Nancy Sullivan notes on delayed umbilical cord clamping
Comments on the research of Judith S. Mercer by Nancy Sullivan, Certified Nurse Midwife, CNM, link below:
January-February 2003 E-Magazine
Editor: Nancy Sullivan, CNM nancy@midwifeinfo.com
http://www.midwifeinfo.com/jan03email.php#cordclamping
"
Immediate clamping of the umbilical cord can reduce the red blood cells an infant receives at
birth by more than
50%
, resulting in potential short-term and long-term neonatal problems."
So concluded Judith Mercer, CNM and colleagues in a study reported in the fall
of 2001 in the Journal of Midwifery and
Women's Health (Mercer, 2001).
"Early clamping of the umbilical cord at birth, a practice developed without
adequate evidence,
causes neonatal blood volume
to vary 25% to 40%
. Such a massive change occurs at no other time in one's life without serious consequences, even death.
Early cord clamping may impede a successful transition and contribute to hypovolemic and hypoxia damage
in vulnerable
newborns" (Mercer, 2002).
". . . almost all obstetricians and many midwives just cannot wait to clamp and cut that cord.
In a survey by Mercer of the habits
of nurse-midwives, she found that about a quarter clamped before 1 minute after birth;
slightly over a third clamped from1 to
3 minutes; and a third clamped after pulsations cease (Mercer, 2000).
" he clamps and scissors are readied ahead of time and, as soon as the baby is out, before there is time to assess how he is doing or to hand him up to the arms of his waiting mother, the big, fat, living, pulsing cord is clamped in two places and severed between, often spraying blood from the force of the pulsations .
"In the interests of being family-friendly, the scissors are frequently handed to the dazed and wide-eyed father , who hasn't had time to take stock of the momentous event that has just occurred, nor to have a good look at his baby. "Here, dad, you want to cut the cord?"
"Why this hurry?
There seems to be a fear that something just terrible will happen if the baby
is not separated immediately from his lifeblood,
from the placental oxygen and nutrients that have nourished him for nine months.
Or, is it just a rush to get on with things, to get this case finished
up and move on to the next one? Recently, an additional
rationale for early clamping of the cord has been promoted -
collecting that precious cord blood to be saved,
either for use
in this baby's later life, for another individual, or for research.
By clamping umbilical cord blood at an early stage, researchers obtain "a
greater number of CD34+ cells" (Pafumi et al.).
B
ut wait a minute! Those CD34+ cells belong to this infant!
When they are "harvested" for another purpose, there is a
great possibility that this infant is being robbed of substances that he needs for normal growth
and development.
It makes intrinsic sense that, during the incredible transition from intrauterine
to extrauterine life, while he is trying to take his
first breaths and fill his lungs with air, the baby can benefit from the additional oxygen coming from
the still-attached placenta."
"In her study, Mercer reviewed cord clamping studies from 1980 to 2001.
According to her results, "five hundred thirty-one term infants in the nine identified randomized
and non-randomized studies experienced late clamping, ranging
from 3 minutes to cessation of pulsations, without symptoms of polycythemia or significant hyperbilirubinemia.
Higher red blood cell flow to vital organs in the first week was noted, and
term infants had
less anemia at 2 months
and
increased duration of early breastfeeding.
In seven randomized trials of preterm infants, benefits associated with delayed
clamping in these infants included higher
hematocrit and hemoglobin levels, blood pressure, and blood volume, with better cardiopulmonary adaptation
and fewer days of
oxygen and ventilation and fewer transfusions needed.
For both term and preterm infants, few, if any, risks were associated with delayed
cord clamping." Mercer noted that
longitudinal studies are needed to confirm the benefits of delayed cord clamping."
References
Gupta R, Ramji S. Effect of delayed cord clamping on iron stores in infants born to anemic mothers: a randomized controlled trial. Indian Pediatr 2002 Feb;39(2):130-5
Ibrahim HM, Krouskop RW, Lewis DF, Dhanireddy R. Placental transfusion: umbilical cord clamping and preterm infants. J Perinatol 2000 Sep;20(6):351-4
Mercer JS.Current best evidence: a review of the literature on umbilical cord clamping. J Midwifery Womens Health 2001 Nov-Dec;46(6):402-14
Mercer JS, Skovgaard RL. Neonatal transitional physiology: a new paradigm. J Perinat Neonatal Nurse. 2002 Mar;15(4):56-75. Review.
Mercer JS, Nelson CC, Skovgaard RL. Umbilical cord clamping: beliefs and practices of American nurse-midwives. J Midwifery Womens Health 2000 Jan-Feb;45(1):58-66
Pafumi C, Milone G, Maggi I, Russo A, Farina M, Pernicone G, Bandiera S, Giardina P, Mangiafico L, Mancari R, Calogero AE, Cianci A. Early clamping of umbilical cord blood and foetal CD34 enrichment. Acta Med Austriaca 2001;28(5):141-4
Rabe H, Wacker A, Hulskamp G, Hornig-Franz I, Schulze-Everding A, Harms E, Cirkel U, Louwen F, Witteler R, Schneider HP. A randomised controlled trial of delayed cord clamping in very low birth weight preterm infants. Eur J Pediatr 2000 Oct;159(10):775-
_________________________________
Comments on research by Judith S. Mercer, by Donna Young
What, today, is meant by delayed cord clamping? Many doctors think it is counting 30-seconds, and not waiting for all pulsation in the cord to cease, naturally. They do not do research or drain the evidence of how much blood they actually deprived the child, nor record that fact on the child's own medical chart with all witnesses to that fact. If it is so good, where are the records of fact? Why are the facts on the care and treatment and the blood trapped in the placenta missing?
One comment on the research of Judith S. Mercer, in her personal participation of 30 second clamping,
Judith did object to
immediate cord clamping but apparently her research grant money did not allow for her to tell
the mothers of no
clamping or cutting of the cord, at all, the Lotus Birth. Why not?
It does no harm. It was a practice of no clamping, at
all, by our grandmothers, prior to the 1920's
.
I have noted other research papers, of what they left out when researching the
timing of the clamping of the cord. They often
accused delayed clamping of causing jaundice and they left out drugs given the mother that kill blood
cells and over burden the
baby's tiny liver, spleen, and kidneys. Babies cannot dispell drugs like the adult's system can.
Ethics of Research All information must be made available for true informed choices:
Research should not have a bias by leaving out all choices, or to pay the researcher to leave out all
choices. Such natural birth
choices are legal for the mother to make an informed choice, whether her baby is born by vaginal
birth, c-section, or whether her
baby is a full term or a premature baby.
When such information is left out at hospitals, it suggests, perhaps, they have a conflict of interest
in the blood the placenta,
trapped by hasty clamping, or in the placenta, itself, as using in research.
There are no risk of blood and navel infections to no clamping or cutting the cord. The cord is
off in two days time. The baby
receives the blood inside his/her own body. That time for the placenta and cord to heal
by no clamping is a shorter
inconvenience of keeping a cut cord from blood infections from 8 days to 2 weeks. The cosmetic
removal of the placenta with 30-seconds only serves to risks the placenta and blood to be harvested
for resell to drug companies, research, and stem cell
collection.
Personally, Judith S. Mercer told me, that some placentas were burned and the blood
in them, but not all. Some went to drug
companies and to research. Those that did were not likely sent with informed consent
of the parent(s). And that, Judith Mercer
shared with me, personally, that the
premature babies have more quantity of stem cells,
then does a full term baby. Those
were questions I had asked her, and she truthfully answered them for me, as I believe she would testify
if required to do so by a
court of law.
The research of Judith S. Mercer, has a risk of requiring only 30-second clamping, to be considered
as the new delayed method.
That is making a standard of care of limited time the cord will be left alone to finish full blood transfusion
to the child. Judith,
alone, counted the 30-seconds for when to then clamp the pulsating cord. It would have been better
to all the child's own body to
determine when its needs were satisfied not the decision of a medical persons, and the means to control
the child's quality of life,
even life itself. Might we consider how many potential brain genius cells might have been damaged
by too soon clamping? The
child had legal rights for full completion of his/her birth. This is full delayed clamping and waiting
for the placenta to be expelled.
A mere 30-second and 45-second clamping still leaves a large amount of blood trapped in the placenta
for harvesting later, and
not with informed choice. It is no consolation to the child to have had its blood burned or sent
to others, when the blood legally
belonged inside the baby.
In contrast of an earlier study by Dr. Mavis Gunther, London, UK, 1957,
http://www.123babybirth.com/doc/MapJune1-222.htm
, this doctor revealed the pulsation of the cord, if the child was drugged,
continued closer to 14 to 20 minutes, before all
pulsation ceased.
This 30 second clamping must be reviewed as much the same as immediate cord clamping. The medical
person can be
involved in intentional deprivation of blood volume to the child, while the child lives. It is
not the point if the larger babies live it is
the point of unnecessary interruption of the blood, that legally belongs to the owner/infant, to be
inside his/her body at birth, not
years later.....when the child gets sick or shows evidence of a brain tumor or cancers.
Both hasty clamping 30-second and immediate are short of the choice for natural allowance or no clamping
or all, the Lotus Birth.
The Lotus Birth is a new name for an old practice of the early pioneers, and a practice of many
small villages in third world
countries. In such places, they did not have drugs to combat infections from a cut cord, the same
as the pioneers.
Now, in such small villages, there is evidence of Millions of babies who die of cord infections after
these small villages tried to
copy Western societies trends and habits. See the World Health Organization 1998, care of the umbilical
cord. The small
villages did not have the drugs to combat the infections by a cut cord, so millions of babies died a
long and painful death. Also,
many babies died such deaths when Western Societies encouraged the mothers to use formulas, rather than
natural breast milk.
The babies died of internal infections as they could not keep the milk long, or make it in sterilized
water conditions, nor refrigerate
it. Millions died too. This, is a mean form of population control, if that is the hidden reasons
of having these people change
natural ways, that do no harm.
For Fetus to Neonate circulation systems see:
www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-435.htm
for Hormones in birth see:
www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-434.htm
Search this www.lotusbirth.com web site for : AAP policy, SOGC policy, ACOG policy; Placenta; Fetus to Neonate Circulation; 30-scond 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
Revised: August 12, 2004
Please ask this site to have a Medical Alert Petition Site:
petitions@earth.case2.com
