More reality, than not.
Did you hear that story about the little woman that could? After 12 risky ultrasounds and 10 birthing classes that did her no good; she went and had a hospital birth. They told her to take this, and they injected this and that, and we will put this in here and in there and in that, and push now and don't push then; ok push! She had picked a doctor that wouldn't give up after 2 hours, and she pushed for 20 hours up hill on her back, with after 5 hours an epidural, got nowhere and ended up getting a cesarean. So next time she went from S.D., to a Minnesota midwife and had her baby with little to no intervention and with a little help and care, loved it the whole experience; (imagine that), she said hey this isn't bad, and look at my baby that isn't even in the NICU on antibiotics and what not else? Imagine that, the baby is alert and not drugged up; and actually knows how to nurse. I bet he's so smart he will be reading by tomorrow, no vitamin K, no hep B; no bill we can't pay. And nobody took off with my baby?! Holy smokes, what happened in that hospital, I barely remember; oh that was sure not fun. I better fight for some midwives legislation in S.D.; those tyrants; I'm fired up not taking it anymore... she organized a womens coalition that stormed the capitol at Pierre, and next voting session they all trembled in their seats in fear of what would happen if it was voted down again..and if those mothers returned... the End. Truth, as weapon for change.
The Business of Being Born: A Must-See Documentary for Expectant Parents.
By Dr. Ben Kim on Feb 11, 2008. (Article).
DVD
Trailer. (Here's your truth).
Baby Center-Resource. (You can search easily, for other sites as well).
Your antenatal appointments. (What to expect-prenatal care).
Antenatal tests and care
RAISING HEALTHY VACCINE DRUG-FREE CHILDREN.
Vitamin K at Birth: To Inject or Not
Posted By Dr. Ben Kim on Apr 28, 2007
Also go to my two pages on Circumcision; NOT a smart idea!
Home Births with Midwife Safe As Hospital for Babies, Fewer Infections and Less Bleeding for moms.
The Medical Establishment’s Ridiculous Opposition to Home-Births.
Home births performed by registered midwives are safe and natural.
Medical Risks of Epidural Anesthesia During Childbirth.
By Lewis Mehl-Madrona, M.D., Ph.D. and Morgaine Mehl-Madrona
Deaths from Epidural Anesthesia.
New: From Gary Null's comprehensive website: Women's Health: Pregnancy & Childbirth. This series examines medical risks with summaries of medical studies of many topics including fertility, cesarean section, episiotomy, home vs. hospital delivery, antenatal care, fetal heart monitoring, and breast feeding vs. formula feeding.
Children's Vaccines: Research on the Risks for Children and Possible Neurological Consequences.
Index.
Quick Index to the Theories of Autism.
New Section - endless articles on vaccines.
Adverse events after Hepatitis B Vaccination.
Go to the end of the page for more on vaccines.
Home Birth vs. Hospital Birth
Vivante Midwifery.
The Homebirth Choice.
Choosing Where to Have Your Baby.
------------------------
Anderson RE. Anderson DA.
[Dept. of Economics, Centre College, Danville, KY 40422, USA. ]
The cost-effectiveness of home birth.
Journal of Nurse-Midwifery. 44(1):30-5, 1999 Jan-Feb.
As health care costs increase and a growing number of women are without insurance, the one health service that every family needs deserves further attention. Even for the 40% of births covered by Medicaid, safe birthing alternatives that permit a reduction in the $150 billion Medicaid burden would allow the United States to devote more resources to other urgent priorities. Informed birthing decisions cannot be made without information on costs, success rates, and any necessary tradeoffs between the two. This article provides the relevant information for hospital, home, and birth center births. The average uncomplicated vaginal birth costs 68% less in a home than in a hospital, and births initiated in the home offer a lower combined rate of intrapartum and neonatal mortality and a lower incidence of cesarean delivery.
This citation linked from below said citations link. (No live link available).
-------------------
Kenneth C Johnson and Betty-Anne Daviss
Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America.
BMJ 2005;330:1416 (18 June).
The study included prospectively reported data from more than 5000 women planning home births with Certified Professional Midwives in the year 2000 in the U.S. and Can, and found that outcomes for mothers and babies were the same as for low-risk mothers giving birth in hospitals, but with a fraction of the interventions.
Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America.
Abstract:
Conclusions Planned home birth for low risk women in North America using certified professional midwives was associated with lower rates of medical intervention but similar intrapartum and neonatal mortality to that of low risk hospital births in the United States.
Study Paper - (excerpt).
An economic analysis found that an uncomplicated vaginal birth in hospital in the United States cost on average three times as much as a similar birth at home with a midwife41 in an environment where management of birth has become an economic, medical, and industrial enterprise.42 Our study of certified professional midwives suggests that they achieve good outcomes among low risk women without routine use of expensive hospital interventions. Our results are consistent with the weight of previous research on safety of home birth with midwives internationally. This evidence supports the American Public Health Association's recommendation8 to increase access to out of hospital maternity care services with direct entry midwives in the United States. We recommend that these findings be taken into account when insurers and governing bodies make decisions about home birth and hospital privileges with respect to certified professional midwives.
The safety of home Birth, (more citations and links).
--------------------
But finds Higher Complication Rate in planned hospital deliveries.
Statistics.
Childbirth Resource Center.
Homebirth Safety/Advocacy.
Analysis of the: Washington State Home Birth Study.
Reading through, and dispelling the BS.
Resources.
What's So Scary About Home Birth?
The Politics of Childbirth: Divergence of Maternal Health Practices among Advanced Industrialized Countries.
Abstract:
Childbirth is one of the most widely shared experiences of roughly half the world?s population. Yet even among the most highly developed countries, the quality of that experience varies tremendously, with high-intervention practices becoming increasingly the rule in the US, while countries such as the Netherlands have relatively low numbers of cesareans, but high numbers of homebirths with excellent results. A discourse of medical rationality would have us expect that wealthy countries provide the best care available for whatever health needs present themselves, including the needs of women giving birth. Yet countries clearly differ in what they consider the “best” care. Why do otherwise similar countries diverge in their approaches to childbirth and maternal health? This paper documents the extent of variation in obstetric practices and maternal and child health outcomes among OECD and EU countries and then presents research design and preliminary findings for a new multi-country investigation into policy divergence in maternal health policies.
Go down on the page and click on, Political Research Online, to get the article.
(Or try here).
Department of Philosophy. Georgetown University.
The Hospital Risks of Infection.
Septis in ICU Newborns.
Excerpt.
Babies can also develop sepsis by contracting infections after birth from infected persons or objects. Babies in the newborn intensive care unit (NICU) are at increased risk for acquiring nosocomial (hospital-acquired) infections.
Clinical and Microbiological Characteristics of Hospital Infections in Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.
Microbiological monitoring of suppurative-septic hospital infections in newborn infants and puerperae.
Hospital Infections: Gynecologic, Obstetric, and Perinatal Infections
WILLIAM J. LEDGER, M.D.
Serratia marcescens infections and outbreaks in neonatal intensive care units.
Changes in Pathogens Causing Early-Onset Sepsis in Very-Low-Birth-Weight Infants.
Here in the below link, clearly, antibiotics were routinely used in newborns to combat potential hospital acquired pathogen caused septis. (Antibotics entirely disrupt normal and needed digestive bacterial flora in an infant). This has an adverse effect on immune function as well, as a large portion of immune function is dependent on digestive flora and proper balance! The next thing they want to do is vaccinations, or a Hep B shot at birth; add a toxic vitamin K shot. The toxins of a Hep B shot can overwhelm the immune system of the infant, and they can not detox any of it; nor build an immune response; even if the shot worked at all. The next thing, they deny your child was vaccine damaged; all is believed a coincidence. Doctors are trained to believe it's all good; and deny the damage. Its all good - even if YOU are falsely charged with Shaken Baby Syndrome; or your infant dies of vaccine caused SIDS. Think I am lying?
www.brainguardmd.com (.....go)
Look what has happened with Gardasil as well. The deaths and un-recovered outcomes. If they can all out deny all that, what is enough? Nothing...EVER is! "Oh. were backed by the CDC and the FDA; and a couple conflict of interest corrupted peer reviewed studies"; all of it is; you KNOW, the ones that falsely claim to follow the scientific METHOD? And they say, no connection? The the CDC and the FDA, is nothing more than a paid for front group for big pharma ...period. They protect..NO-ONE... in the public sector!
Preventing Infection in Labor and Childbirth.
The Chicago Tribune's investigation linked the deaths of 2,610 infants in the year 2000 to preventable hospital-acquired infections--most were caused by Hospital staff--doctors, nurses, and maintenance workers--who failure to follow simple hygienic procedures unsanitary: "The lack of hand-washing is responsible for most germs spread in pediatric intensive care units, said Dr. William Jarvis, chief of the CDC's hospital infections program."
The Tribune identified 75, 000 preventable deaths "where hospital-acquired infections played a major role. This analysis, based on the most recent national data, is the most comprehensive of its kind and draws on thousands of hospital and government inspection reports."
Other Excerpts:
The Tribune examined federal health inspection reports and other public documents from 2000--the latest year health-care records were available nationally--to estimate that 75,000 of the deadly hospital infections took place in conditions that were preventable. Deaths were considered preventable if patients contracted infections that were spread as the result of deficiencies documented by state, federal or health-care investigators.
Serious violations of infection-control standards have been found in the vast majority of hospitals nationally. Since 1995, more than 75 percent of all hospitals have been cited for significant cleanliness and sanitation violations.
More.
Drug-resistant germs adapt, thrive beyond hospital walls; (not only are they rampant in hospitals, but the bugs, in turn get spread into the communities).
Lax Hosptial Procedures Put Infants At High Risk.
Infection epidemic carves deadly path
Poor hygiene, overwhelmed workers contribute to thousands of deaths
Hospital Acquired Infections: American hospitals’ “dirty little secret”.
------------
How Childbirth Went Industrial - A Deconstruction.
America needs better birth care, and midwives can deliver it.
Excerpt.Some healthcare trivia: In the United States, what is the No. 1 reason people are admitted to the hospital? Not diabetes, not heart attack, not stroke. The answer is something that isn't even a disease: childbirth.
A Woman's Nation: Reclaim Your Right To Birth Right.
Vitamin D Deficiency Boosts C-Section Risk.Low Levels of Vitamin D in Pregnant Women May Increase Chances of C-Sections.
Pregnancy Calendar.
Due date calculator.
Ronnie Falcao, LM MS, Licensed Midwife
Safe, Holistic Midwifery Care for Mother and Baby
What does a midwife do?
Homebirth: Is it really a safe option?
The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) claim that a 2002 study shows that women planning homebirths have an increased risk of several complications, including twice the risk of newborn death (11).This new study flies in the face of numerous other reputable studies, all concluding that planned homebirth with a trained attendant is safe (3,5,7,12). These include a study carried out by the Washington State Department of Social and Health services using some of the same data (3).
It behooves us to examine this new study with a critical eye. When we do so, it reveals itself to be, at best, a piece of work done by obstetricians who have an axe to grind. At worst, its many omissions and misstatements may have been intentional.
Here are the study's flaws:
Design flaws render the study incapable of determining whether planned homebirth is riskier than planned hospital birth
The researchers incorrectly select and analyze their outcomes
The authors exaggerate and misrepresent claims
The researchers lack an open mind.
(Explanation, on the following pages in the link).
When Research is Flawed: Critiques of the Influential Research Studies.
Her Survival Was a “Christmas Miracle,” but the Disaster Was Man-Made.
------------------
Ultrsound - TRUTH.
Ultrasound: Weighing the Propaganda Against the Facts.
Questions about Prenatal Ultrasound and the Alarming Increase in Autism.
Excerpts:
At a 1982 World Health Organization (WHO) meeting sponsored by the International Radiation Protection Association (IRPA) and other organizations, an international group of experts reported that "[t]here are several frequently quoted studies that claim to show that exposure to ultrasound in utero does not cause any significant abnormalities in the offspring. …However, these studies can be criticized on several grounds, including the lack of a control population and/or inadequate sample size, and exposure after the period of major organogenesis; this invalidates their conclusions…."(4)
Early studies showed that subtle effects of neurological damage linked to ultrasound were implicated by an increased incidence in left-handedness in boys (a marker for brain problems when not hereditary) and speech delays.(5) Then in August 2006, Pasko Rakic, chair of Yale School of Medicine's Department of Neurobiology, announced the results of a study in which pregnant mice underwent various durations of ultrasound.(6) The brains of the offspring showed damage consistent with that found in the brains of people with autism. The research, funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, also implicated ultrasound in neurodevelopmental problems in children, such as dyslexia, epilepsy, mental retardation and schizophrenia, and showed that damage to brain cells increased with longer exposures.(7)
Dr. Rakic's study, which expanded on prior research with similar results in 2004 (8), is just one of many animal experiments and human studies conducted over the years indicating that prenatal ultrasound can be harmful to babies. While some questions remain unanswered, based on available information, health practitioners must seriously consider the possible consequences of both routine and diagnostic use of ultrasound, as well as electronic fetal heart monitors, which may be neither non-invasive nor safe. If pregnant women knew all the facts, would they choose to expose their unborn children to a technology that—despite its increasingly entrenched position in modern obstetrics—has little or no proven benefit?
Problems with Sound and Heat
One challenge that ultrasound operators face is keeping the transducer positioned over the part of the fetus the operator is trying to visualize. When fetuses move away from the stream of high-frequency sound waves, they may be feeling vibrations, heat or both. As the FDA warned in 2004, "ultrasound is a form of energy, and even at low levels, laboratory studies have shown it can produce physical effect in tissue, such as jarring vibrations and a rise in temperature."(9) This is consistent with research conducted in 2001 in which an ultrasound transducer aimed directly at a miniature hydrophone placed in a woman's uterus recorded sound "as loud as a subway train coming into the station."(10)
Ultrasound Warnings Unheeded
The idea that a prenatal ultrasound can be hazardous is not new. The previously mentioned 1982 WHO report, in its summary "Effects of Ultrasound on Biological Systems," stated that "…animal studies suggest that neurological, behavioral, developmental, immunological, haematological changes and reduced fetal weight can result from exposure to ultrasound."(25)
Two years later, when the National Institutes of Health (NIH) held a conference assessing ultrasound risks, it reported that when birth defects occurred, the acoustic output was usually high enough to cause considerable heat.(26). Although the NIH has since stated that the report "is no longer viewed…as guidance for current medical practice," the facts remain unchanged.
Despite the findings of these two major scientific gatherings, in 1993 the FDA approved an eight-fold increase in the potential acoustical output of ultrasound equipment (27), greatly increasing the possibility of disastrous pregnancy outcomes caused by overheating. Can the fact that this increase in potential thermal effects happened during the same period of time the incidence of autism increased nearly 60-fold be merely coincidental?
Read the rest of this (ultasound) very damning article HERE. (More harm than good)!
----------------
Ultrasound: More Harm than Good?
Selected Excerpts.
When is Ultrasound Helpful?
In assessing the effectiveness of ultrasound in pregnancy, it is essential to make the distinction between its selective use for specific indications and its routine use as a screening procedure.
Essentially, ultrasound has proven valuable in a handful of specific situations in which the diagnosis "remains uncertain after clinical history has been ascertained and a physical examination has been performed." Yet, considering whether the benefits outweigh the costs of using ultrasound routinely, systematic medical research has not supported routine use.
One of the most common justifications given today for routine ultrasound scanning is to detect intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR). Many clinicians insist that ultrasound is the best method for the identification of this condition. In 1986, a professional review of 83 scientific articles on ultrasound showed that "for intrauterine growth retardation detection, ultrasound should be performed only in a high-risk population." In other words, the hands of an experienced midwife or doctor feeling a pregnant woman's abdomen are as accurate as the ultrasound machine for detecting IUGR. The same conclusion was reached by a study in Sweden comparing repeated measurement of the size of the uterus by a midwife with repeated ultrasonic measurements of the head size of the fetus in 581 pregnancies. The report concludes: "Measurements of uterus size are more effective than ultrasonic measurements for the antenatal diagnosis of intrauterine growth retardation."
If doctors continue to try to detect IUGR with ultrasound, the result will be high false-positive rates. Studies show that even under ideal conditions, such as do not exist in most settings, it is likely that over half of the time a positive IUGR screening test using ultrasound is returned, the test is false, and the pregnancy is in fact normal. The implications of this are great for producing anxiety in the woman and the likelihood of further unnecessary interventions.
That ultrasound during pregnancy cannot be simply assumed to be harmless is suggested by good scientific work in Norway. By following up on children at age eight or nine born of mothers who had taken part in two controlled trials of routine ultrasound in pregnancy, they were able to show that routine ultrasonography was associated with a symptom of possible neurological problems.
With regard to the active scientific pursuit of safety, an editorial in Lancet, a British medical journal, says: "There have been no randomized controlled trials of adequate size to assess whether there are adverse effects on growth and development of children exposed in utero to ultrasound. Indeed, the necessary studies to ascertain safety may never be done, because of lack of interest in such research."
The safety issue is made more complicated by the problem of exposure conditions. Clearly, any bio-effects that might occur as a result of ultrasound would depend on the dose of ultrasound received by the fetus or woman. But there are no national or international standards for the output characteristics of ultrasound equipment. The result is the shocking situation described in a commentary in the British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, in which ultrasound machines in use on pregnant women range in output power from extremely high to extremely low, all with equal effect. The commentary reads, "If the machines with the lowest powers have been shown to be diagnostically adequate, how can one possibly justify exposing the patient to a dose 5,000 times greater?" It goes on to urge government guidelines on the output of ultrasound equipment and for legislation making it mandatory for equipment manufacturers to state the output characteristics. As far as is known, this has not yet been done in any country.
Read the full article HERE.
------------------
Technology in Birth: First Do No Harm.
Excerpt.
Your next question when ultrasound is suggested should be, "Is there a better chance my baby will survive the pregnancy and birth if an ultrasound scan is done, and what are the data?" The correct answer is that a large study in the United States of more than 15,000 pregnant women showed no improvement in the mortality rate of the babies if ultrasound is routinely used during pregnancy.
One scientist published the following summary of the present state of the art on routine prenatal ultrasound scanning: "The casual observer might be forgiven for wondering why the medical profession is now involved in the wholesale examination of pregnant patients with machines emanating vastly different powers of energy which is not proven to be harmless to obtain information which is not proven to be of any clinical value by operators who are not certified as competent to perform the examinations." For all these reasons, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the American College of Radiology and the U.S. government's Preventive Services Task Force all recommend against routine ultrasound screening of low-risk pregnancies. This is the type of unbiased, scientifically sound information you need to make informed choices about technology used on you during pregnancy.
Be sure on this title page to also read the section titled, Information on Prenatal Technologies.
Excerpt.
If 100 pregnancies are routinely screened with ultrasound to look for a defective fetus, two out of the 100 will have a true positive result (i.e., the scan says the fetus is defective, and it truly is defective), and one out of the 100 will have a false positive result (i.e., the scan says the fetus is defective, but it is not defective, it is a normal fetus). So if all women with a positive scan are offered therapeutic abortion, for every two defective fetuses aborted, one normal fetus will be aborted. How many women are told this before they are offered a routine prenatal ultrasound scan?
(My note: As always and to often in modern medicine, more harm than good is done).
More excerpts.
Women giving birth today have more options than ever before, yet perceive very few. Information is available in unprecedented quantities at the touch of a fingertip, yet erroneous beliefs impact decision-making more than cold, hard facts.
Women believe that birth is a dangerous medical event. The fact is that normal birth is safer than many things we do each day without a thought (2).
Women believe that U.S. technology makes birth safe. The fact is that birth is much safer in countries where technology is more appropriately utilized (3).
Worse yet, women are often not making decisions at all. Like the elephant that cannot conceive that he has the power to walk away, women simply do not see the options before them.
A mother called me regarding private childbirth classes. During the course of the discussion, she explained that she wasn't even sure the classes would help her, as she was planning a VBAC (vaginal birth after cesarean) and doubted it would "work." Further discussion revealed that her doctor was insisting on certain "conditions" in order to "attempt" this VBAC.
The mother would be induced if she went "over due," as determined by an ultrasound (4).
The mother would be induced if her baby got "too big," as determined by an ultrasound estimation (5).
The mother must deliver between 7:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. when an anesthesiologist would be on hand. If that looked unlikely, induction or augmentation would be required. If she did not dilate steadily and quickly she would be augmented with Pitocin or Cytotec. If she were still laboring near the end of her given time frame, surgery would be inevitable (6).
The mother must labor with an epidural (7).
The reason for these restrictions was that the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) had issued new "guidelines" for VBAC, supposedly from a study that "proved" VBAC was unsafe (8).
However, what the study showed was that "obstetrically managed VBAC" was unsafe. The factors that made VBAC unsafe were mainly—hold on to your seat—pharmaceutical induction agents that are known to cause uterine rupture in non-scarred uteri (9). In other words, any woman in labor who gets them, not just VBAC mothers. Instead of investigating the drugs, which are not FDA-approved for nonmedical indications, the recommendation became to put restrictions on VBAC that bring about the very conditions that are singular to the drug/VBAC combination, not the VBAC itself. That "logic" is just lost on me, but it's beside the point, anyway.
Read full article HERE.
---------------------
Episiotomy - Truth. (Use of a midwife and techniques as well as patient selected positions, as well minimizes the need for this. On your back is the worst place. Dr. Robert Mendelsohn.
Confessions of a Medical Heratic.
Epidurals for labor pain - truth.
Epidurals: Can they impact breastfeeding? Shows the affect on the brain fucntion of the just born infant; in comparison to non epideural births.
----------------------
Elective Induction of Labor
Table of Contents
Is elective induction safe and effective?
How did obstetricians come to believe elective induction was harmless?
Who makes a good candidate for elective induction?
How can women considering elective induction minimize the risks?
Bibliography
Article.
----------------------
Drug to Know: Cytotec - Good basic information on the risks do Cytotec.
Cytotec: Safe for inducing labor? (Trust us)!
Excerpt.
Cytotec's only FDA-approved use is treating ulcers. In August 2000, Searle, Cytotec's manufacturer, sent physicians a letter reminding them that Cytotec was not approved for use as a cervical ripening agent and that it was contraindicated for use in pregnancy (14). The letter listed serious adverse effects associated with using Cytotec, including maternal or fetal death, uterine rupture, and severe vaginal bleeding and shock.
-----------------------
ACOG’s 2009 Induction Guidelines: Spin Doctoring Misoprostol (Cytotec).
Excerpts.
ACOG STATEMENT: “There is . . . a large body of published reports supporting (misoprostol’s) safety and efficacy when used appropriately” (p. 387).
FACT: None of the studies have been big enough either alone or in the aggregate to detect differences in rare, catastrophic events, a point acknowledged by a Cochrane systematic review, and it is those rare, catastrophic events that are the issue with “miso.” And while more disasters will occur with higher doses and in women with prior cesareans, there is no “appropriate” use of misoprostol in terms of safety.
ACOG STATEMENT: “No studies indicate that intrapartum exposure . . . has any long-term adverse health consequences to the fetus in the absence of fetal distress [emphasis mine]. . . .” (p. 387).
FACT: Well, that’s the catch, isn’t it? The long-term adverse health consequences to the fetus occur in the presence of fetal distress subsequent to uterine rupture—including in unscarred uteruses and with moderate doses of misoprostol—and amniotic fluid embolism. In some cases, of course, the fetus doesn’t survive to experience long-term consequences.
ACOG STATEMENT: “Although misoprostol currently is approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for the prevention of peptic ulcers, the FDA in 2002 approved a new label on the use of misoprostol during pregnancy for cervical ripening and for the induction of labor. This labeling does not contain claims regarding the efficacy or safety of misoprostol” (p. 387).
FACT: A reader can be forgiven for assuming from this convoluted phrasing that the FDA now approves of using misoprostol to induce labor. The reader would be wrong. The FDA removed the “black box” designation prohibiting use in pregnant women, but it takes a much dimmer view of “miso” than merely not claiming it is safe. Here is an excerpt from the FDA’s 2002 statement (PDF):
A major adverse effect of the obstetrical use of Cytotec is hyperstimulation of the uterus which may progress to uterine tetany [uterus contracts and doesn't let go] with marked impairment of uteroplacental blood flow, uterine rupture (requiring surgical repair, hysterectomy, and/or salpingo-oophorectomy [removal of the ovaries and Fallopian tubes]), or amniotic fluid embolism [maternal and infant mortality is very high from this]. Pelvic pain, retained placenta, severe genital bleeding, shock, fetal bradycardia [profound slowing of the fetal heart], and fetal and maternal death have been reported.
There may be an increased risk of uterine tachysystole [contractions coming too fast], uterine rupture, meconium passage, meconium staining of amniotic fluid, and Cesarean delivery due to uterine hyperstimulation with the use of higher doses of Cytotec; including the manufactured 100 mcg tablet. The risk of uterine rupture increases with advancing gestational ages and with prior uterine surgery, including Cesarean delivery. Grand multiparity [usually defined as more than four births] also appears to be a risk factor for uterine rupture.
What actually happened was this: ACOG held that “misoprostol is one of the most important medications in obstetrical practice. . . . The real victims in this scenario [i.e., prohibition in pregnancy] are pregnant women who receive treatment in hospitals that will not allow the use of misoprostol” (Hale 2001, p. 59). Lobbied by ACOG, the FDA rescinded the black box designation on the grounds that obstetricians were using it to induce labor, a rationale that amounts to “but all the kids are doing it.”
ACOG STATEMENT: “The majority of adverse maternal and fetal outcomes associated with misoprostol therapy resulted from the use of doses greater than 25 mcg” (p. 387).
FACT: The “majority” of adverse outcomes is hardly reassuring. What about the minority? Not to mention that obstetricians may ignore recommended dosages, and even the guidelines say “Misoprostol in higher doses (50 mcg every 6 hours) may be appropriate in some situations” (p. 390). In any case, misoprostol is formulated in 100 mcg tablets for use as an oral ulcer medication. Getting a 25 mcg dose means cutting an unscored tablet in quarters. It’s anybody’s guess what dosage is really delivered.
The real kicker is that according to the Cochrane systematic review, misoprostol is no more effective than the FDA approved medication, PGE2 (a.k.a dinoprostone, trade names Cervidil and Prepidil). More vaginal deliveries happened within 24 hours after administration, but cesarean rates overall did not differ between groups. Cesarean rates in trials comparing misoprostol with with intravenous oxytocin (trade names Pitocin or “Pit” and “Syntocinon”) were more variable, but not all of them found reductions in cesarean rates with misoprostol. Meanwhile, misoprostol results in higher rates of uterine hyperstimulation and uterine hyperstimulation with adverse changes in the fetal heart rate than other agents. And misoprostol has yet another major disadvantage: Oxytocin has a short half-life. If contractions get too strong or too close together, turn the I.V. drip down or off, and within a little while, contractions fade. If misoprostol hyperstimulates the uterus, you are stuck. Moreover, lurking in the “miso works faster” benefit is a problem not captured in the trials because they only measure major morbidity: some women are thrown into violent labors. These labors should have given researchers pause, though, if for no other reason than they are the precursor, the shark fin in the water, of misoprostol’s potential for severe fetal distress, massive hemorrhage, uterine rupture, and amniotic fluid embolism.
Link to FDA document.
Why, then, are obstetricians so enamored of misoprostol? The answer is summed up by this obstetrician enthusiast:
The best part about it is that you can block-schedule your nurses so that you have enough on hand. . . [I]f we start our inductions at 7 a.m., we know that we’re going to have X number of patients in labor being admitted by 4 p.m. That’s helped our hospital tremendously, . . . [Cytotec is] a great agent. It works very, very efficiently. . . . And it’s ungodly inexpensive: 27 cents per tablet.
In other words, Cytotec’s real benefits are convenience for obstetricians and helping the hospital’s bottom line. For women and babies, though, it’s a roll of the dice. Most times things go fine, but sometimes the dice come up snake eyes.
Read full article HERE.
Cytotec - another abstract.
--------------
Adverse Events Following Misoprostol Induction of Labor. 16 cases listed.
Here's some highlights!
Case 1.
In 1995, a 34-year-old gravida 2, para 1, with previous caesarean section was given misoprostol vaginally, 25 micrograms (mcg) every four hours X 2, for a total 50 mcg, followed by oxytocin drip. Uterine hyperstimulation with severe hypoxic fetal heart rate patterns was followed by uterine rupture. Apgar was 2, 4, 4. The baby died at three days of age from hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE).
Case 7
In 1999, a 26-year-old gravida 2, para 1, with no previous c-section was given misoprostol vaginally, 50 mcg, one dose, followed by oxytocin drip. Severe uterine hyperstimulation and meconium ensued. Mother died just after giving birth. The diagnosis was amniotic fluid embolism.
Case 9
In 1999, a 34-year-old gravida 4, para 3, with no previous c-section was given misoprostol vaginally, 50 mcg, and four hours later 25 mcg, for a total 75 mcg, followed by an oxytocin drip. Uterine hyperstimulation with severe hypoxic fetal heart rate patterns occurred with "pea soup" meconium. Apgar was 1, 1, 2. The child has severe HIE. The mother died just after giving birth. The diagnosis was amniotic fluid embolism.
Case 10
In 2000, an 18-year-old gravida 2, ab 1, with no previous c-section was given misoprostol orally, 50 mcg, then after four hours misoprostol vaginally, 50 mcg, and after four hours, 75 mcg vaginally, for a total 175 mcg, followed by oxytocin drip. Uterine hyperstimulation with severe hypoxic fetal heart rate patterns occurred. The mother died shortly after giving birth. The diagnosis was amniotic fluid embolism. The baby died shortly after birth from severe hypoxia resulting from uterine hyperstimulation and maternal shock.
Case 14
In 2001, a 32-year-old primip was given misoprostol vaginally, 25 mcg every four hours X 2, for a total 50 mcg. Uterine hyperstimulation with severe hypoxic fetal heart rate patterns occurred. The mother died during childbirth. The diagnosis was amniotic fluid embolism. The baby died at birth after severe hypoxia due to uterine hyperstimulation and maternal shock.
Case 16
In 2002, a 31-year-old primip was given misoprostol vaginally, 25 mcg, and then after four hours 50 mcg every four hours X 4, for a total 225 mcg misoprostol, followed by oxytocin drip. Uterine hyperstimulation, accompanied by severe hypoxic fetal heart rate patterns, occurred. An emergency caesarean section was done for severe fetal hypoxia. The child has HIE with cerebral palsy and mental retardation.
Another Cytotec - Personal Horror Story!
My note: And doctors are using this for induction of labor? They really know what they are doing; don't they. (Read the FDA document below) - (the wonders of "modern medicine)! The problem is that this level of evil exists to the point, in regard to birthing, noone has any faith that a creator made childbirth a natural occurance, and men because they had years of school that taught them nothing about what it should have, believe they can be and play God. People regard them like and as if they are nearly next to God. "The drug rep said this would work good" Has worked well, hasn't it??? Medical procedures and medicine have their needed place; but when insanity like this, and a dozen other issues I could point to, overtake any common good, all for money and continuation of the lies and misinformation; then we all need to KNOW what goes on, and be vigilent, and on every level. You can trust nothing? Nothing!
Misoprostol. (Posted again).
Cytotec to induce labor? (Good posts by some who experienced it).
A Case of Statistical Malpractice? Predicting the Risk of Uterine Rupture.
Good article on Cytotec.
Cytotec Induction and Off-Label Use.
The other pharma choice in induction, Cervidil. (Again..side affects .and.. risks).
--------------
Natural or Non-Pharmaceutical Induction.
Natural Induction Methods.
There are an endless amount of these articles you can find.
INDUCTION OF LABOR: MOTHER NATURE KNOWS BEST
Do Herbs Induce Labor?
Castor Oil, (Cochrane Reviews).
My note; So if you could avoid or reduce risk of all that by use of a midwife and choice; why would you elect a hospital birth, if it wasn't necessary?
----------
2009 in review: A year of FDA censorship, Big Pharma crimes and celebrity drug deaths.
NaturalNews announces the "Dumb and Dumber and Dumberer" awards for 2009.
----------
More:
Home birth with midwife as safe as hospital birth. With, Too many doctors and hospitals are overusing high-tech procedures, and other articles.
When Push Comes to Shove. Read more about the horror story and show of hospital intervention, and told what to do..birth!!!
The Assault on Normal Birth: The OB Disinformation Campaign. (How they LIE)!
Articles on Ultra Sound.
The Soaring Cesarean Rate: It’s the Economics, Stupid.
Choices in Childbirth. (Multiple articles).
Spin Doctoring the Research.
Rebuttal to Rationales for Denial of VBAC.
VBAC safety: A closer look at the 2002 JAMA study
Doctors Ignore Evidence. AMA Seeks to Deny Women Choices in Childbirth.
CPM2000 Study Published! Landmark Study Shows Giving Birth at Home is Safe.
Outcomes of planned home births with certified professional midwives: large prospective study in North America. (Abstract). 42 references.
Reforming Maternity Care in America, Recommendations to Obama-Biden Transisition Team on Maternity Health Care.
Midwife Laws, by State
Position Paper.
Reference Links.
2005 Infant Mortality Rates, (per 1000 live births) by Country.The US is third from the bottom, of 30 countries. Even Cuba has a better rate. Wonder if the increase toxic vaccinations play any role?
What Every Woman needs to Know About Cesarean Section, PDF
Comparison of the Risks.
Fact Sheet: On Page 15 it gives the average costs.$1624 doe a TYPICAL MIDWIFE BIRTH, verses $6239 for a no complications non cesarean hospital physician attended birth. If a physician birth has more chance of intervention, and convienience intervention and complications; why would you want pay thousands more for that? If over-all midwife birth is is much better, easier experience for both the the mother and baby; why pay thoussands more for on average a potentially worse outcome? You would do that because modern medicine has brainwashed far to many women and people that they need a doctor for everything. Those women who have a determined high risk pregnancy, and that thus use a hospital; that situation still be made better, and less risk; if the doctor took the advice of a midwife, and followed that their advice and asssisted help. Oh ya, like that will likely happen; with the arrogance about their ability and process - that we know exists.
Vaginal Verses Cesarean Birth, (Ceserean is not as safe nor harmless as you might think).
Myth Verses Reality
US Cochrane Center Studies, Consumers United for Evidence-based Healthcare (CUE)
Home Birth With Midwife As Safe As Hospital Birth: Study, Canadian researchers find lower rate of complications.
National Association of Certified Midwives
Midwives Alliance of North America
Widwife Education Accreditaion Council.
International Confederation of Midwives.
UK Maternity Units Basic Statistics.
North American Registry of Midwives.
Mothers Naturally
Midwifery Today
Sample letter to your legislators.
Legislators, call them.
Legislative Process.
-------------------
Sugar May Be Bad, But This Sweetener Is Far More Deadly.
Posted by: Dr. Mercola
January 02 2010 | 206,218 views
------------
The JOURNAL of the AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION (JAMA) Vol 284, No 4, July 26th 2000 article written by Dr Barbara Starfield, MD, MPH, of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health, shows that medical errors may be the third leading cause of death in the United States.
Doctors Are The Third Leading Cause of Death in the US, Killing 225,000 People Every Year
Posted by: Dr. Mercola, July 30 2000
Excerpts:
This article in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) is the best article I have ever seen written in the published literature documenting the tragedy of the traditional medical paradigm.
If you want to keep updated on issues like this click here to sign up for my free newsletter.
This information is a followup of the Institute of Medicine report which hit the papers in December of last year, but the data was hard to reference as it was not in peer-reviewed journal. Now it is published in JAMA which is the most widely circulated medical periodical in the world.
The Author is Dr. Barbara Starfield of the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene and Public Health. Published in
ALL THESE ARE DEATHS PER YEAR:
12,000 -- unnecessary surgery
7,000 -- medication errors in hospitals
20,000 -- other errors in hospitals
80,000 -- infections in hospitals
106,000 -- non-error, negative effects of drugs
These total to 225,000 deaths per year from iatrogenic causes!!
-----------------
AN EXCLUSIVE INTERVIEW WITH DR. BARBARA STARFIELD. (The Original author of the JAMA study, 4th leading cause of death in the US, prescription drugs properly prescribed).
MEDICALLY CAUSED DEATH IN AMERICA.
Reference.
------------------
Now for "Childhood Vaccines", bet you thought I would never have a section here, on that subject???
Vaccinations, another reason for mid wife birth and home schooling. However exemptions are available; do not let them tell you they are not. Philosophical and/or religious, in most states; one or the other or both.
Department of Health and Human Services » National Vaccine Program Office » The National Vaccine Advisory Committee (NVAC)
Transcript of the Proceedings of the April 11, 2008 Meeting of the Vaccine Safety Working Group of the National Vaccine Advisory Committee.
Preface and transcript.
Meeting Transcript.
VACCINATIONS
ALEX LOGLIA ON "THE HOUR OF THE TIME"
(Begining of article - excerpts):
I want to warn you in advance folks that tonight I am going to do a lot of reading; I'm going to quote a lot of different people, and I want you to understand from the start that I am not making up anything from what I'm going to be saying here tonight, but that everything I mention here is scientific fact which I have discovered in my own research.
I make this warning because you are not going to want to believe what you are about to hear. I'm going to talk to you tonight about vaccinations. Most of you out there have probably received some form of vaccination at one point or another in your life, or you may have children who are in the process of receiving vaccinations. Well, I have some very bad news for you folks; you, once again, have been conned. I am sure, that you, like myself, have been raised to believe that doctors know what is best for you, that everything that comes out of the medical industry is done to help you and that everything that doctors do is safe and well-tested and proven, vaccinations included.
Unfortunately, we have all been lied to, and once again, me and all of you are responsible because we would rather put the responsibility of our health into someone else's hands, instead of taking charge of our own lives and our own well-being.
I'm going to say this bluntly, so that it will make an impact on you and so that you will hear me. You and your children are being poisoned, folks, and you are making pharmaceutical companies incredibly rich, and you are also unknowingly helping along the progress of what is going to become the greatest epidemic that the human race has ever seen, namely AIDS. With ignorance and foolish trust in the experts, you have been had.
Adverse events after Hepatitis B Vaccination.
Vaccines truth website.
Vaccination - Deception and Tragedy.
EDUCATION ABOUT TOXIC VACCINES IS SWEEPING THE NATION.
Archive.
AN OVERVIEW ON THE POLIO VACCINE.
VACCINATION TOXICITY CAN CAUSE INJURY.
RAISING HEALTHY VACCINE DRUG-FREE CHILDREN.
As to vaccination so called science. Look at who is the actually appointed judge and jury on what peer reviewed studies prove, what studies point as a conclusion to, and/or disprove what? The CDC? For profit pharma? Or maybe its the pharma front groups, Orec, Quackwatch, or Autism Speaks? Anything that suggests a vaccine link, that claim and or study is discounted, never considered, or automatically made without review, some hypocritical automatic conclusion, that it hasn't followed the scientific method. Only the officially accepted peer reviewed journal/s, are accepted. Yet, I have seen people claim their Pubmed study is proof that there is no vaccine link to autism, yet your Pubmed study that shows a huge link, that is irrelevant.
What speaks, is actually 100's parents across this nation who watched their healthy child slip into no speech autism shortly after vaccines. They claim, it was all a coincidence, no proof; just like Gardasil. What speaks, is the parallel increase in autism, ADD/ADHD , asthma, learning disorders, childhood diabetes, cancer, childhood arthritis, etc. directly correlating to the number of added vaccines since the 1987 NVCA. What speaks is the fact that Homefirst Medical Services has now over 36,000 children's files and no autism, nor any of the rest of the medical issues just mentioned.
Listen To The Video.
4 Generations And No Vaccines. Do You Believe In God Or Not.
The Sanctity of Human Blood: Vaccination Is Not Immunization
2009. Dr. Tim O'Shea
Also what speaks, is that herd immunity is clearly a myth, and the failure rate is at times high and unreliable. Go to my Herd Immunity page. What is protecting the children at Homefirst? the rest of the nations, so called herd immunity? Maybe there is something to that soil and the seed concept after all? Maybe there is something to that claim that vaccines toxins corrupt the immune system.
Vaccines and Immune Suppression.
Doctors Admit MMR Vaccine Doubts Posted by: Dr. Mercola (Check all the links).
How Vaccines Are Made.
Vaccination Conflicts Of Interest.
Dispelling The Vaccine Myths.
International Memorial For Vaccine Victims.
VERY Important Vaccine Question. (Check out how many vaccines children are given these days)!
Historical facts about the dangers (and failures) of vaccines.
Vaccination Debate; Graphical and Historical Evidence Vaccines Did Not Save Us!
Why It Continues.
Vaccines Putting Children at Risk.
Eric's life before and after the Vaccine.
Mercury in Flu Shots.
Thimerosal Safety Data Sheets. Does it not, state that it is a neurological poison!
Was Smallpox Vaccine Really A Great Success?
Gardasil.
How To Legally Avoid Unwanted Immunizations Of All Kinds.
Who Is Behind Quackwatch.
Economic Stimulus Bill Mandates $954 Million for Vaccinations, $545 Million for "Genomics Programs"
Innoculations - The True Weapons of Mass Destruction - Part 1 and 2
Autism Testimonial
Cancer and Vaccines. Part 1 and 2
Dr Rebecca Carley - Statement.
Vaccine induced stroke due to serum sickness is in fact one of the complications of vaccines, but there are many other ways vaccines kill and maim (including autoimmunity, demyelination, aluminum induced allergy, etc.). This is explained in "Inoculations the true weapons of mass destruction" on my site, and backed up by multiple research studies done by non-pharma funded veterinarians discussed in the article "Science of Vaccine Damage" also posted on my site.
Vaccines the True Weapons of Mass Destruction, Challenge to the CDC, and the Academy of Pediatrics, (Un-responded to).
Autism Mercury Vaccines Poisoning Connection.
And this is true, there is clearly more than one physiological vaccine mechanism to causation of autism, and other vaccine harm. However, the 3 forms of biomedical treatment, including homeopathy accomplishes the same thing. Reduction of vaccine heavy metal, viral, and other pathological vaccine contaminates. And/or through that process of a child's immune system thus being overloaded with pathogens from the MMR, or DPT shots; reduction of that; which through corruption of the immune system response, by vaccine toxins, the child could not process those said vaccine viral antigens. It's all about an overloaded immune system, the particular child could not handle, which some children could. Then we have the issue of vaccine induced and caused blood sludging, which goes right along with all of it. The brain vascular territory ischemia stated here. And as evidenced in the pictures and information on the sites below. It all as well fits with the information on my Biomedical Treatment page as well. Healing the vaccine damage. What else is happening there, ask yourself that? The main stream medical side, refuses to acknowledge that.
The Key. Dr. Andrew Moulden's work.
Example. (Nevaeh Gelineau section). Now that the end vascular territories are impaired, this is like a series of areas wherein the blood vessel pipes are "crimped,", partially blocked..or obliterated. At this point, any immune hyper stimulating triggers Nevaeh is intolerant of (e.g. Casein, Gluten, etc..) will lead to an immune response. It is the immune response that has these partially "closed vessels/pipes" cannot handle. This aggravates ischemia - and symptomatology.
Note that is states, any hyper immune stimulating trigger. Of course this then explains as well, why they often see significant recovery in autism, after even just dietary elimination of allergic foods. Without even the other means of viral and heavy metal detox. So we can clearly see here, what goes on in biomedical treatment of autism. They are eliminating all of the (above-said), hyper stimulating triggers. Brought on most of it by vaccine toxins; and the immune system dis-regulating damage.
Autistic children nationwide have been known to have severe diarrhea and gut problems.Leaky gut syndrome healed with elimination of typical food allergens, and autism reversal. For some more is needed, and detox of anti viral and heavy metal overload, due to said low glutathione, also found in the autistic.
www.drbutttar.com Also go to the Biomedical Treatment page. Many recoveries. As well you can see the pictures and info. on Dr. Moulden's site, do show at times recovery of and reversal of those situations, if no more vaccines are given. However, there is residual damage done, and the micro-circulation is compromised in unrecoverable ways. If any more vaccines are given, the resulting effect is worse than the first time it happened. How much proof is that; it IS ALL vaccines!
There are puffs of new vessels forming, known as Moyamoya, that appear as white puffs in imaging. These puffs are the bodies attempt to revascularize hypoxic areas of the end vascular territories of the brain, to recover from ischemia/hypoxia in the brain. Silent ischemia strokes, from repeat vaccinations. It ALL fits, every bit of it now, as well as the reasons biomedical treatment has worked for many children. As long as the vaccines are stopped, early enough.
Does it seem understandable that doctors that have realized these strokes, then went in with aspirin and made it worse? Reye' is a mass disorder. Those doctors that seen it on imaging, the white puff spots, treated it like a new disease, and never knew what it was. They just can not ever stop treating and start healing, seems no matter what... causes do not ever matter to them. The whole modern medicine plan is to treat, not find nor realize the cause and heal.
The most moving picture I see there of all, that little baby with both eyes turned in, on Andrews site. This has to stop!
Vaccinated By Force, Now Autistic. (Listen, it's always the same thing)!
Pharma's only solution to autism and as well as ADD/ADHD, etc. is filling the kids with more chemicals, chemical restraint; how sad is that. Providing only better programs for learning or parental coping.
Fact. The true history of vaccinations has been hidden for decades. Pharma taking false credit for wiping out or reduction in diseases that were already long into decline before any vaccine; check that information for yourself; compare it to their CDC information. Polio and small pox vaccine causing more disease than they had before, and increased cases of paralytic polio. The known redefinition of polio changed to hide the fact that the polio vaccine had never worked. Think its not truth? Go to the Polio Truth page. Jonas Salk stated himself, later on, that the only cases of polio we see today, are directly caused by the vaccine. Ask why is it possible that polio disappeared in countries as well, that had little to no vaccine available?
Fact. The true history of early day, (which wasn't medicine at all), to modern day medicine, has been hidden for decades. Check the History of Modern Medicine pages, as well as the Curing Cancer page. Ask why does that not exist in any medical text book, even going back to the 50's? It is because the Rockefeller oil money bought off what was the AMA, just around the time of early 1900. Check it out for yourself? Watch the DVD, Curing Cancer From the Inside Out, or at least read my written excepts, as I watched it myself.
Does it astonish you that cancer can be reversed and cured with an elimination of animal protein, and initiating of a raw food and vegetable juices diet? How about as well as that every known natural cancer cure ever, has been suppressed by the medical for profit monopoly. The proof is all there, you just have to look.
“Hostile Takeover” of American Medicine. Pharmaganda.
Does it make anyone angry that any doctor or nurse that informs a cancer patient of that, what happens if found out? They get fired, and it has happened. Doesn't matter if it worked, and did. Selling sickness, only a drug can treat, prevent, or cure disease; (FDA). Any and all other claims are forbidden. You can refuse to investigate that, and refuse to believe any of this; however I guarantee you, you will likely continue on the same failed path they have set you forward on. Selling sickness and disease; continual billions in dollars spent by pharma, advertising to you in your own living room, on TV. Listen to the side affects being potentially worse than what you intend to treat. Consider their pharmaceutical success record; as well go to my Prescription Drug pages, for more truth information on that. It's a real raving success story. It is not that that system is totally useless, there are times it is needed; and especially in trauma/emergency care. What would happen to their cardiac and cancer units, were the real preventative protocols, everyone started living by? Cholesterol is not even the issue, the Standard American Diet is, and C-reactive protein resulting inflammation.
Back to vaccines. When I was a kid, there were 5 vaccines. 20 years later there were 10. After advent of the NVCA in 1987, and thus after threats by the vaccine makers to discontinue production of vaccines, due to lawsuits for childhood vaccine harm; they concluded at the federal level that a tax could be charged on all vaccines, and the money used to create a federal vaccine court, where all claims would be heard. the vaccine makers and anyone else then had no liability for the damages, nor any incentive to create safer vaccines. Think, if they had done that with script drugs? Now there are what, 39 vaccines and total of 69 shots, before the age of 6. And they still claim no proof; just like Gardasil. Nothing is enough.
They say there is no conclusive studies; there never are. They produce a study looking at one ingredient or two; thimersol, (mercury), or the MMR, measles component. Here are the basic ingredients in vaccines.
http://www.novaccine.com/vaccine-ingredients/ They are as well in a race to create more and more vaccines to inject into your child. A race as well to create new adjuvants, that have already shown to produce disastrous results, Cervarix, with the (Apo4 adjuvant).
A Review of Evidence and Medical Hypothesis. Are Current Childhood Vaccine programs compromising the genetics of present and future generations?
All they have to do is produce one single vaccine study, claiming no connection to autism
was found. Then the mainstream and world media picks that up, just as they were told, and proclaims it as solid proof no connection was found. The only thing is, just as Thomas Verstatean said concerning the Simpson Wood Conference, and that study as well was proclaimed as well as solid proof, no connection was found. He later stated, we have never claimed there is no link; just that we did not find one with that study; and more study is needed.
Dr. Russell Blaylock, The truth behind the Cover-Up, (Simpson Wood Conference).
You see, and that is how it works, and the main stream media is never going to publish nor broadcast anything that goes against the billions in money that pharma, and the hospitals advertising money brings them nationally, nor locally. It works the same in any industrialized country. No matter what. And they then claim its not all controlled, for information.
No matter how many studies show the truth, even more-so than the few they used, and claimed peer reviewed. 100's if not 1000's of other peer reviewed studies never see the light of day, with their pharma evaluation of vaccines process.
------------------
Example.
Delayed acquisition of neonatal reflexes in newborn primates receiving a thimerosal-containing Hepatitis B vaccine: Influence of gestational age and birth weight.
Laura Hewitson, Lisa A. Houser , Carol Stott, Gene Sackett, Jaime L. Tomko ,David Atwood, Lisa Blue, E. Railey White, Andrew J. Wakefield
Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, United States
Washington National Primate Research Center, University of Washington, Seattle, WA 98195, United States
Thoughtful House Center for Children, Austin, TX 78746, United States
Department of Chemistry, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 40506, United States
Wakefield’s work has not been fully replicated and therefore it has not been discredited.
Publications by Wakefield and others, since 1998, and in peer reviewed journals.
Here below is a similar study in the Journal of Pediatrics.
Evaluation, Diagnosis, and Treatment of Gastrointestinal Disorders in Individuals With ASDs: A Consensus Report.
Wakefield's Science Proven Valid Again In New Study That Replicates Findings.
A study published in Autism Insights became public and went one step further: it replicated the findings of Dr. Wakefield’s paper from twelve years ago, finding once again that the majority of children with autism studied, in this case 143 children, suffered from severe bowel disease – read the full study by Dr. Arthur Krigsman et al.
Clinical Presentation and Histologic Findings at Ileocolonoscopy in Children with Autistic Spectrum Disorder and Chronic Gastrointestinal Symptoms.
On Second Looking Into The case Of Dr. Andrew J. Wakefield. By William R. Long. MDiv, PhD, JD. (Good analysis).
Gastrointestinal Pathology in Autism Spectrum Disorders: by Lenny Gonzalez, MD, Venezuela. (Similar to Wakefield findings).
Peer-Reviewed Scientific Studies and Citations Related to Autism, Underlying Medical Conditions and Treatment
April 2, 2008. (100's of citations in peer reviewed journals).
Use the abstacts to many of the full length abstract studies here.
Autism and Gastrointestinal Inflamation - Peer reviewed. Numerous Citations.
Autism citations including treatment of gastrointestinal inflamation.
Autism Studies. Evidence: Published Studies. 34 more vax./autism related studies.
Studies Against Vaccines & Autism Relationship with Rebuttals.
Teresa Binstock, Researcher in Developmental & Behavioral Neuroanatomy.
February 04, 2010
(Read this womans account of what actually happened to Wakefield; another account of the truth).
Andrew Wakefield & Ignaz Semmelweis: MMR concerns for the UK's GMC.
(23 more studies in peer reviewed journals- on the severe gastointestinal problems in the autistic).
Scientific News, by Teresa Binstock.
Endless more scientific citations in regard to vaccines, and the related harm they do.
Scientific News by Dr. Russell Blaylock, retired Board certified neurosurgeon.
Testimonials: Links to many autism recovery stories. What are they doing? Detoxing and healing the vaccine harm done; and they still refuse to look at, nor consider that whatsoever, at the CDC, or anywhere else that is responsible for any authority and guidance on this. Also go to my Biomedical Treatment page.
Cal-Oregan Vaccination vs. Unvaccination Survey.
Vaccine Damage Stories.
Scientific Studies, (vaccines and diabetes, etc.) - Peer Reviewed.
HPV/Gardasil- Studies.
The Evolving Science of Chiropractic Philosophy, Part I and 2.
Posted by: Dr. Mercola