World Health Organization's Physiological Way of Treating the Umbilical Cord, by Donna Young,
September 2003
The World Health Organization, does not recommend early umbilical cord clamping (except and unless the birthing mother accepted Oxytocin, Syntocinon, Pitocin, Toesen). Then the rules change. The child will then be caused to anemic deprived from 20 to 50 percent total placenta blood volume. In most instances, the child will live but be weaker in immunities, hormones, and enzymes and more. The W.H.O. are political, apparently, and we thought them to be neutral, and for the best informed care and treatment for all women, world wide. It would be nice to see W.H.O. adopt a Birth Contract, that I have suggested at www.lotusbirth.com (See Table of Contents) by Donna Young, Natural Birth Education.
(Reference for this Url is: www.lotusbirth.com/doc/FEB2003Lotusbirth-456.htm) Revised March 29, 2004 .
Best practice possible least risk of endangering in medical care and services
has no place for WHO to be neutral, but factual.
It is a matter of knowing right from wrong and not exploiting the mother or the baby, as to duty of
facts told the mother, for an
informed decision. This is to assure of no medical exploitation of the common folk and and no
person or institution is taking
advantage of the baby's need of equal protection and security of person.
Not too long ago, in the summer of the year 2003, a mother pulled the perfect
crime, as I perceive it. The mother went to a
higher altitude. She did this knowing her body would increase in blood cells, and her baby's. She had vigorous sex, and was not
surprised when her water broke. Her baby was intentionally meant to be harvested for the placenta
stem cell blood. Now child's
placenta blood had been increased in stem cells. It is not dissented from of the medical knowledge
that premature babies have
more stem cells then do full term. The mother had pre-arranged to store her baby's deprived placenta
blood which can only be
done by immediate and 30 second umbilical cord clamping.
I perceive this to be unethical for doctors to have taken a premature baby's
blood. Likely it was sold to a rich person, likely a
relative, and their requests and need accommodated by the mother. The baby, thus, was a second
class citizen, exploitable, yet
it would live with being revived with inferior blood, such as ringer's lactate. The private blood
banks would cooperate with this
arrangement that her relative or friend had this blood at their disposal. Any payment of $30,000, for
example, would be not
disclosed, ever. It would be a matter of conscience, unless a criminal investigation of endangering
a child was to be done, on the
mother's requests and the doctors that complied with the request to early clamp a functioning organ.
I perceive this to be crimes against the person. The helpless child, not
able to give informed consent, not 110 pounds, or age
17, or known to be in good health at the time early clamping was allowed (premature).
We need to know what our duties are. Some would consider this an Act of Jezebel,
going back to the worship of Baal, when
babies were sacrificed for the prosperity of their mother or their father.
Should this mother be allowed to keep this child? It was a second class citizen,
harvested for his/her blood!
What does the World Health Organization say on this issue. Well, they
are a little confused, but one of their statements on the
200 year old internal debate on the timing of the clamping of the child's umbilical cord is quoted below.
I do note that WHO leaves
out informed choice to the mother to know that for any baby, premature, full term, vaginal or c-section
birth, no baby has to be
removed from the umbilical cord, ever. This can be allowed the natural birth process, to fall
off in a day's time. No navel hernias,
no cord infections, no low blood volume and pressure, and high immunities, the child not getting anemic
or jaundiced.
The Pioneer method, those who were wise, did this prior to the 1920's. After
that date, women feared to be sent to jail if they
birth unassisted or only with their family. The natural birth and safety of births, as long as
no cutting of the mother's body took
place (this is what caused the deaths, prior to drugs, had this pioneer method of simply putting the
baby's placenta, still attached
to the baby, an untied, in a diaper. Birth was easy. Birth in the warmest room possible.
Wrap the baby in a warm towel. Do
nothing with the cord. Wait for the placenta to be born, the completion of the child's birth. Put the placenta in a warm towel, and
later in a diaper. That is natural child birth, followed with the mother nursing her baby. This
provided natural 5-sugars essential for
the baby's continued brain and tissue development.
This simply natural birth had not been lost to the still developing countries
who were not influenced by North American or
Britain's active management policies on child birth, or other developed countries.
The sooner North American women turn from the deception of the last 3 and 4
generations on child birth and what is best
practice possible, and least risk of harm, the healthier our babies will be. The last of the natural
unassisted birth grandparents
lived to ages of 101, like the Queen Mother. And my own parents, who were born in unassisted births,
1913 and 1914, recently
celebrated their 65th Anniversary, and are living on their own, with minimal assistance.
LACK OF EDUCATION IS THE PROBLEM FOR ALL MEDICAL PERSONS AND THE BIRTHING MOTHER:
Our societies must be bet educated that the clamping of the umbilical cord, is not a medical need, unless the cord tore or for placenta previa. Both these conditions or any interruption of the infant's lifeline, must be investigated for medical malpractice, in order to protect the child's rights to civil or criminal tort. Therefore, the mothers must know that interruption of their baby's lifeline is only a choice of cosmetic removal, which should only be done after the completion of the child's birth. That is the placenta is expelled and until then and the cord is totally finished pulsating, can actually take 20 minutes for some babies, depends on their heart beat and if the cord had been compressed, the cord should not be invasively touched, clamped, tied, or cut.
The damage is done by hand-squeezing, tying or clamping off the cord. Also
a cold room will stop the circulation system too.
That is why warm water births are best, no shock to the child born in warm water. Just bring the baby's
head out of the water.
Pioneers enjoyed water births, but most of this natural birth was never talked about. I was told
about no clamping or cutting of the
cord when I was fourteen years of age...but I did not understand the reasons. Likely, the pioneers
did not know either, but their
babies thrived. They had no injections of their baby, at birth, or samples of blood removed. Babies
today have mysterious
viruses, that are slow or fast acting, and it is likely to breaking of their skin at birth, needlessly
done.
WHEN IT IS SAFE TO COSMETICALLY REMOVE THE CHILD'S UMBILICAL CORD?:
This is after the placenta has been birthed, and no drugs needs to be taken for this natural occurrence, such as using oxytocin, routinely. This is a myth it prevents bleeding. And mothers should be advised the routine use of Oxytocin is endangering to them and to the baby. The World Health Organization states so. They fear endangering of the child's brain development.
DOES OXYTOCIN SEAL UP BROKEN AND TORN BLOOD VESSELS?:
No. Oxytocin is not the drug to seal up broken blood tissues. This
artificial drug with questionable preservatives and trace
elements in it, causes the risk of too severe uterine contractions. This, logically, risks to
the mother to bleed likely more. This
drug risks the labor contractions to be so unnatural, the baby is risked to not get the blood and oxygen
supply to his/her brain. The
contractions are long, close together and of long duration. This is good for those who wish to
harvest the baby's blood. Under
this unnatural distress, the baby fearing of dying, is going to create or release more red cells into
their blood stream, and may
even release, from fear of dying, meconium.
Doctors jump at the use of oxytocin and sight or fear of meconium, to take the
extra blood stem cells the baby created for
his/her own needs. How the doctors sell the placenta blood or the hospital they may work for in
turning the placenta and blood
over to them, is a duty of an investigation of records of billings and codes who all profits from the
harvesting of the baby's
placenta and the placenta blood. That investigation can come as a result of an Commissioned Inquiry
on Maternity Matters and
Care and Treatment of the Newborn Universal Citizen. The United Nations would be best to see that
each Nation protects equal
protection and security of person as to natural birth rights.
PLATELETS AND SEROTONIN SEAL UP BROKEN BLOOD VESSELS AFTER CHILD BIRTH:
The proper hormones released in the birthing mother's body to seal up broken
blood vessels after the placenta has been
expelled, has not been disputed to be the platelets, releasing the hormone serotonin. Therefore,
any misguidance of any
medical authority must be investigated so the mothers can have a
signed birth contract
what is not done to their baby, or to her
body. The legal rights are for the mother to sign a birth contract that her body cannot be cut
to give birth to a baby. Only the
mother can change her mind, as to facts of truth of confirmed medical need to endanger her to staph
infections of cutting tools on
her body, or that on her baby's. Any cut on the mother or the baby's body, in a hospital, risk both
the mother and the child to blood
infections, requiring drugs to heal.
DUTY OF THE CHILD, WHICH IS UNIVERSAL:
Babies must not be shown disrespect because of age, or mental or physical disadvantage,
or by color, or race, or by marital
status of the mother. The babies must not be harvested for their blood. This is showing
a form of discrimination to the women,
that most Nations ratified they would not do that to any woman because it would suggest her body is
being exploited to create a
baby, of which the Nations have a conflict of interest in the baby's blood.
The women, in a sense, would be exploited to create raw material for the Nations,
being the baby's blood. The baby would be
exploited too, a conflict of interest to weaken the baby, harvesting it for the components of the placenta
blood. These are
separated into valuable sold products by drug companies and research labs: white cells, red cells,
stem cells (immature blood
cells), platelets, hormones, enzymes, (some of which may then not be properly reproduced); plasma which
contains valuable
proteins).
To weaken any one baby would be a conflict of interest of any Nation. I suggest
the higher budget for active managed births in
North America, in the United States alone for some 4 million babies born annually, the $20 billion dollar
budget be reserved, for
damages to present babies, and to compensate those babies that died and without a proper Coroner's inquiry,
if more blood
was trapped in the placenta, that ought to have been in the child.
MOST INTERNAL INJURIES, NERVOUS DISORDERS, MUSCLE PROBLEMS, BEHAVIOR CAN BE LIKELY TRACED
TO BIRTH PRACTICES THAT WERE NOT NECESSARY TO BE DONE AT ALL:
Many children are internally damaged. Millions of North American babies,
now teenagers, many adults, have had mysterious
learning and behavior problems and internal health problems, one major concern is attention deficit
disorders and autism. No
investigation on the time of the clamping of the cord has been done and other matters of injections
in babies, while yet anemic.
Why not?
HOW THE MOTHER AND THE CHILD ARE ENDANGERED DURING BIRTH:
Mothers are endangered by early cord clamping. The risk is by two blood mixing, if the placenta burst. The World Health Organization states draining of the cut placenta vein may prevent this, they did not say don't do early cord clamping. Why not? If the cord was clamped on a full placenta, the risk of blood pushed back hard, is a probability. The blood mixing then requires the drug companies cure of Rhogam. The future babies, of this endangered mother may then never go full term, or their baby's blood will destroy itself. How many mothers having abortions or miscarriages were victims of the Rh factors?
Other reasons mothers are endangered because of "active management"
are as follows, and this is around the world:
1. drugging the mother during birth. All drugs cross the placenta and endanger the baby. No drug is safe because of allergic reactions a probable reality. Morphines to slow labor took the delay of labor by tying the mother's feet together, now Demerol and other morphine drugs are used to slow labor. Oxytocins and similar drugs of the same intent, termination of the labor, are given by gels, creams, pills, IV's, needles.
2. false birth positions, the USA has known since 1913 that flat on the back birth positions are harmful, as well as semi-sitting birth positions. Any forward position, sideways or gravity births are known to be best.
3. failure to allow nourishment of the mother. Nourished mothers birth faster and have more endurance for normal labor discomfort. Mothers prevented this nourishment may have diabetic problems, or their child.
4. unncessary umbilical cord clamping, when no clamping or cutting of the cord is factually necessary, ever.
The medical community has known since 1801 that early clamping weakens and endangers the child, or ought to have. They have known putting needles into babies risks the to blood viruses, that can be slow or fast blood disorders.
They have known about the duty of all medical persons to have informed consent and that birth is not a medical need for any person to be present, as mothers have birthed naturally without assistance, and did fine prior to 1920's.
At time, mothers were more or less imposed on to birth in institutions, where disease infected many of the baby's cords, cosmetic removal risked the babies to navel hernias and infections requiring drugs. The drugs risked yeast infections.
Therefore, any medical person, surgeon (even for c-sections), midwife, ambulance medic, doula, who in the past or in the present gives false reasons of fear of the mother bleeding, and then intends to endangering the child and does any tying of the cord, hand-squeezing, clamping any person's baby's lifeline, must be under a proper investigation for endangering the baby. Unless, of course, the cord tore (likely a dropped baby) ; or for placenta previa (likely an error of cutting into the cord or the placenta.
There is no good excuse for the cord to be clamped early. The placenta should be expelled (without drugs, oxytocin is very harmful and should never be given without informed consent it threats the baby not to have full blood transfusion, and this weakens the baby to internal problems of insufficient nutrients),
The cord, if the father or the mother insist it be removed for cosmetic appearances, only, the cord can be detached, themselves, in their own home, hours after the birth, so no clamps are necessary to be imposed on the baby at all. The condition of the cord to be cosmetically removed will be: white, silver, limp and not pulsating and the child's lips and tongue should not be blue. These facts of science have not been disputed.
Here is what the good of the World Health Organization had to say about the
known internal medical 200 year
debate on when to clamp the cord:
"Delaying cord clamping until the pulsations stop is the physiological way of treating the cord and is not associated with adverse effects, at least in normal deliveries."
" Early cord clamping conflicts with traditional beliefs and is an intervention that needs justification. "
References on Umbilical Cord Clamping Used by the World Health Organization
Note: Dupont developed a clamping and cutting tool and do not warn the parents or the person clamping the cord that is pulsating the baby will be deprived 20 to 50 percent total blood volume and be anemic
http://www.umbicut.com/supporting_data.html
REVIEW OF EVIDENCE ON CORD CARE PRACTICES
http://www.who.int/reproductive-health/publications/MSM_98_4/MSM_98_4_chapter4.en.html (See also the threat of to the child's health by cut cords, tetanus, over 400,000 to 500,000 babies annually die from infections from a cut cord. Babies unclamped and uncut, do not get cord infections. The cut cord takes 5 to 15 days to heal. The unclamped cord takes 2 days. See Dr. Sarah Buckley's Declaration for Lotus Birth.
In support of legal protection of the baby no harm done by leaving the umbilical cord alone, are as follows:
32. Pau-Chen W, Tsu-Shan K. Early clamping of the umbilical cord. A study on its effect on the infant. Chin
Med J, 1960, 80:351-355.
33. Botha MC. The management of the umbilical cord in labour. S A J Ob Gyn, 1968, 6:30-33.
34. Nelson NM et al. A randomized clinical trial of the Leboyer approach to childbirth. N Engl J Med, 1980, 302:655-660.
35. Prendiville WJ et al. The Bristol third stage trial: active versus physiological management of third stage of labour. British Medical Journal, 1988, 297:1295-1300.
36. Begley CM. A comparison of "active" versus "physiological" management of the third stage of labour. Midwifery, 1990, 6:3-17.
37. World Health Organization, Care in Normal Birth: A Practical Guide. Report of a technical working group. Geneva, WHO, 1996 (document WHO/FRH/MSM/96.24).
38. Moncrieff D et al. Placental drainage and feto-maternal transfusion. Lancet, 1986, 2:453.
39. Ladipo OA. Management of the third stage of labour, with particular reference to reduction of feto-maternal transfusion. British Medical Journal, 1972, 1:721-723.
40. Johansen JK et al. Feto-maternal transfusion and free bleeding from the umbilical cord. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 1971, 50:193-195.
41. Yao AC, Lind J. Effect of gravity on placental transfusion. Lancet, 1969, ii:505-8.
42. Yao AC, Lind J. Placental transfusion. Am J Dis Child, 1974, 127:128-141.
43. Peltonen T. Placental transfusion advantage and disadvantage. Eur J Pediatr, 1981, 137:141-146.
44. Linderkamp O. Placental transfusion: determinants and effects. Clin Perinatol, 1982, 9:559-593.
45. Nelle M et al. Effect of Leboyer childbirth on cardiac output, cerebral and gastrointestinal blood flow velocities in full-term neonates. Am J Perinatol, 1995, 12:212-6.
46. Oh W et al. Further study of neonatal blood volume in relation to placental transfusion. Ann Ped, 1966, 207:147-159.
47. Yao AC et al. Distribution of blood between infant and placenta after birth. Lancet, 1969, ii:871-873.
48. Usher R et al. The blood volume of the newborn infant and placental transfusion. Acta Paediatr Scand, 1963, 52:497-512.
49. Yao AC, Lind J. Blood volume in the asphyxiated term neonate. Biol Neonate, 1972, 21:199-209.
50. Michaelsen KF et al. A longitudinal study of iron status in healthy Danish infants: effects of early iron status, growth velocity and dietary factors. Acta Paediatr, 1995, 84:1035-44.
51. Pisacane A. Neonatal prevention of iron deficiency. Placental transfusion is a cheap and physiological solution. British Medical Journal, 1996, 312:136-137.
52. Grajeda R et al. Delayed clamping of the umbilical cord improves hematologic status of Guatemalan infants at 2 mo of age. 1997, Am J Clin Nutr, 65:425-31.
53. World Health Organization, Aids Prevention: Guidelines for MCH/FP programme managers, II. Aids and maternal child health. Geneva, WHO, 1990 (document WHO/MCH/GPA/90.2).
54. Buckels LJ. Cardiopulmonary effects of placental transfusion. J Pediatr, 1965, 67:239-246.
55. Saigal S et al. Placental transfusion and hyperbilirubinemia in the premature. Pediatrics, 1972, 49:406-419.
56. Daily W et al. Transthoracic impedance.V. Effects of early and late cord clamping of the umbilical cord with special reference to the ratio air to blood during respiration. Acta Paediatr Scand, 1970, (Supp 207):57-72.
57. Oxford Midwives' Research Group. A study of the relationship between the delivery to cord clamping interval and the time of cord separation. 1991, Midwifery, 7:167-176.
58. Kinmond S et al. Umbilical cord clamping and preterm infants: a randomized trial. British Medical Journal, 1993, 306:172-175.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________
Note: For any other topics at www.lotusbirth.com or www.123-baby-birth.com just put that web site
name into a search engine and the topic right
after it. This can be used for references, and identification of all the medical groups approached who
have no protective policies on this issue,
including Colleges of Physicians and Surgeons, Midwives, doulas, ambulance medics, and the nurses whose
basic course was absent, apparently,
of the fetus to the neonate circulation system. See the criminal codes of Canada, namely, Common
Nuisance where even one person was
endangered, causing bodily harm and the Criminal Code when Canada, at least, determines when the baby
is considered a citizen, a human being
for equal protection and security of person. This is as to the Charter of Rights and Freedoms -- no
discrimination by age, nor by mental or physical
disadvantage. Are babies endangered by age and mental and physical disadvantage? Yes.
The babies, world wide, are being deprived 20 to 50 percent total blood volume. This causes low blood volume, jaudice and anemia. A 9-pound baby only makes a total blood volume of 10 ounces (300 ml), so how would you like to be deprived up to 50 percent of your total blood volume and have it said that is no harm done?
The politicians, around the world, and the major news media have been silent on this issue. Only big business, those involved in stem cell collection, the universal corporated blood banks, have allowed the babies to be so exploited. Where are our Statutory laws? Why have not the city police done their duties to the babies. They must be investigating any baby in intensive care. They need to review all the babies who have died whether early cord clamping and drugs injected into them, were a fact, and if this was knowing done by informed consent of the mother.
I believe a Universal Commission Inquiry on Maternity Matters and the Care and Treatment of the Newborn Child is about 200 years past due.Will the United Nations accept the challenge and protect all babies, and require all Nations to do a review on this issue? I hope so. We have forgotten our duty. Do no harm. Best practice possible, least risk of harm.
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 on
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
