not immediately correcting
their ways. I would like
support in letters to have this Maternity Matter and Care and Treatment of the New Born Child and the
treatment of drugging the
child as an embryo, fetus or neonate, taken to an Official Commissioned Enquiry.
It is up to the court to allow for a hearing to consider to allow for criminal prosecution to government
officials, in charge of
protecting the public to have adequately trained medical persons and policies that do not harm any one
person of the public, be
they women or the newborn child. It is up to the Court to decide the fate of the medical executives
of those who made and
published false medical policies outside of empirical and observable medical science and medicine and
all those who remained
"silent" and by that fact, concealed and/or supported false training and unnecessary testing
of blood, by hasty clamping.
The hasty clamping were alleged done for a pH test, taken by the means of instantly umbilical
cord clamping of the infants
lifeline. In many cases, if the child lived from the early clamping, the pH test was thrown away,
and the evidence of a full placenta
bag, was destroyed. In my perspective that was destroying of evidence, and failure to record all
facts of the child's birth. This is
done world wide, and I cannot accept it is just a general oversight.
But an endangering medical directive can be found on a major web site, MDConsult, by a doctor, Dr.
Gabbes. It is not the
standard of care or policy of most Medical Colleges. This opinion of this Dr. Gabbes (I do not
know if he is living or dead)
alleges the amount of blood trapped in the placenta is not of value or important. That seems only
to the value of the doctor, not
that to have more blood in the body of the child, is not important to the child, which may be 20 to
50 percent more total blood
volume, and the difference of a quality of life, or even life, itself.
This leads doctors to believe this medical web site is a defense, so that the Colleges of Physicians,
Surgeons and Midwives, will
not investigate c-section surgeons or any medical person (s) doing hasty clamping. MCConsult
shares no other information, or
research paper, I am aware of, that advocates no clamping or cutting of the cord, unless the cord tore
or for placenta previa, as is
advocated by Dr. George M. Morley. If retired doctors with personal experience of a reduction
of 70 percent revival of babies by
delayed clamping is not valued by the medical persons, who then guides them: the willfully blind?
Examples, of such training are Policy #216, November 1995, ACOG's, and the Canadian Policy that
copied it, Policy #89, May
2000 of SOGC, and also Policy #89, November 1995 that knew babies were deprived of 20 to 50 percent
total blood volume,
represent 4 to 6 ounces of blood, if the baby was a 9-pound baby, and only made a total blood volume
of 10 ounces of blood
(300 ml).
The medical authorities have excused this habit and directive for convenience of time to shorten the
natural completion of the
baby's birth, the birth of the baby's organ, the placenta. It would take normally, 5 minutes
to 20 minutes, if they did not use the
drug oxytocin, and cord traction, and hasty clamping.
The students, nurses and doctors pulled on the "cut" cord and pressed on the mother's stomach
(cord contraction with the risk of
inverting the mother's womb), to speed up the birth of the placenta, by cutting the cord. They
did this after immediately stopping
the cord from transfusion of the blood. This in my opinion must be told to a Supreme Court Judge.
This must be an International violence to the child and a breached trust to the mother's trust to go
to a professional birth, and birth
her baby in governments controlled institution, a birth center (some are private but receive government
funding) or a hospital, and
they bill the government and the medical insurance plans for whatever they did to the mother: drugs,
oxygen, cutting, and
transfusions.
All come after following "active management. The mothers not told about no clamping or cutting
of the umbilical cord doing no
harm, or their rights to birth unassisted and in water births, in their tubs, or in their showers, or
the mother brings her own tub, and
signs waivers.
I believe many professional persons feared their superiors teaching traditions, customs, habits, trends
. . . because they wanted
to first get their license to practice medicine, and did not make waves. It speaks of the logic
that the medical student must first
take an oath to do no harm and to report to the proper authorities, which includes to the police of
any medical assault and battery
done to a patient, trusting in high ethics and properly trained medical persons.
The false training involves ambulance attendants, doulas, practical nurses, midwives, registered nurses,
doctors and to the
surgeons. Books of misdirection on care of the fetus, neonate on the clamping of the pulsating cord
are in the medical
emergency manuals of today, and put out by the Canadian Red Cross, and the Workman's Compensation
persons, and others.
(See list of references, last on the list of contents). Any emergency birth or home-birth does not easily
have means to correct a
child, that may go limp and go into shock by the hasty clamping by the whims and guesses of the medical
persons, which can be
an unskilled mother or father involved, in the risk taking on a functioning organ. I have noted
no resolutions in most midwifery
conferences, and no petition to have an investigation by an Official Inquiry on the training of the
medical persons in child birth.
There are many weak excuses for endangering the child, and one is fear of the mother's bleeding, after
birth; or for the child: too
much blood, to thick of blood, too much blood and one frequently heard is to allow the mother to see
or hold the child.
I am sure an educated or adequately informed birthing mother would not risk her baby, if informed, as
she should be patient
because the baby's birth is not yet complete with the physical birth of the body of the child. More
is yet to be completed, as
nature designed wait for all pulsation of the lifeline and hopeline to be a blue ribbon baby, has ceased.
And, to go a step further,
wait for the baby's organ, the placenta to be born.
The placenta is the baby's organ, it is the baby's blood in it, and NOT the mothers. The security
of person and equal protection is
a duty owed to the child, by "all" adults, including the mother and the father. They
may be reported, too, as equally as the medical
person(s) who interfere with the baby's natural right to completion of the blood flow from the placenta
to the baby. Most parents
have interrupted their baby's potential of volume of blood by what they were told or not told in most
biology books giving out
wrongful information. That is, again, not excusable for professional biology teachers. They
had a duty, too, to investigate harmful
medical directives.
After this completion of the baby's birth, the "baby's placenta expelled," the mother's womb
is as it was before conception. The
mother's normal hormones the platelets and the serotonin will seal the blood vessels,
to prevent excessive bleeding. The
oxytocin will work on her breasts, to encourage the milk flow for the baby's benefit if nursed.
The bleeding of the mother is reduced if the mother is NOT given oxytocin or is NOT cut by an episiotomy,
imposed on many
mothers forced to birth on their back, or in semi-sitting positions. Bleeding is reduced if the
mother is NOT anemic during birth,
or not sick.
If the medical persons are not questioning what the are being taught and have not adequacy of time to
do independent research
we have students licensed to blindly accept and not think standing on their feet. Now, for the
research of Mr. Cory Mermer.
(Note, the highlights are of Donna Young, and did not appear in the original writing).
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Potential Dangers of Childbirth Interventions
"Early clamping of the umbilical cord: Cutting the ties that bind"
by Cory Mermer
Townsend Letters, April 2000 Issue #201, p 74-
"Most likely the first medical intervention to which every infant is subjected to is the clamping
of his or her umbilical cord. Under
normal circumstances, in most of western society, this is done almost immediately, without the matter
even being given a thought
and often before the infant has taken its first breath. A vast majority of parents, and possibly many
doctors and midwives as well,
are completely unaware or at least unfamiliar with the controversy surrounding this issue. This is quite
astounding when you
realize that disagreement and debate has surrounded this practice for a long time, dating back at least
200 years and probably
much longer 1.
The immediate clamping and cutting of the umbilical cord is a common practice that deprives the newborn
of a substantial
amount of possibly its most valuable possession: placental blood with all of its oxygen-carrying capacity,
vital nutrients and
immune enhancing antibodies. The purpose of this paper is to further explore the issue and the still-ongoing
debate.
Active vs. Expectant Management of the 3rd Stage of Labor Cord clamping is part of the "third stage"
of labor, which begins after
the baby is delivered. The two primary approaches to the third stage are often referred to as "active"
and "expectant"
management. One of the primary reasons for the medical establishment's favoring early clamping is their
overwhelming
preference for "active" management. This preference is due to a belief that it is safer for
the mother. Early clamping (EC) would
most likely occur in an "actively managed" 3rd stage, since oxytocin administration and controlled
cord traction are the norm,
thereby precluding late clamping (LC) 2.
However, although "active" management of the 3rd stage has been shown to reduce maternal blood
loss, it does not necessarily
result in a decrease in maternal mortality or seem to have any obvious long-term effects on the mother
3. The long-term effects of
this practice on the newborn, on the other hand, have not been adequately investigated 4. The modest
maternal blood losses
found are not surprising or alarming since, in healthy women, postpartum blood losses of up to 1000ml
may still be considered
physiological and do not necessitate treatment other than oxytocics 2.
( Note by Donna Young . Active Management uses commonly, Oxytocin. It is stated by the World Health Organization (review on clamping 1998), that using this drug, an artificial hormone with questionable preservatives in it, like Chlorobutanol, to require immediate cord clamping, alleged oxytocin damages the baby's brain development. Oxytocin causes the hard and fast contraction of the womb, that may trap the placenta in it, too).
Advantages Most of the reasons for the possible advantages of LC (see Figure 1) can be explained by
two vital elements:
Oxygen and Iron. However, since the main function of iron in the body is facilitating the transport
of oxygen, we can even reduce
this further to simply say that improved oxygenation is responsible for most of the purported and potential
benefits.
Additional Blood Volume Although the debate over the benefits and risks of early clamping vs. late clamping
continues, it has
become a fairly well-established fact that the newborn does receive a substantial amount of extra blood,
referred to as placental
transfusion, when clamping is delayed. It is not so much the existence of such a phenomena that is debated,
but rather the
significance and value of the additional blood.
It has been asserted that placental transfusion helps to prevent hypovolemia, a condition of decreased
blood volume,
normally resulting from blood loss or dehydration 21,30. Estimates on the additional quantity of placental
transfusion with LC vary,
depending on several factors (see Figure 2), from 10 to 60 ml of blood per kg of body weight 5-13,30,48,51.
The estimated
additional blood volume varies from 20% to 60% of the existing supply 11,15,16.
This is a significant enough quantity for immediate cord clamping to be referred to as "the equivalent
of subjecting an infant to a
massive hemorrhage" 14. Not exactly the way one would hope to welcome a new life into the world.
The estimated average total
blood volume of term infants has been reported to be between 80 and 90 ml/kg 19, 20 or a total volume
of 310 ml 52.
The birth position assumed by the mother has as great impact on the quantity of placental transfusion.
Taking full advantage of
gravity, this transfusion is greatly facilitated when the squatting birth position is practiced, as
is still commonly done throughout the
less developed nations of the world, as well as by our closest evolutionary relatives, the primates
14.
Another study estimated that about 35 ml of blood per kg of birth weight is transfused when infants
are kept at the level of the
vaginal opening and the cord is clamped 3 minutes after birth 17. The same authors later found a 32%
higher blood volume in
babies who were placed on their mother's abdomen and the cord clamped after it stopped pulsating
18. This practice has
become more common in the "natural childbirth" setting, but still only takes place in a small
percentage of overall births.
In a recent report, the World Health Organization (WHO) cited several medical references to back-up
it's statement that if the
newborn is placed at or below the level of the vulva for 3 minutes before clamping, an approximately
80 ml blood transfer would
result 2, 25, 26, 27.
A 1998 study from Great Britain found that LC babies weighed over 2 oz. more than did babies
whose cords were
immediately cut 3. Following the study, one of the authors stated that they plan on performing follow-up
studies on the children
when they are between 2 and 5 years of age to attempt to find any impact on the children 4. As we will
soon discuss, the possible
effects on the infant could be dramatic.
Anemia and Iron status LC has been shown to reduce the incidence of iron deficiency anemia and result
in increased
hemoglobin and hematocrit levels 5, 7, 17, 19, 28, 38, 48. The trend toward higher hematocrit levels
in LC infants were found
to be greater in infants born by C-section and those born very premature (26-29 weeks) 42. Even as long
ago as 1877, it was
shown that LC resulted in increased erythrocyte concentrations 7.
LC has been estimated to provide about 50 mg of additional iron to the infant 2, 39. According
to one researcher 16: . a
moderate transfusion of about 20-30 ml/kg endows about 30-50 mg of "extra" iron and can help
prevent or delay depletion of iron
stores during late infancy..placental transfusion could represent a physiological and inexpensive means
of increasing iron stores.
The iron status of LC infants has been shown to remain high, even at two months 28 and nine months
of age 39. Adequate
iron stores are crucial for proper neurological development. Although iron supplements can reverse anemia,
impaired cognitive
function has still been observed 4 to 5 years later 40. In addition, iron deficiency is often not discovered
for several years, at
which time there may be irreparable damage, which may even be so subtle as not to be noticed.
Another study found an inverse relationship between the volume of blood remaining in the placenta with
the hemoglobin
concentration of the newborn 38. Obviously, the less blood remaining in the placenta, the more retained
by the newborn. The
hemoglobin concentration at birth is of critical importance as it is a measure of the infant's available
iron stores 19.
Iron deficiency may be a much more common dilemma than is generally thought. A 1995 diet and nutrition
survey from Great
Britain showed that 25% of children were iron deficient and 12% had iron deficiency anemia 41.
Could LC improve the iron status and thereby the developmental potential of children throughout the
world?
Premature infants Delayed cord clamping has been shown to be especially beneficial with preterm
infants by improving
outcomes including reductions in respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) 5,10,22,30, blood transfusions
21,30, and ischemic organ
damage 30. These benefits are most likely due to the greater erythrocyte volume and oxygen carrying
capacity due to the greater
blood volume. However, doesn't it make sense that a practice that is better for preterms would be better
for full-terms as well?
Even though a normal infant may not be at high risk for RDS, wouldn't it still be advantageous to have
a greater oxygen carrying
capacity? Besides premature infants, the benefits of LC may be especially great for other infants considered
to at high-risk for
RDS (see Figure 3) 31.
In addition, the lower blood volume with EC may result in a shunting of blood to the infant's
more critical organs (e.g., heart and
brain), at the expense of others. This may cause complications by rendering some organs ischemic 30.
One reason that LC has
been shown to be especially beneficial for premature infants is the proportionally greater blood supply
gained. With a full-term
infant, two-thirds of the blood in the placental-fetal circulation is in the fetal circulation. However,
at 30 weeks gestation, only half
the blood is in the fetal circulation 44. Therefore, the premature infant is in a more dire hematological
position and has more to
gain from the greater blood supply provided by LC.
A recently published editorial in The Lancet states that, although there have been many technical
advances in the treatment of
premature infants, "simple measures that improve outcome, such as late clamping of the cord, seem
to have been forgotten" 43.
It should not be surprising that conventional medicine is so quick to use high-tech gadgets and pharmaceuticals
without first
considering simple, natural, and low-cost measures.
Brain Damage and Asphyxia A significant number of infants suffer permanent brain damage during
the birth process, often
without parents or doctors even realizing it has occurred. Years ago, a report by the National Institute
of Child Health and Human
Development estimated the number of such cases to be so great as to exceed "the combined annual
number of deaths from all
types of cancer, the number of deaths in automobile accidents each year, and the total loss of American
life in the war effort in
Vietnam" 45. Admittedly, it is quite possible that this number has gone down significantly in the
years since these comments
were published. However, it is probably still not a rare occurrence and may have even gone up.
One researcher, Dr. Abraham Towbin, in the Journal of the American Medical Association,
maintained that oxygen deprivation
causing minimal brain damage is a common occurrence that is not generally realized. While severe and
obvious brain damage
and even death can occur after a relatively long period of oxygen deprivation, shorter periods can cause
lesser damage, which
may go unnoticed until later in life where it can manifest itself as a learning difficulty or behavioral
problem 46.
He made the following extremely disturbing observation 46: With the brain marred at birth, the potential
of performance may be
reduced from that of a genius to that of a plain child, or less. The damage may be slight, imperceptible
clinically, or it may spell
the difference between brothers, one a dexterous athlete and the other 'an awkward child'.
Dr. William Windle, a former research director at The Institute of Rehabilitative Medicine
at the New York Medical Center, made
the assertion that any infant that has asphyxia long enough to require resuscitation at birth will almost
certainly have brain
damage as a result. The number of people with minimal brain damage, in his opinion, is much larger than
is widely thought.
Citing experiments performed on monkeys in two National Institutes of Health laboratories, he asserted
that even infants who
seem to recover fully will most likely have permanent brain lesions that may cause subtle deficiencies
in memory or behavior 14.
LC could play a crucial role in reducing the number of infants damaged due to asphyxia. One of the main
reasons for this is very
simple to understand. Infants survive for their entire life, prior to being born, by obtaining oxygen,
through the placenta, from the
maternal blood supply. When the umbilical cord is clamped, the infants must then rely completely on
their own respiratory efforts.
However, sometimes infants do not begin to breathe promptly following birth. If the cord has already
been clamped, the infant will
have no oxygen supply. If left alone, the cord will most likely supply oxygenated blood for several
minutes, until pulsation ceases,
thereby reducing or eliminating the time that the infant is oxygen deprived.
Early minimal brain damage may also manifest itself later in life as a mental disorder such as schizophrenia.
A just published
1999 case-controlled study found that adverse conditions in the womb, such as placental insufficiency,
may be a risk factor for
early-onset schizophrenia, possibly due to oxygen deprivation 47. If oxygen deprivation to the fetus
can result in schizophrenia, it
is not so far-fetched to hypothesize that oxygen deprivation, caused by EC, to the newborn may do the
same.
Is it possible for LC to permanently improve brain function by providing a greater oxygen supply? Could
the rates of disorders
such as Cerebral Palsy, mental retardation, autism, schizophrenia and others be reduced? Can LC increase
intelligence? None
of these questions have yet to be properly addressed, let alone answered.
Immune System Boost It is well established that the newborn receives a plethora of maternal antibodies
from the placental
blood supply. Therefore, it stands to reason that by increasing this supply, you are increasing the
quantity of these immune-enhancing antibodies as well. Considering the fact that these antibodies continue
to provide protection to the infant for months, a
higher level could have significant impact on infant morbidity and mortality.
Take, for example, the potentially dangerous Bordetella pertussis (whooping cough) bacteria, which has
the potential to cause
significant infant mortality. It has been shown that the placental blood does contain anti-pertussis
antibodies 33,34.
Although the authors point out that the levels are not necessarily always high enough to provide complete
protection, it would
seem to be beneficial nonetheless.
Placental blood has also been shown to contain antibodies to other dangerous and potentially deadly
infectious agents such as
Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), Streptococcus pneumoniae and Neisseria meningitidis, among others
34.
Could a widespread acceptance and practice of LC cause a reduction in these life-threatening diseases?
If true, this could have
an influence on infant vaccination policy by altering the risk/benefit analysis.
Breastfeeding Regarding possibly the strangest association, how is it possible for LC to improve breastfeeding
rates? Well, no
one is really sure, but a 1991 report did show a significantly higher breastfeeding rate with LC 35.
One theory is that the LC newborn has more strength (possibly due to greater blood volume and higher
blood pressure). They
may therefore be in a better position to successfully nurse, especially with first time mothers, where
both mom and baby are
attempting a new feat. Additionally, it has been reported that the increased early contact between mother
and baby that often
occurs with LC might improve breastfeeding rates 16,36.
Since breastfeeding has been shown to provide numerous and significant health benefits, this
needs to be taken into
consideration when discussing the issue of cord clamping. (Added comment by Donna Young: Breast
milk has 5-natural sugars
that are beneficial to the baby's brain and other cell and blood development).
Vitamins, Minerals, and Hormones It also stands to reason that along with the additional blood
volume, the infant receives
additional quantities of various nutrients such as vitamins and minerals, as well as hormones, which
could provide many health
benefits. For example, additional quantities of vitamin K might help prevent some cases of vitamin K
deficiency bleeding in
newborns, which often prove fatal. This might also reduce the need for neonatal vitamin K prophylaxis.
As another example, consider the trace mineral chromium. Additional quantities could improve insulin
sensitivity, thereby
improving blood glucose levels and reducing strain on the infant's pancreas by requiring a decreased
level of insulin production.
The fetal blood supply also contains many hormones, some produced by the placenta and others obtained
from the maternal
blood supply. The greater supply of hormones provided by LC could provide numerous health benefits.
As an example, thyroid
hormones are known to easily cross the placenta 37 and could exert positive influences on the infant's
basal metabolism. Is it
possible that LC could even help reduce the effects of hormonal deficiency disorders, such as Cretinism?
Additional Benefits The placental blood also supplies a great number of stem cells, which have the unique
capability of dividing
into specialized cells, replacing those that die or are lost. This additional supply could have a positive
influence on the health of
newborns 30.
In addition to the potential health benefits, LC may actually result in financial savings for the healthcare
industry by reducing costs
associated with the treatment of premature infants, such as reduced blood transfusions and other neonatal
care procedures
21,30. Maybe health insurance companies should take a look into this issue, as it may be a unique opportunity
to reduce costs,
while improving health at the same time.
Possible Disadvantages and Risks Critics of LC cite several drawbacks, most commonly referring to the
increased maternal
bleeding which, as previously discussed, posses minimal risks to the mother, especially in a hospital
setting. However, there are
some situations where the risks of LC seem to be elevated. Some of these are listed in Figure 4.
An increased incidence of sepsis in infants occurs with LC when antimicrobial medications are given
to the mother prior to birth.
Because of this, it has been recommended that when the mother is given these drugs, as is often done
following c-sections, the
cord should be clamped prior to their administration in order to prevent neonatal exposure 49.
In addition, it has been shown that LC results in adverse effects on the infant when general anesthesia
is used on mother, as
often occurs with an emergency c-section 6. It has also been alleged by one study that no significant
placental transfusion takes
place with a c-section delivery, even after 3 minutes 8. However, other studies contradict this assertion
23,42. A possible cause
of reduced transfusion in a c-section could be the lack or diminished strength of contractions, which
seem to play an important
role in the movement of blood from the placenta to the infant. It may be possible, therefore, to improve
the rate of transfusion
through the administration of oxytocin, thereby stimulating contractions 55.
Although no adverse effects of a moderate placental transfusion were found, one study warned of potential
circulatory overload,
hyperviscosity and polycythemia at term deliveries if "excessive" placental transfusion were
allowed 17. This hypothesis,
however, has yet to be adequately demonstrated, and therefore in my opinion can not be used as a basis
for a medical
intervention.
Additionally, a 1998 study expressed the opinion LC represents no risk to the newborn and that some
problems which have
occasionally been attributed to LC (e.g., polycythemia) may be the result of the routine vitamin K injections
given to all newborns
when combined with LC, rather than LC alone 53. If true, this could have a profound impact on the risk/benefit
analysis for the
standard procedure of administrating neonatal intramuscular vitamin K prophylaxis to all infants.
Lastly, LC may be medically contraindicated in the case of Rh sensitization, where an Rh-negative mother
is giving birth to an Rh
positive infant 2. Despite the occasional negative report, the WHO states that when LC is performed
after the ceasing of
pulsation (approx. 3-4 minutes), adverse effects have not been reported 2.
What is the optimal time? Even a very short delay in clamping can result in significant placental transfusion.
After only 30
seconds, approximately 10-20ml/kg of placental blood transfer occurs in a vaginal birth 8. However,
30 seconds is certainly on
the lower end of the spectrum, with most proponents recommending times ranging from 1 minute up to the
cessation of cord
pulsation, depending on conditions including gestational age, birth weight, type of delivery, and degree
of risk for complications,
including Respiratory Distress Syndrome (RDS).
For premature babies, it has been recommended that clamping be delayed for 1 to 1.5 minutes by one study
10, with another
recommending 3 minutes 5. What to do?The question of what to do with the cord does not arise in the
animal kingdom, since
most herbivores tear it and carnivores chew it, which is of course followed by eagerly consuming the
placenta, not letting any of
the valuable nutrients go to waste 52.
Throughout a vast majority of their existence, humans have left the umbilical cord alone, at least until
the placenta was delivered.
This practice was replaced, in western society, during the seventeenth century with one of cutting it
and tying it off, leaving a short
stump 52.
According to the WHO 2: Late clamping (or not clamping at all) is the physiological way of treating
the cord, and early clamping is
an intervention that needs justification... in normal birth there should be a valid reason to interfere
with the natural procedure.
It is important to realize that EC is a medical intervention and therefore needs to be medically justified.
The fact that the practice
of early cord clamping is a medical intervention, incompatible with natural physiological processes,
is a concept that is often
expressed in medical literature30,20,54 but seems to have a difficult time finding it's way into the
delivery room.
Summary and Conclusion An editorial in the British Medical Journal had a startling and unfortunate observation
that may apply
not just to cord clamping, but to other common medical practices as well 16: Immediate cord clamping
is currently routine
practice, but its widespread acceptance was not preceded by studies evaluating the effects of depriving
neonates of a significant
volume of blood. Simply by providing a greater supply of oxygen, antibodies, vitamins, minerals, hormones,
and other nutrients to
the newborn, many potential benefits may be seen from LC.
As stated by one researcher, by employing placental blood, rather than discarding it, many benefits
could reaped 30. Therefore,
unless medically contraindicated for a particular birth, there is much evidence that it makes sense
for cord clamping to be
delayed to allow for placental transfusion. This practice seems to be fairly low-risk, in most cases,
and potentially quite beneficial.
Has the time has finally come for this to become the standard medical practice rather than the exception?
I would urge those in
the clinical research setting to look at this issue closer, possibly addressing some of the potential
impacts that have yet to be
looked at (see Figure 5). Late cord clamping, although not technically part of "alternative medicine",
is an excellent example of
how a simple, low-cost, non-pharmacological, non-surgical, and non-technology based intervention may
result in long term and far
reaching health benefits.
REFERENCES
Darwin E. Zoonomia 1801 3: 302.
Care in Normal Birth: a practical guide, Report of a Technical Working Group, World Health Organization, 1996: 32-33.
Rogers J, Wood J, McCandlish R, Ayers S, Truesdale A, Elbourne D. Active versus expectant management of third stage of labour: the Hinchingbrooke randomised controlled trial. Lancet 1998; 351: 693-699.
Elbourne D, Dezateux C, Effect of delaying timing of clamping of cord is being studied. [letter] British Medical Journal 1998;316:145-146.
Hohmann M, [Early or late cord clamping? A question of optimal time]. Wien Klin Wochenschr 1985 May 24; 97: 497-500.
Erkkola R, Kero P, Kanto J, Korvenranta H, Nanto V, Peltonen T. Delayed cord clamping in cesarean section with general anesthesia. Am J Perinatol 1984 Jan 1:2 165-9.
Kunzel W. [Cord clamping at birth - considerations for choosing the right time]. Z Geburtshilfe Perinatol 1982 Apr-May 186:2 59-64.
Kleinberg F, Dong L, Phibbs RH. Cesarean section prevents placenta-to-infant transfusion despite delayed cord clamping. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1975 Jan 1 121:1 66-70.
Yao AC, Lind J. Effect of early and late cord clamping on the systolic time intervals of the newborn infant. Acta Paediatr Scand 1977 Jul 66:4 489-93
Usher RH, Saigal S, O'Neil A, Surainder Y, Chua LB. Estimation of red blood cell volume in premature infants with and without respiratory distress syndrome. Biol Neonate 1975 26:3-4 241-8.
Usher R, Shephard M, Lind J. The blood volume of the newborn infant and placental transfusion. Acta Paediatr Scand 1963; 52: 497-512.
Vardi P, Significance of placental transfusion in the pathogenesis of neonatal jaundice and hyperbilirubinemia. Acta Chir Acad Sci Hung 1967;8(3):211-214.
DeMarch QB, Windle WF, Alt HL. (title unknown). Am J Dis Child 1942 63: 1123.
Windle, WF. Brain Damage by Asphyxia at Birth. Scientific American, October 1969; 77-84.
Yao AC, Lind J. Effect of gravity on placental transfusion. Lancet 1969; ii: 505-508.
Pisacane A. Neonatal prevention of iron deficiency. Placental transfusion is a cheap and physiological solution [editorial]. British Medical Journal 1996;312:136-7.
Linderkamp O, Nelle M, Kraus M, Zilow EP. The effect of early and late cord clamping on blood viscosity and other hemorheological parameters in full-term neonates. Acta Paediatr 1992; 81: 745-50.
Nelle M, Zilow EP, Bastert G, Linderkamp O. Effect of Leboyer childbirth on cardiac output, cerebral and gastrointestinal blood flow velocities in full-term neonates. Am J Perinatol 1995; 12: 212-6.
Markey, G, Morris, T C M. Placental transfusion might reduce prevalence of iron deficiency [letter]. BMJ 1996; 312: 1103-1103.
Linderkamp OL. Placental transfusion: determinants and effects. Clin Perinatol 1982; 9: 559.
Kinmond S, Aitchison TC, Holland BM, Jones JG, Turner TL, Wardrop CA, Umbilical cord clamping and preterm infants: a randomised trial. British Medical Journal 1993;306:172-175.
Werle P, Künzel W. [Perinatal mortality and asphyxia in premature babies (author's transl)]. Z Geburtshilfe Perinatol 1975 Aug 179:4 250-60.
Ogata ES, Kitterman JA, Kleinberg F, Dong L, Willis M, Mates J, Phibbs RH. The effect of time of cord clamping and maternal blood pressure on placental transfusion with cesarean section. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1977 May 15 128:2 197-200.
Speir B. Birth Whole for Optimum Health. Berkeley: Open Eden, 1982.
Yao AC, Lind J, Vourenkosky V. Expiratory grunting in the late cord clamped normal neonate. Pediatrics 1971; 48: 865-870.
Yao AC, Lind J. Placental Transfusion. Am J Dis Child 1974; 127:128-141.
Dunn PM. The third stage and fetal adaptation. In: Clinch J, Matthews T (eds). Perinatal medicine. Proceedings of the IX European Congress of prenatal medicine held in Dublin, Ireland, 1984. Lancaster, MTP Press, 1985.
Grajeda R, Perez-Escamilla R, Dewey KG, Delayed clamping of the umbilical cord improves hematologic status of Guatemalan infants at 2 months of age. Am J Clin Nutr 1997 Feb;65(2):425-431.
Zeulzer W: In Tizard JP, Holzel A, editors: Modern Trends in Paediatrics, London, 1958, Butterworth & Co., page 116.
Wardrop CA, Holland BM. The roles and vital importance of placental blood to the newborn infant. J Perinat Med 1995 23:1-2 139-43.
Moss AJ, Duffie ER, Fagan LM. (title unknown). JAMA 1963 184: 48.
Jegier W, Blankenship W, Lind J. (title unknown). Acta Paediatr 1963 52: 485.
Tripodi V, Liguori G, Capunzo M, D'Eliseo R. [Vertical transmission of immunity against B. pertussis] Boll Ist Sieroter Milan 1988 67:5-6 357-62.
Kassim OO, Raphael DH, Ako-Nai AK, Taiwo O, Torimiro SE, Afolabi OO. Class-specific antibodies to Bordetella pertussis, Haemophilus influenzae type b, Streptococcus pneumoniae and Neisseria meningitidis in human breast-milk and maternal-infant sera. Ann Trop Paediatr 1989 Dec 9:4 226-32.
Anonymous. A study of the relationship between the delivery to cord clamping interval and the time of cord separation. Oxford Midwives Research Group. Midwifery 1991 Dec 7:4 167-76.
Perez-Escamilla R, Pollitt E, Lonnerdal B, Dewey KG. Infant feeding policies in maternity wards and their effect on breast-feeding success: an overview. Am J Public Health 1994;84:89-97.
Iskaros J, Pickard M, Evans I, Sinha A, Hardiman P, Ekins R. Thyroid hormone receptor gene expression in the first trimester human fetal CNS. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1998;12 suppl. 1: 72.
Hows JM, Bradley BA, Marsh JCW, Luft T, Coutinsho L, Testa NG, et al. Growth of human umbilical cord blood in long term haemopoietic cultures. Lancet 1992; 340: 73-6.
Michaelsen KF, Milman N, Samuelson G, A longitudinal study of iron status in healthy Danish infants. Effect of early iron status, growth velocity and dietary factors. Acta Paediatr 1995; 84: 1035-44.
Idjradinata P, Pollitt E, Reversal of developmental delays in iron deficient anaemic infants treated with iron. Lancet 1993;341:1-4.
Office of Population Censuses and Surveys. National diet and nutrition survey. Vol 1. London: HMSO, 1995.
McDonnell M, Henderson-Smart DJ, Delayed umbilical cord clamping in preterm infants: a feasibility study. J Pediatr Child Health 1997 Aug;33(4):308-310.
Koppe JG. Prevention of brain haemorrhage and ischaemic injury [comment]. Lancet 1996; 348: 208-209.
Brace RA. Regulation of blood volume in utero. In: Hanson MA, et al (eds): Fetal and Neonatal Physiology and Clinical Application. 1. The Circulation. Cambridge University Press, England 1993.
Optimal Health Care for Mothers and Children: A National Priority. A report of five conferences held during 1967. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; National Institutes of Health.
Towbin, A. Organic causes of minimal brain dysfunction. JAMA August 30, 1971.
Hultman CM, Sparen P, Takei N, Murray RM, Cnattingius S. Prenatal and perinatal risk factors for Schizophrenia, Affective Psychosis, and Reactive Psychosis of early onset: case-control study. British Medical Journal 1999; 318:421-426.
Prendiville W, Elbourne D. Care during the third stage of labor. In: Chalmers I (eds). Effective care in pregnancy and childbirth. Oxford, Oxford University Press 1989.
Cunningham FG, Leveno KJ, DePalma RT, Roark M, Rosenfeld CR. Perioperative antimicrobials for cesarean delivery: before or after cord clamping? Obstet Gynecol 1983 Aug 62:2 151-4.
Peltonen T. Placental transfusion: advantage and disadvantage. Euro Journal of Pediatrics 1981;137:141- 146.
Klebe JG, Ingomar CJ. The fetoplacental circulation during parturition: evidence from residual placental blood volume. Pediatrics 1974 Aug; 54:2 213-216.
Smith, Anthony. The Body, Walker and Co., New York City, 1968; p. 123-124.
Papagno L. Umbilical cord clamping. An analysis of a usual neonatological conduct. Acta Physiol Pharmacol Ther Latinoam 1998;48(4):224-7.
Dunn PM. Caesarean section and the prevention of respiratory distress syndrome of the newborn. In: Bossart H: Perinatal medicine. Proceedings of the 3rd European Congress of prenatal medicine Lausanne 1973. Bern, Hans Huber.
Yao AC, Lind J. Placental transfusion - rate and uterine contraction. Lancet 1968 i; 380. "
_________________________________________________________________________________________________________
Visit a recommended web site, edited by Cory Mermer and many articles by a retired obstetrician and gynecologists, Dr. George M. Morley: : www.cordclamping.com
__________________________________________________________________
Other Comments:
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.
(Reference from Protect Babies www.123-baby-birth.com an original site of Donna Young This site has many other concerns posted. It is, like most of my web sites (www.123babybirth.com) in the embryo stage, unedited.......so bare with me, as a mother and grandmother, sharing my concerns, with the world.
I encourage others to write their true experiences, too, positive or negative, as a Sworn Declaration,
naming the doctor and the
NURSES, too. If you need web space, I can help you, too.
Please get the nurses names, and get a copy of their observation of your child's birth. You are entitled
to copies of all tests, PKU
testing, and pH tests of your baby's birth. The nurses are either allies of the doctor and
are willfully blind, or the are accomplices
to a crime against the child, and concealed it. Most RN's were not adequately trained on the fetus
to neonates/adult's circulation
system, and were not trained on the importance of the placenta blood. They then alleged or did
not reason right from wrong, or
observe whose babies were getting oxygen supplements and blood expanders, delayed clamped babies or
early clamped. They
did not report to the police or their own medical trainers what they were seeing as a Constitutional
violation to the child or the right
to equal protection and security of persons.
Letters to professional associations for the proper training of all registered nurses is advocated for. They are NOT taught, in most training of the fetus to infant circulation, so do not know right from wrong in the delivery rooms. One nurse called them the den of iniquity, and would not work there. She was helpless to report a doctor, or superior and was not allowed to go to the police on child endangering by a professional persons, or feared to.
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:
Note: PETITION www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/102580814
Please ask this site to have a Medical Alert Petition Site: petitions@earth.case2.com
