Saturday, February 23, 2013

Going to Be a Parent? Consider this!


Newborn Procedures to Reconsider

Please visit this blog (link given below) for more wonderful articles: (Thank  you Amanda, keep it up!)
http://blindedbythelightt.blogspot.in/2012/10/newborn-procedures-to-reconsider.html

For me, being a first time mother, I never knew that there were routine hospital procedures that influenced the welfare of my child AND that I had the authority to manipulate them.


My advice to a new mama is to learn about what to expect in the hospital beforehand.

There are several routine practices that shouldcan be considered for you to declined, delayed or modify.

Since your number one priority is to the welfare of your child, take the time review the information available on the procedures used in hospital maternity wards – surprisingly, most are not evidence-based practices, instead they are in place due to the ease and convenience of the staff or because that is what has been done in the past.


Cord Clamping

Clamping the cord within 30 to 60 seconds after birth is one of three steps in an "active management" approach to the third stage of labor in hospitals. The reason for this routine medical procedure is because immediately following birth the new mother is most vulnerable to excessive blood loss.[1]


However, The Cochrane Library (a publication of The Cochrane Collaboration, an international organization that evaluates medical research-systematic reviews draw evidence-based conclusions about medical practice after considering both the content and quality of existing medical trials on a topic) found that in terms of the amount of bleeding, delayed clamping did not reduce the mother's risk of bleeding.[2]

In fact, there are many benefits of delaying this procedure until the newborn’s umbilical cord has stopped pulsating. The benefits of waiting are well documented and many parents are not aware of the large impact this particular routine procedure can have on their new baby.

The amount of iron in the blood at birth influences health, particularly an infant's risk for anemia in the first months of life.


This is especially relevant when considering that iron deficiency is the primary cause of anemia which can lead to central nervous system effects and cognitive impairment. In addition, delayed cord clamping can increase the rate of transfer of hematopoietic stem cells to the newborn, which may play a role in the prevention of certain blood disorders and immune conditions.[3]


Please consider telling your partner to watch and be vocal about what you wish when giving birth. Delaying clamping of the cord is an easy one to watch for and your hospital should be able to abide by your request.

Vitamin K Injection

The injection of vitamin K to every newborn infant was a practice that began in the 1950’s. The injection is used to artifically alter the naturally occurring level of vitamin k in the baby and to promote blood clotting.

To account for a rare liver disease (called Hemorrhagic Disease) that occurs approximately about 5 out of 100,000 births – the answer the CDC has come up with to tackle this rare bleeding trauma is to inject all infants with not double the amount…not 10 times or not even 100 times ….but rather 20,000 times the newborn level of vitamin k.

Yikes.

You might ask yourself, why is every newborn baby born with a “low level” of vitamin k? From what research recognizes, the newborn’s tight regulation of vitamin k levels control the rapid rate of cell division (which is rather useful during fetal development). It has been documented that high levels of vitamin k may lead to cancer due to uncontrolled, rapid cell division. (Ahh….this may explain the link to the prophylactic use of the vitamin k injection and a rise in childhood leukemia).

If you opt out of the vitamin K injection, the baby will gradually raise their levels after birth by breastfeeding (colostrum is extremely high in vitamin k).

You can also consider giving vitamin k drops orally (liquid vitamin K9) which is a significantly lower dose then the 20,000x level of the injectable vitamin k. If you consider this - I would contact the pediatrician to determine how this will be administered and how to attain it.

If you are a mother at higher risk of having a baby with Hemorrhagic Disease or if your baby is at a higher risk, then you may want to consider the vitamin k injection more thoughtfully. Those mothers and babies would be:

-Women on anticonvulsant drugs during pregnancy (for epilepsy)

-Babies that had premature clamping or cutting of their umbilical cord (this deprives the baby of up to 40% of their blood volume which includes platelets which aid in clotting) - another reason to delay!

-Women who had a vacuum extractor assisted birth (this often causes bruising and internal bleeding) – another reason to try for a natural birth

-Women/newborn on antibiotics


The administration of any injection into the blood stream of a newborn carries risk, particularly of infection…especially in an environment that contains the most hazardous germs.

It has also been known that trauma from injections during the first moments of life can jeopardize the establishment of the breastfeeding relationship.Breastfeeding assists vitamin k levels and absorption monumentally more then the synthetic vitamin k injection.


I imagine there is a very delicate, complex relationship between blood clotting levels and a newborn’s cell growth. To go all ‘willy-nilly’ (sorry no other term applies here) and inject a synthetic vitamin in the blood stream (20,000 times higher then normal, a level chosen with no rhyme or reason) to alter something we don’t fully understand seem a tad bit reckless.



 


Erythromycin Eye Ointment


Erythromy-what?

Erythromycin is an antibiotic ointment applied to a newborns eyes just minutes after birth.

The administration of erythromycin is on the grounds of preventing blindness from exposure to maternal gonorrhea.

Yes – if you have gonorrhea, then you might want to consider keeping this procedure in place – if not, pass on it.

Please note that it is common practice to screen mothers for STDs during their prenatal care so if you don’t have an STD

I’m not sure why it would make sense on administering it.

Again, the administration of this groundless routine intervention is waive-able, but could include a fine of $5.00 in most states (however, in New York it is much more difficult to decline).


If you are considering administering “just in case” - is there risk?

The antibiotics in the ointment enter the bloodstream through the eye – the potential for diaper rash, thrush, and digestive problems are all present when this happens.


The bottom line-is it necessary and effective?

According to the several medical studies listed below (and in more detail here),that answer is no:

Bell TA, Grayston JT, Krohn MA, Kronmal RA.  Randomized trial of silver nitrate, erythromycin, and no eye prophylaxis for the prevention of conjunctivitis among newborns not at risk for gonococcal ophthalmitis.  Pediatrics 1993 Dec;92(6):755-60.

Chen JY.    Prophylaxis of ophthalmia neonatorum: comparison of silver
nitrate, tetracycline, erythromycin and no prophylaxis.  Pediatr Infect Dis J 1992 Dec;11(12):1026-30.


Black-Payne C, Bocchini JA Jr, Cedotal C.  Failure of erythromycin ointment for postnatal ocular prophylaxis of chlamydial conjunctivitis.  14: Pediatr Infect Dis J 1989 Aug;8(8):491-5.
 

Krohn MA, Hillier SL, Bell TA, Kronmal RA, Grayston JT.  The bacterial etiology of conjunctivitis in early infancy.  5: Am J Epidemiol 1993 Sep 1;138(5):326-32.



These studies “prove that the eye ointment routinely applied to newborns does not significantly alter eye infections as opposed to no ointment of any kind.  Also, there is evidence that the bacteria which cause these infections are not passed to the infant in the birth canal, but after birth.  Also, it has been found that a significant number of infants develop an infection even though they HAVE received the ointment.” 



Circumcision

Being that this is a sensitive issue – I will not discuss this subject in detail or my personal views on the matter.

I will ask that if you are expecting son, please carefully assess the information available. This is definitely a procedure that the hospital will honor in declining, in fact, the rate of circumcision is declining because evidence-based knowledge is mounting.

If you are unsure, consider viewing a circumcision video to understand what your son will experience. (note-I did NOT view this video, I can’t handle stuff like that).

The majority of these surgeries in America are done without any anesthetic. Some will utilize a topical cream which takes nearly 45 minutes to numb the skin, yet these creams have not been studied in newborns.


Please be diligent in this decision, many faiths that commonly recommend circumcision have large followings that support keeping sons whole. Please take time to learn more then what is offered in a brochure at your OBGYN.

Hepatitis B

To begin with, hepatitis is a viral disease associated with sexual contact, blood transfusions, re-use of contaminated needles and vertical transmission (mother to child).

Prevelance of Hep B

The virus has the ability to cause an infection of the liver that can have long-lasting effects. For infants – this disease can be exceptionally serious and this is found when the mother is positive for the hepatitis

Now in countries that have a much better infant mortality rate, such as Swedenand The Netherlands, medical professionals only administer the vaccine to mothers who test positive for the disease, not all newborns.

It’s also important to note that the World Health Organization only recommends vaccination of newborns for Hepatitis B in areas where the carrier prevalence is greater then 2% - this does not include the United States!!  

You might say that the vaccine is safe, so why not be extra sure? However, do you know how many safety studies have been performed on the Hepatitis B vaccine for newborns? 

None.

A manufacturer's representative was asked in a 1997 Illinois Board of Health hearing to show evidence that the Hepatitis B vaccine is safe for a 1-day old infant.  The representative stated:


"We have none.  Our studies were done on 5- and 10-year olds."  [The Congressional Quarterly, August 25, 2000, pg. 647.]

You may want to consider delaying this vaccine until your next pediatric visit (2 months). Click here to learn more about hepatitis B and the vaccine used. 



First Bath

Although it might seem somewhat logical to wash a baby immediately after birth, there are significant drawbacks that you might not have otherwise considered.


Firstly – if you decline or delay washing your newborn in the hospital, you might find more resistance then any other routine produce listed here. You will be met with the counter, “It is hospital policy” – this may very well be true but it does not mean you are required to abide by the policy, you have every right to decide what or what not procedures or performed on your child. [4]

If you alter the routine schedule of bathing, the hospital staff may insist on wearing gloves to handle your child – which is fine by me – this is because the medical thought is that your child will be posing a hazard to the staff.

Consider this-who is posing more of a hazard to who?

Newborns have a valid risk of nosocomial infection (infection that is caused by hospital staff) especially with MRSA strains. Bacteria have adhesive pili on their surface to attach to skin – the vernix that is rubbed into the baby’s skin and is allowed to stay on the newborn significantly inhibits growth of bacteria, as well as being antimicrobial in nature (similar to breast milk).[5][6][7]


A baby is born with exceptionally effective skin. Vernix can be rubbed into the skin and is highly effective at deterring the growth of common pathogens found in the hospital: as group B Strep, K pneumoniae, L. monocytogenes, C. albicans and E coli.[7] 

The Department of Health (in conjunction with the World Heath Association) sets forth protocol for newborns: specifically in the section addressing the 0-3 minutes after the baby is born which states - Immediately dry the baby but “do not wipe off vernix” and “wait at least six hours to wash the baby”. [8]

Personally, I would wait longer – I would wait to wash my baby at home. Commercial products used in hospitals are harsh and can be harmful on neonatal skin. You could bring your own baby wash and ask the nurse if you could give your baby it’s first bath. I think that would be ideal if you choose not to wait until you get home. 

Remember, there are no evidence-based guidelines relating to newborn skin care in hospitals and postnatally, vernix exhibits antioxidant, skin cleansing, temperature-regulating and antibacterial properties.[9][10]


Conclusion

Remember, you have every right to choose what will be performed on your baby.

Cautiously take into account what care options you have. If you have questions about a procedure for your baby-speak up and ask.

You are the number one advocate and the only voice your child has. Your responsibly is to him or her, not out-dated hospital policies.          
          

[1]Umbilical Cord Clamping. ScienceDaily. Retrieved October 10, 2012, fromhttp://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2008/04/080415194222.htm

[2]McDonald SJ, Middleton P. "Effect of timing of umbilical cord clamping of term infants on maternal and neonatal outcomes (Review)." Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2008, Issue 2.

[3]Gina Eichenbaum-Pikser & Joanna Zasloff. Delayed Clamping of Umbilical Cord: A Review With Implications for Practice: Benefits of Delayed Cord Clamping. J Midwifery Womens Health. 5(4):321326.2009  http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/708616_3

[4]Andreas Matussek, Jan Taipalensuu, Ing-Marie Einemo, Malena Tiefenthal, Sture Löfgren. Transmission of Staphylococcus aureus from maternity unit staff members to newborns disclosed through spa typing. American Journal of Infection Control. Vol 35, Issue 2. Mar 2007http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0196655306011898

[5]Annika Nelson, Kjell Hultenby, Éva Hell, Hilde M Riedel, Hjalmar Brismar, Jan-Ingmar Flock, Joachim Lundahl, Christian G Giske and Giovanna Marchin. Staphylococcus epidermidis isolated from newborn infants express pilus-like structures and are inhibited by the cathelicidin-derived antimicrobial peptide LL37.Pediatric Research. 25 Mar 2009http://www.nature.com/pr/journal/v66/n2/abs/pr2009183a.html

[6]Dao M. Nguyen, Elizabeth Bancroft, Laurene Mascola,  Ramon Guevara, Lori Yasuda. Risk Factors for Neonatal Methicillin‐Resistant Staphylococcus aureus Infection in a Well Infant Nursery. Infection Control and Hospital Epidemiology. Vol 28;No4. Apr 2007 http://www.jstor.org/stable/10.1086/513122

[7]Akinbi, H. T., Narendran, V., Pass, A. K., Markart, P., & Hoath, S. B.  Host defense proteins in vernix caseosa and amniotic fluid. American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 191(6), 2090–2096. 2004http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1595247/
[8]Care of the Baby at Birth. Module 1Neonatal Divison, AIIMS, New Delhihttp://www.newbornwhocc.org/enn/Care_at_Birth1.pdf

[9] Lynne Walker, Soo Downe, and Liz Gomez. Skin care in the well term newborn: Two systematic reviews. Birth. Vol 32 issue 3. Sept 2005http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.07307659.2005.00374.x/abstract?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false

[10]Johann Wiechers, and Bernard Gabard. Vernix Caseosa: The ultimate natural cosmetic? Cosmetics & Toiletries. Sept 2009 Cosmetics & Toiletries Sciences Applied
[11] Giving Birth Naturally Webpage: Routine Newborn Baby Care Procedures.http://www.givingbirthnaturally.com/newborn-baby-care.html

Sane Advice from Mother of Autistic Child


How I Gave My Son Autism

Mountain MamaI should start by saying that I was raised Catholic. The concepts of reconciliation and absolution are completely ingrained in me. I grew up going to confession at a beautiful monastery where Father Francis, an elderly monk, held my hand as we walked the grounds, and I asked for forgiveness for my transgressions. I always felt great relief and unconditional love after our time together.  Unfortunately, Father Francis passed away years ago, and I haven’t been to confession since. My spiritual beliefs have evolved and changed over the years, but the idea of forgiveness is still critical to how I walk through life. There are things I have done for which I know God forgives me. However, I’m pretty sure that I will never forgive myself, for my transgressions are embodied in a beautiful seven-year-old who tells me daily that I am “the best Mom in the universe.” I know the truth. And someday, so will he. All of these “unforgivable” actions were done with the best of intentions, but we all know what they say about “good intentions” and “the road to hell.” I am admitting here for all the world to see: I gave my son Autism. I did it. Me. And no one can ever take that away.
So . . . how did I give my son autism? I wish I could say it was one thing – one thing that I could take back that would make things neat and easy, but it wasn’t. It was mistake after mistake, assault after assault. The following are the biggest mistakes I made to which I attribute my son’s descent into autism. I’m going to provide links that are easily readable and understandable that contain links to the research rather than providing links to the research itself. A simple Google search about any one of these topics will provide more information than you could ever want. Here goes . . .
1) Ultrasounds – I had at least five while I was pregnant. I was assured that they were completely safe. Heck, you can get them in malls, so I assumed they were pretty benign. Wrong! While I didn’t get ultrasounds in malls, I didn’t research them either. Ultrasounds have, in fact, been implicated in autism among other neurological disorders. While there is no definitive “causal link,” enough has been found to warrant further research and precautionary measures.  According to this article, “Research shows populations exposed to ultrasound have a quadrupled perinatal death rate, increased rates of brain damage, nerve cell demylienation, dyslexia, speech delays, epilepsy and learning difficulty.”  Sound familiar?
2) High-fructose corn syrup – I drank Coca Cola every single day while I was pregnant. I was so incredibly nauseous and it made my stomach feel better. Fast forward a few years and Coca Cola Classic was found to have one of the highest levels of mercury due to HFCS of any product tested. I didn’t eat one bite of fish during my pregnancy for fear of mercury. While I didn’t know there was mercury in the Coke, I have to be honest and admit that OF COURSE I knew that eating and drinking junk wasn’t good for my baby.
3) Lortab/Acetaminophen while pregnant – I have Fibromyalgia. It is painful normally, but it was practically unbearable while I was pregnant. My OB prescribed Lortab telling me that it didn’t cross the placenta and was perfectly safe. I was in so much pain that I wasn’t about to look into this further. I trusted my OB thoroughly and needed to feel better.
Again, did I honestly think that this was good for the baby?  Of course not.  Lortab is a Category C drug which basically means that not enough human testing has been done to qualify it as safe, but based on animal studies, there is reason to believe that it could be dangerous or problematic.  I couldn’t find any specific links between Lortab and Autism, but common sense dictates that this was not good.
4)  Pitocin – Two of the ultrasounds I received at the end of my pregnancy revealed that my water was getting dangerously low, so my OB felt we should induce labor. After several hours of not making progress on the Pitocin drip at low levels, the hospital encouraged me to sign a waiver allowing them to increase the Pitocin to illegal levels. Now, I know this seems absurd, but at the time, I was in incredible pain and was told by hospital staff that it was perfectly safe and was used at these levels all over the country. According to them, Montana just has a very low cap on the highest level allowed. I had Pitocin for 36 hours. Here is an explanation from an excellent article on that explains the potential risks associated with Pitocin:
“In either induced or enhanced use of Pitocin, the blood supply, and therefore the oxygen source to the uterus, is greatly reduced. With naturally-paced contractions, there is a time interval between contractions allowing for the baby to be fully oxygenated before the next contraction. In induced or enhanced labor, the contractions are closer together and last for a longer time, thus shortening the interval where the baby receives the oxygen supply. Reduced oxygen to the baby in labor has life-long consequences on the baby’s brain function.”
5) C-Section – George Malcolm Morley, OB/GYN has done extensive research regarding C-Sections and autism and has concluded that, “A baby born by C-section is 3-4 times more likely to have autism.” His theory is that it is probably due to ICC (immediate cord clamping) and there are really good reasons to think he may be right.  There are so many different elements that play a part in C-sections, however, that it is really hard to determine exactly which specific aspect is problematic: anesthesia, maternal immobility, labor trauma, cord clamping, post-op drugs or lack of friendly bacteria due to bypassing the vaginal canal are all suspect individually. It is easy to see how a combination of all of the above could have a negative impact.
Because I had made the bad decisions about the ultrasounds that led to the bad decision about the Pitocin that led to labor trauma, I ultimately had to have an emergency C-section. I can’t believe that there are so many women who choose to deliver via C-section for cosmetic reasons – I won’t elaborate on this one. Ick.  I’ll be honest; I am still a little bitter about this. I really wanted a natural childbirth. My husband and I took the classes; we practiced at home. Thirty-six hours of drug-induced hell, and I still ended up with a C-section. And not just a regular C-section: it was such an emergency that I had to be anesthetized via general anesthesia, even though I had an epidural in place.
6) Antibiotics – Oh boy. Where to begin? I have so many mixed feelings about antibiotics. Here is what I know: My son was exposed to antibiotics while he was in distress during labor. He was then exposed for the first two weeks of his life via breast milk. He then received five courses of antibiotics before he was a year old for chronic ear infections. While this is bad cumulatively, the one event that stands out for me, and literally makes me feel sick, was a single dose of Augmentin when he was six months old. At his six-month “well” visit, he was diagnosed with his second ear infection. He received vaccinations for seven different diseases despite being ill, and we left with a prescription for Amoxicillin. Six days later, he had developed an upper respiratory infection and the ear infection was worse. Because the Amoxicillin hadn’t worked, the pediatrician prescribed a course of Augmentin. After one dose of this drug and within 24 hours, my six-month-old baby had 35 acidic, liquid bowel movements. The skin literally peeled off of his bottom in sheets. I had never seen anything like it at that time, and I haven’t since. The pain that he was in was beyond description. I called the doctor and she changed the antibiotic to yet a different kind. So he had three different types of antibiotics in his system within eight days. This episode was the biggie. His gut was never the same after that. Nothing was.
Here is what everyone should know about Augmentin:  Augmentin has been implicated in autism.  It is comprised of Amoxicillin and clavulanate potassium. When it is manufactured, the clavulanic acid is fermented which involves large amounts of urea/ammonia. Even a small amount of ingested ammonia can potentially cause gut and brain inflammation. I strongly urge you to do your homework before using this drug.
If you will notice in this link, this study was released in January of 2005. My son was prescribed Augmentin in January of 2006. This was never mentioned when I was handed the prescription. However, if I had been a Thinker back then, I could have quickly Googled “Augmentin and autism,” and I would have made a very different decision.
7) Vaccines – I really don’t even know what to say about vaccines other than to say that if I had it to do over again, my children wouldn’t have received a single one. Of everything I did wrong, if I could have my pick of one thing to take back, it would be the shots. No question. Shortly after my son turned three, we left the idiot pediatrician that led me down this trail of terror. The new MD looked at my son’s blood work and heavy metals testing and informed me unequivocally that my son was vaccine injured and that he had never been a candidate for immunization. She said that because of my fibromyalgia and the fact that autoimmune disease and digestive disorders are pervasive across both sides of our family, he never should have been vaccinated. Add in the birth history and the fact that he had severe jaundice and a cephalohematoma that took more than six months to resolve, plus rashes, severe reflux, chronic rhinitis and ear infections along with eczema, it should have been very apparent that his immune system was not functioning properly. Vaccination REQUIRES a properly functioning immune system to work, which may explain why he has ZERO titers to the diseases he was immunized against. According to the CDC and the vaccine inserts, children should not be vaccinated if they are sick or on antibiotics. My son was sick and/or on antibiotics for almost every single round of vaccinations. People, I know what happened to my kid. I KNOW. I watched it. Ginger Taylor has been compiling studies for years that link vaccines to autism. That list has now reached over 60 studies.
Another word – Don’t bother making comments arguing about vaccines. I won’t post them. I am fully aware that there are children with autism who weren’t vaccinated. I am not suggesting that vaccines are SOLELY responsible for EVERY child’s autism. I KNOW, however, that they caused irreparable damage to my son’s immune system which ultimately led to his autism. There. Done.
8) Acetaminophen/Paracetamol — My baby received an incredible amount of this red, liquid death. Acetaminophen shuts down the production of glutathione, the body’s #1 antioxidant. Glutathione is absolutely critical in the body’s ability to rid itself of toxins. So basically, one of the absolute worst things you can do is to give a baby acetaminophen when they get vaccinations or when their body is trying to fight an infection. The nurse at my son’s pediatrician’s office literally dosed him with acetaminophen at the exact moment she stuck in the needle. When the ear infections and stomach pain and fevers started as a result of the vaccine damage, I gave him acetaminophen to alleviate his pain. Are you starting to see how all of these horrors interlace? One problem requires a solution that creates another problem that requires a solution that creates another problem, etc. For more information regarding acetaminophen and its link to autism, click here.
9) Fluoride – Fluoride probably pisses me off more than anything else on this list, because I am convinced that the fluoride program is one of the biggest scams ever perpetrated on a population in the history of mankind. If you ever have some time and enjoy history, Google “the history of fluoride.” It reads like a Dan Brown novel and would be completely entertaining, if it weren’t for the fact that children are being brain-damaged by the very water they drink. I’ll let you do your own research for the nitty-gritty, but here are the basics: Fluoride contains fluorine. Fluorine is only slightly less toxic than arsenic and is more toxic than lead. It is also a carrier molecule. It loves to combine with other materials and create even more toxic situations. It also can cross the blood/brain barrier. So if there is circulating aluminum in the body from say, oh, I don’t know, vaccine adjuvants for instance, or if there is lead in the joints of water pipes, the fluoride can attach itself to these toxins and escort them right across the blood/brain barrier and into the brain. According to the National Research Council, 36 studies have linked fluoride with reduced IQ in children. Here are some great links to fluoride information:
Here’s the kicker. This is the part where I bang my head on the table, pull my hair and yell, “Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!” like Chris Farley on SNL. We didn’t even HAVE fluoridated water. I actually purchased it and gave it to my son ON PURPOSE. My pediatrician told me that he needed it because our water wasn’t fluoridated. I bought “nursery water” that came in cute little plastic bottles with pictures of Bert and Ernie and Cookie Monster on them. I also gave him prescription vitamins – Poly Vi Flor – that contained fluoride.  After all of this, we still ended up with over $4,000 worth of dental work by the time he was five. This dental work required general anesthesia that contained — yep, you guessed it — fluoride. Fluoride is also in many pharmaceuticals, including the antibiotic Cipro – drops used for ear infections — and Diflucan – the yeast killer we used off and on for years.  How in the hell could I make sure that I didn’t give him toothpaste that had fluoride in it because it was poisonous, but give him fluoridated water? If you want a good scare, read the label on a tube of fluoridated toothpaste sometime. Ingestion of only half a tube of that candy-flavored fluoridated toothpaste could be fatal to a child, and yet we fluoridate our water supply. It is criminal in my opinion.
I can think of many more things I did wrong that I am sure contributed to my son’s health crisis. I will mention diet, toxic cookware, benzocaine teething gel and toxic building materials but won’t elaborate because at this point, common sense should dictate. I am writing this to try to hit the biggies that people really need to research to make better decisions than I did.
I am already anticipating three different responses to this post:
Response 1) There will be people who read this and think, “Good grief, woman. How stupid can you be? What you did borders on child abuse. OF COURSE your child has Autism.” And to that, I have no argument. You are absolutely right. And good for you for knowing better than I did.
Response 2) Some of you will read this and know exactly how I feel because your story is very similar. To all of you, you have my deepest, heartfelt sympathy. While we will always have our mistakes to live with, the best thing we can do now is to share our truth and our story to help others.
Response 3) There will be people who feel pity for me because I have not been able to make peace with myself for my role in my son’s health crisis. You will feel compelled to reach out to me with kind messages imploring me to forgive myself. Please . . . don’t. It won’t do any good. I am not fishing for forgiveness, and while I know you mean well, it won’t help me. If you really, REALLY want to help, take five minutes and send this blog to everyone you know – especially those who are pregnant or have babies. Implore them to read this blog. No child should have to endure what mine has endured. No mother should ever have to experience the kind of torturous guilt I live with every day.
The mistakes I made were, by and large, recommended by healthcare professionals. That is no excuse.  My son’s health was MY responsibility. I could choose to follow the recommendations or not. Even a small bit of research would have changed the outcome for my son. There are women, as we speak, who are on the way to the doctor for their second or third ultrasound. There are mothers dosing their babies with acetaminophen before their shots. There are expectant moms being hooked up to Pitocin drips. Some moms are administering unnecessary antibiotics for yet another ear infection and haven’t made the connection that their baby’s immune system is failing. There are also many, many mothers who are hearing the following words for the first time, “Your child has autism.” Help them.
I truly believe that my son’s autism was preventable. Think. Research. At this point, you can’t afford not to.
~ Mountain Mama

Monday, February 18, 2013

Vaccinating your Pet? Beware!


The Science of Vaccine Damage


    http://hpathy.com/veterinary-homeopathy/the-science-of-vaccine-damage/
    A must read for anyone contemplating vaccination of their dog, cat,…. or anyone they love.
    A team at Purdue University School of Veterinary Medicine conducted several studies1,2 to determine if vaccines can cause changes in the immune system of dogs that might lead to life-threatening immune-mediated diseases. They obviously conducted this research because concern already existed. It was sponsored by the Haywood Foundation which itself was looking for evidence that such changes in the human immune system might also be vaccine induced. It found the evidence.
    The vaccinated, but not the non-vaccinated dogs in the Purdue studies, developed autoantibodies to many of their own biochemicals, including fibronectin, laminin, DNA, albumin, cytochrome C, cardiolipin and collagen.
    This means that the vaccinated dogs —but not the non-vaccinated dogs—were attacking their own fibronectin, which is involved in tissue repair, cell multiplication and growth, and differentiation between tissues and organs in a living organism.
    The vaccinated Purdue dogs also developed autoantibodies to laminin, which is involved in many cellular activities including the adhesion, spreading, differentiation, proliferation and movement of cells. Vaccines thus appear to be capable of removing the natural intelligence of cells.
    Autoantibodies to cardiolipin are frequently found in patients with the serious disease systemic lupus erythematosus and also in individuals with other autoimmune diseases. The presence of elevated anti-cardiolipin antibodies is significantly associated with clots within the heart or blood vessels, in poor blood clotting, haemorrhage, bleeding into the skin, foetal loss and neurological conditions.
    The Purdue studies also found that vaccinated dogs were developing autoantibodies to their own collagen. About one quarter of all the protein in the body is collagen. Collagen provides struc­ture to our bodies, protecting and supporting the softer tissues and connecting them with the skeleton. It is no wonder that Canine Health Concern’s 1997 study of 4,000 dogs showed a high number of dogs developing mobility problems shortly after they were vaccinated (noted in my 1997 book,What Vets Don’t Tell You About Vaccines).
    Perhaps most worryingly, the Purdue studies found that the vaccinated dogs had developed autoantibodies to their own DNA. Did the alarm bells sound? Did the scientific community call a halt to the vaccination program? No. Instead, they stuck their fingers in the air, saying more research is needed to ascertain whether vaccines can cause genetic damage. Meanwhile, the study dogs were found good homes, but no long-term follow-up has been conducted.
    At around the same time, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Vaccine-Associated Feline Sarcoma Task Force initiated several studies to find out why 20,000 cats each year in the USA develop terminal cancer at their vaccine injection sites.3 The fact that cats can get vaccine-induced cancer has been acknowledged by veterinary bodies around the world, and even the British Government acknowledged it through its Working Group charged with the task of looking into canine and feline vaccines4 following pressure from Canine Health Concern. What do you imagine was the advice of the AVMA Task Force, veterinary bodies and governments? “Carry on vacci­nating until we find out why vaccines are killing cats, and which cats are most likely to die.”
    In America, in an attempt to mitigate the problem, they’re vac­cinating cats in the tail or leg so they can amputate when cancer appears. Great advice if it’s not your cat amongst the hundreds of thousands on the “oops” list.
    But other species are okay—right? Wrong. In August 2003, the Journal of Veterinary Medicine carried an Italian study which showed that dogs also develop vaccine-induced cancers at their injection sites.5 We already know that vaccine-site cancer is a possible sequel to human vaccines, too, since the Salk polio vac­cine was said to carry a monkey retrovirus (from cultivating the vaccine on monkey organs) that produces inheritable cancer. The monkey retrovirus SV40 keeps turning up in human cancer sites.
    It is also widely acknowledged that vaccines can cause a fast-acting, usually fatal, disease called autoimmune haemolytic anaemia (AIHA). Without treatment, and frequently with treat­ment, individuals can die in agony within a matter of days. Merck, itself a multinational vaccine manufacturer, states in The Merck Manual of Diagnosis and Therapy that autoimmune haemolytic anaemia may be caused by modified live-virus vaccines, as do Tizard’s Veterinary Immunology (4th edition) and the Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine.6 The British Government’s Working Group, despite being staffed by vaccine-industry consultants who say they are independent, also acknowledged this fact. However, no one warns the pet owners before their animals are subjected to an unnecessary booster, and very few owners are told why after their pets die of AIHA.
    A Wide Range of Vaccine-induced Diseases
    We also found some worrying correlations between vaccine events and the onset of arthritis in our 1997 survey. Our concerns were compounded by research in the human field.
    The New England Journal of Medicine, for example, reported that it is possible to isolate the rubella virus from affected joints in children vaccinated against rubella. It also told of the isolation of viruses from the peripheral blood of women with prolonged arthritis following vaccination.7
    Then, in 2000, CHC’s findings were confirmed by research which showed that polyarthritis and other diseases like amyloidosis, which affects organs in dogs, were linked to the combined vaccine given to dogs.8
    There is a huge body of research, despite the paucity of funding from the vaccine industry, to confirm that vaccines can cause a wide range of brain and central nervous system damage. Merck itself states in its Manual that vaccines (i.e., its own products) can cause encephalitis: brain inflammation/damage. In some cases, encephalitis involves lesions in the brain and throughout the central nervous system. Merck states that “examples are the encephalitides following measles, chickenpox, rubella, smallpox vaccination, vaccinia, and many other less well defined viral infections”.
    When the dog owners who took part in the CHC survey reported that their dogs developed short attention spans, 73.1% of the dogs did so within three months of a vaccine event. The same percentage of dogs was diagnosed with epilepsy within three months of a shot (but usually within days). We also found that 72.5% of dogs that were considered by their owners to be nervous and of a worrying disposition, first exhibited these traits within the three-month post-vaccination period.
    I would like to add for the sake of Oliver, my friend who suffered from paralysed rear legs and death shortly after a vaccine shot, that “paresis” is listed in Merck’s Manualas a symptom of encephalitis. This is defined as muscular weakness of a neural (brain) origin which involves partial or incomplete paralysis, resulting from lesions at any level of the descending pathway from the brain. Hind limb paralysis is one of the potential consequences. Encephalitis, incidentally, is a disease that can manifest across the scale from mild to severe and can also cause sudden death.
    Organ failure must also be suspected when it occurs shortly after a vaccine event. Dr Larry Glickman, who spearheaded the Purdue research into post-vaccination biochemical changes in dogs, wrote in a letter to Cavalier Spaniel breeder Bet Hargreaves:
    “Our ongoing studies of dogs show that following routine vaccination, there is a significant rise in the level of antibodies dogs produce against their own tissues. Some of these antibodies have been shown to target the thyroid gland, connective tissue such as that found in the valves of the heart, red blood cells, DNA, etc. I do believe that the heart conditions in Cavalier King Charles Spaniels could be the end result of repeated immunisations by vaccines containing tissue culture contaminants that cause a pro­gressive immune response directed at connective tissue in the heart valves. The clinical manifestations would be more pro­nounced in dogs that have a genetic predisposition [although] the findings should be generally applicable to all dogs regardless of their breed.”
    I must mention here that Dr Glickman believes that vaccines are a necessary evil, but that safer vaccines need to be developed.
    Meanwhile, please join the queue to place your dog, cat, horse and child on the Russian roulette wheel because a scientist says you should.
    Vaccines Stimulate an Inflammatory Response
    The word “allergy” is synonymous with “sensitivity” and “inflammation”. It should, by rights, also be synonymous with the word “vaccination”. This is what vaccines do: they sensitise (render allergic) an individual in the process of forcing them to develop antibodies to fight a disease threat. In other words, as is acknowledged and accepted, as part of the vaccine process the body will respond with inflammation. This may be apparently temporary or it may be longstanding.
    Holistic doctors and veterinarians have known this for at least 100 years. They talk about a wide range of inflammatory or “-itis” diseases which arise shortly after a vaccine event. Vaccines, in fact, plunge many individuals into an allergic state. Again, this is a disorder that ranges from mild all the way through to the suddenly fatal. Anaphylactic shock is the culmination: it’s where an individual has a massive allergic reaction to a vaccine and will die within minutes if adrenaline or its equivalent is not administered.
    There are some individuals who are genetically not well placed to withstand the vaccine challenge. These are the people (and animals are “people”, too) who have inherited faulty B and T cell function. B and T cells are components within the immune sys­tem which identify foreign invaders and destroy them, and hold the invader in memory so that they cannot cause future harm. However, where inflammatory responses are concerned, the immune system overreacts and causes unwanted effects such as allergies and other inflammatory conditions.
    Merck warns in its Manual that patients with, or from families with, B and/or T cell immunodeficiencies should not receive live-virus vaccines due to the risk of severe or fatal infection. Elsewhere, it lists features of B and T cell immunodeficiencies as food allergies, inhalant allergies, eczema, dermatitis, neurological deterioration and heart disease. To translate, people with these conditions can die if they receive live-virus vaccines. Their immune systems are simply not competent enough to guarantee a healthy reaction to the viral assault from modified live-virus vaccines.
    Modified live-virus (MLV) vaccines replicate in the patient until an immune response is provoked. If a defence isn’t stimulated, then the vaccine continues to replicate until it gives the patient the very disease it was intending to prevent.
    Alternatively, a deranged immune response will lead to inflammatory conditions such as arthritis, pancreatitis, colitis, encephalitis and any number of autoimmune diseases such as cancer and leukaemia, where the body attacks its own cells.
    A new theory, stumbled upon by Open University student Gary Smith, explains what holistic practitioners have been saying for a very long time. Here is what a few of the holistic vets have said in relation to their patients:
    Dr Jean Dodds: “Many veterinarians trace the present problems with allergic and immunologic diseases to the introduction of MLV vaccines…”9
    Christina Chambreau, DVM: “Routine vaccinations are probably the worst thing that we do for our animals. They cause all types of illnesses, but not directly to where we would relate them definitely to be caused by the vaccine.”10
    Martin Goldstein, DVM: “I think that vaccines…are leading killers of dogs and cats in America today.”"
    Dr Charles E. Loops, DVM: “Homoeopathic veterinarians and other holistic practitioners have maintained for some time that vaccinations do more harm than they provide benefits.”12
    Mike Kohn, DVM: “In response to this [vaccine] violation, there have been increased autoimmune diseases (allergies being one component), epilepsy, neoplasia [tumours], as well as behavioural problems in small animals.”13
    A Theory on Inflammation
    Gary Smith explains what observant healthcare practitioners have been saying for a very long time, but perhaps they’ve not understood why their observations led them to say it. His theory, incidentally, is causing a huge stir within the inner scientific sanctum. Some believe that his theory could lead to a cure for many diseases including cancer. For me, it explains why the vaccine process is inherently questionable.
    Gary was learning about inflammation as part of his studies when he struck upon a theory so extraordinary that it could have implications for the treatment of almost every inflammatory disease—including Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s, rheumatoid arthritis and even HIV and AIDS.
    Gary’s theory questions the received wisdom that when a person gets ill, the inflammation that occurs around the infected area helps it to heal. He claims that, in reality, inflammation prevents the body from recognising a foreign substance and therefore serves as a hiding place for invaders. The inflammation occurs when at-risk cells produce receptors called All (known as angiotensin II type I receptors). He says that while At1 has a balancing receptor, At2, which is supposed to switch off the inflammation, in most diseases this does not happen.
    “Cancer has been described as the wound that never heals,” he says. “All successful cancers are surrounded by inflammation. Commonly this is thought to be the body’s reaction to try to fight the cancer, but this is not the case.
    “The inflammation is not the body trying to fight the infection. It is actually the virus or bacteria deliberately causing inflammation in order to hide from the immune system [author's emphasis].”14
    If Gary is right, then the inflammatory process so commonly stimulated by vaccines is not, as hitherto assumed, a necessarily acceptable sign. Instead, it could be a sign that the viral or bacterial component, or the adjuvant (which, containing foreign protein, is seen as an invader by the immune system), in the vaccine is winning by stealth.
    If Gary is correct in believing that the inflammatory response is not protective but a sign that invasion is taking place under cover of darkness, vaccines are certainly not the friends we thought they were. They are undercover assassins working on behalf of the enemy, and vets and medical doctors are unwittingly acting as collaborators. Worse, we animal guardians and parents are actually paying doctors and vets to unwittingly betray our loved ones.
    Potentially, vaccines are the stealth bomb of the medical world. They are used to catapult invaders inside the castle walls where they can wreak havoc, with none of us any the wiser. So rather than experiencing frank viral diseases such as the ‘flu, measles, mumps and rubella (and, in the case of dogs, parvovirus and distemper), we are allowing the viruses to win anyway—but with cancer, leukaemia and other inflammatory or autoimmune (self-attacking) diseases taking their place.
    The Final Insult
    All 27 veterinary schools in North America have changed their protocols for vaccinating dogs and cats along the following lines;15 however, vets in practice are reluctant to listen to these changed protocols and official veterinary bodies in the UK and other countries are ignoring the following facts.
    Dogs’ and cats’ immune systems mature fully at six months. If a modified live-virus vaccine is giver after six months of age, it produces immunity, which is good for the life of the pet. If another MLV vaccine is given a year later, the antibodies from the first vaccine neutralise the antigens of the second vaccine and there is little or no effect. The titre is not “boosted”, nor are more memory cells induced. Not only are annual boosters unnecessary, but they subject the pet to potential risks such as allergic reactions and immune-mediated haemolytic anaemia.
    In plain language, veterinary schools in America, plus the American Veterinary Medical Association, have looked at studies to show how long vaccines last and they have concluded and announced that annual vaccination is unnecessary.16-19
    Further, they have acknowledged that vaccines are not without harm. Dr Ron Schultz, head of pathobiology at Wisconsin University and a leading light in this field, has been saying this politely to his veterinary colleagues since the 1980s. I’ve been saying it for the past 20 years. But change is so long in coming and, in the meantime, hundreds of thousands of animals are dying every year— unnecessarily.
    The good news is that thousands of animal lovers (but not enough) have heard what we’ve been saying. Canine Health Concern members around the world use real food as Nature’s supreme disease preventative, eschewing processed pet food, and minimise the vaccine risk. Some of us, myself included, have chosen not to vaccinate our pets at all. Our reward is healthy and long-lived dogs.
    It has taken but one paragraph to tell you the good and simple news. The gratitude I feel each day, when I embrace my healthy dogs, stretches from the centre of the Earth to the Universe and beyond
    About the Author:
    Catherine O’Driscoll runs Canine Health Concern which campaigns for natural health in dogs, and also delivers an educational program, the Foundation in Canine Healthcare. She is author of best-selling books Shock to the System and What Vets Don’t Tell You About Vaccines (1997, 1998), and Who Killed the Darling Buds of May? She lives in Scotland with her husband, Rob Ellis, and three Golden Retrievers, named Edward, Daniel and Gwinnie, and she lectures on canine health around the world.
    For more information, contact Catherine O’Driscoll at Canine Health Concern, Gardener’s Cottage, Kirklands, Ancrum, Jedburgh TD8 6UJ, UK , emailCatherine@canine-health-concern.co.uk; website http://www.canine-health-concern.org.uk. Shock to the System is available in the UK from CHC, and worldwide from Dogwise at http://www.dogwise.com.
    Endnotes
    1. “Effects of Vaccination on the Endocrine and Immune Systems of Dogs, Phase II”, Purdue University, November 1,1999, athttp://www.homestead.com/vonhapsburg/haywardstudyonvaccines.html.
    4. Veterinary Products Committee (VPC) Working Group on Feline and Canine Vaccination, DEFRA, May 2001.
    5. JVM Series A 50(6):286-291, August 2003.
    6. Duval, D. and Giger,U. (1996). “Vaccine-Associated Immune-Mediated Hemolytic Anemia in the Dog”, Journal of Veterinary Internal Medicine 10:290-295.
    7. New England Journal of Medicine, vol.313,1985. See also Clin Exp Rheumatol 20(6):767-71, Nov-Dec 2002.
    8. Am Coll Vet Intern Med 14:381,2000.
    9. Dodds, Jean W.,DVM, “Immune System and Disease Resistance”, athttp://www.critterchat.net/immune.htm.
    10. Wolf Clan magazine, April/May 1995.
    11. Goldstein, Martin, The Nature of Animal Healing, Borzoi/Alfred A. Knopf, Inc., 1999.
    12. Wolf Clan magazine, op. cit.
    13. ibid.
    14. Journal of Inflammation 1:3,2004, at http://www.journal-inflammation.comcontent/1/1/3.
    15. Klingborg, D.J., Hustead, D.R. and Curry-Galvin, E. et al., “AVMA Council on Biologic and Therapeutic Agents’ report on cat and dog vaccines”, Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association 221(10):1401-1407, November 15,2002,http://www.avma.org/policies/vaccination.htm.
    16. ibid.
    17. Schultz, R.D., “Current and future canine and feline vaccination programs”, Vet Med 93:233-254,1998.
    18. Schultz, R.D., Ford, R.B., Olsen, J. and Scott, P., “Titer testing and vaccination: a new look at traditional practices”, Vet Med 97:1-13, 2002 (insert).
    19. Twark, L. and Dodds, W.J., “Clinical application of serum parvovirus and distemper virus antibody liters for determining revaccination strategies in healthy dogs”, J Am Vet Med Assoc 217:1021-1024,2000.

    Catherine O’Driscoll

    Catherine O’Driscoll is the founder of Canine Health Concern and the Pet Welfare Alliance. Her best-selling books include What Vets Don’t Tell You About Vaccines, and Shock to the System. See www.canine-health-concern.org.uk, and www.petwelfarealliance.org. Click on ‘CHC TV’ on the Canine Health