This picture from WikiMedia really moved me, and so I am sharing with you.
Rotarix is on the vaccine schedule to give to our infants at age 2, 4, and 6 months. It has only been on the market since 2008 and is one of two vaccines given to almost all American babies for the rotavirus. Scientists doing a study on something else stumble upon the pig virus and notified GlaxoSmithKline, the manufacturer. And the FDA suspended the vaccine until they can determine if the pig virus is dangerous. The other vaccine, RotaTeq, is made by Merck. RotaTeq was found to contain a virus similar to simian (monkey) retrovirus, but the FDA hasn't suspended this one.
I opted out of the rotavirus vaccine for West. I didn't know any better with Nate and he got the full doses at his young age of 2, 4, and 6 months. In the US doctors can easily identify the virus, and then I can give my child the fluids and rest that he needs to fight it, and then rake in the rewards of natural lifetime immunity.
The question here is really why is there a pig virus in a vaccine that no body knew was there? How is that safe? What else has gone undetected in this vaccine and all the others? Why do we have a policy of distributing the vaccines first, and then thoroughly testing it later? We are injecting our most vulnerable and precious babies with vaccines that we put full faith in. Should we really have full faith in these vaccines? Are the vaccines really less risk than the virus? We need to gauge our own threshold. For me, I feel like I can handle diarrhea. It isn't that big of risk compared to the unknowns of vaccines.
The manufacturers don't even know what's in their own vaccines. The FDA doesn't know. It is just by luck that some scientists saw the pig virus and notified us. Doctors just do what the FDA says to do. I feel like a big herd of sheep all following huge pharmaceutical companies off the cliff.
When has my child's pediatrician gone over the brand option for my child's vaccines? I asked Nate's pediatrician what brand he was selling and he had to go get the insert to find out. When have they sat down with me and really told me what was in those vaccines? Are we really making informed choices? To be informed, I need to do the research myself. At least I can have the peace of mind that I did the best that I could. I did enough research to feel comfortable with my decision to inject my children with these vaccines.
And it isn't just the question of whether to vaccinate or not. With every vaccine that is on the schedule, I need to ask myself: what is this vaccine? What is in it (that is noted!)? Just like reading the label on my food. If I don't know what it is, I need to find out or I don't eat it! What are the differences in the brands available to me? Not all brands have the same ingredients in them. What is the virus? Is it really that bad that my child needs a vaccine? Remember that vaccines are making our doctors and those big drug companies a lot of money.
From the National Vaccine Information Center:
“Today, even though almost all US infants receive vaccines for rotavirus, and despite efforts to improve the management of childhood rotavirus-associated diarrhea, hospitalizations of children in the U.S. with the disease have not significantly declined in the past two decades.”
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/03/22/rotavirus.vaccine/index.html?hpt=T2
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/17/major-vaccine-suspended-due-to-contamination-with-pig-virus.aspx
I opted out of the rotavirus vaccine for West. I didn't know any better with Nate and he got the full doses at his young age of 2, 4, and 6 months. In the US doctors can easily identify the virus, and then I can give my child the fluids and rest that he needs to fight it, and then rake in the rewards of natural lifetime immunity.
The question here is really why is there a pig virus in a vaccine that no body knew was there? How is that safe? What else has gone undetected in this vaccine and all the others? Why do we have a policy of distributing the vaccines first, and then thoroughly testing it later? We are injecting our most vulnerable and precious babies with vaccines that we put full faith in. Should we really have full faith in these vaccines? Are the vaccines really less risk than the virus? We need to gauge our own threshold. For me, I feel like I can handle diarrhea. It isn't that big of risk compared to the unknowns of vaccines.
The manufacturers don't even know what's in their own vaccines. The FDA doesn't know. It is just by luck that some scientists saw the pig virus and notified us. Doctors just do what the FDA says to do. I feel like a big herd of sheep all following huge pharmaceutical companies off the cliff.
When has my child's pediatrician gone over the brand option for my child's vaccines? I asked Nate's pediatrician what brand he was selling and he had to go get the insert to find out. When have they sat down with me and really told me what was in those vaccines? Are we really making informed choices? To be informed, I need to do the research myself. At least I can have the peace of mind that I did the best that I could. I did enough research to feel comfortable with my decision to inject my children with these vaccines.
And it isn't just the question of whether to vaccinate or not. With every vaccine that is on the schedule, I need to ask myself: what is this vaccine? What is in it (that is noted!)? Just like reading the label on my food. If I don't know what it is, I need to find out or I don't eat it! What are the differences in the brands available to me? Not all brands have the same ingredients in them. What is the virus? Is it really that bad that my child needs a vaccine? Remember that vaccines are making our doctors and those big drug companies a lot of money.
From the National Vaccine Information Center:
“Today, even though almost all US infants receive vaccines for rotavirus, and despite efforts to improve the management of childhood rotavirus-associated diarrhea, hospitalizations of children in the U.S. with the disease have not significantly declined in the past two decades.”
Sources:
http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/03/22/rotavirus.vaccine/index.html?hpt=T2
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2010/04/17/major-vaccine-suspended-due-to-contamination-with-pig-virus.aspx
The National Institutes of Health (NIH) finished the Conference on Vaginal Birth After Cesarean (VBAC) March 8th-10th, 2010, evaluating issues surrounding VBAC and seeking to quantify why VBAC rates have plummeted in the U.S. over the last decade.
http://consensus.nih.gov/2010/vbacstatement.htm
http://www.ican-online.org/
Clips that I picked from the International Cesarean Awareness Network Synopsis of the conference:
“The final statement from the NIH concludes that a VBAC is a reasonable option for most women. Over 75% of women who attempt VBAC will be successful.” says Desirre Andrews, ICAN President. “Currently less than 10% of women who have had previous cesareans deliver vaginally in subsequent pregnancies, leading to significant and preventable illness and death.”
It was acknowledged, however, by many expert presenters that forcing a pregnant woman to undergo an unwanted surgery is medically indefensible, unethical and immoral. ACOG’s own statement on ethics states that a woman should neither be coerced nor punished for not following a recommendation.
http://consensus.nih.gov/2010/vbacstatement.htm
http://www.ican-online.org/
Clips that I picked from the International Cesarean Awareness Network Synopsis of the conference:
“The final statement from the NIH concludes that a VBAC is a reasonable option for most women. Over 75% of women who attempt VBAC will be successful.” says Desirre Andrews, ICAN President. “Currently less than 10% of women who have had previous cesareans deliver vaginally in subsequent pregnancies, leading to significant and preventable illness and death.”
“NIH took the American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and anesthesiologists to task, calling on them to change the language in their official recommendations on VBAC. ICAN has understood for years that this language plays a large role in the lack of access to VBAC in the U.S.” continues Ms. Andrews. “We hope ACOG rises to the challenge and also hope they will finally be willing to work with ICAN and other advocacy organizations to improve maternal and fetal safety.”
A survey conducted by ICAN in 2009 showed approximately 45% of hospitals in the United States formally ban VBACs either explicitly or through unsupportive policies and procedures. Many women are never counseled that they are good candidates for VBAC and thus undergo more risky and expensive repeat cesareans. The NIH report acknowledges that this represents a serious breach of medical ethics. ICAN supports every woman’s right to select the care provider, birth setting and birth plan of her choice.
Lacking in the NIH statement is support for a woman’s right to refuse a cesarean section as this was felt to be beyond the scope of the current mandate.It was acknowledged, however, by many expert presenters that forcing a pregnant woman to undergo an unwanted surgery is medically indefensible, unethical and immoral. ACOG’s own statement on ethics states that a woman should neither be coerced nor punished for not following a recommendation.
To download the full CDC report, go to http://www.cdc. gov/nchs/ data/nvsr/ nvsr58/nvsr58_ 11.pdf.
From the Abstract of the Center for Disease Control's Report:
Objectives—This report examines trends and characteristics of
out-of-hospital and home births in the United States.
Methods—Descriptive tabulations of data are presented and interpreted.
Results—In 2006, there were 38,568 out-of-hospital births in the
United States, including 24,970 home births and 10,781 births occurring
in a freestanding birthing center. After a gradual decline from 1990 to
2004, the percentage of out-of-hospital births increased by 3% from
0.87% in 2004 to 0.90% in 2005 and 2006. A similar pattern was found
for home births. After a gradual decline from 1990 to 2004, the
percentage of home births increased by 5% to 0.59% in 2005 and
remained steady in 2006. Compared with the U.S. average, home birth
rates were higher for non-Hispanic white women, married women,
women aged 25 and over, and women with several previous children.
Home births were less likely than hospital births to be preterm, low
birthweight, or multiple deliveries. The percentage of home births was
74% higher in rural counties of less than 100,000 population than in
counties with a population size of 100,000 or more. The percentage
of home births also varied widely by state; in Vermont and Montana
more than 2% of births in 2005–2006 were home births, compared with
less than 0.2% in Louisiana and Nebraska. About 61% of home births
were delivered by midwives. Among midwife-delivered home births,
one-fourth (27%) were delivered by certified nurse midwives, and
nearly three-fourths (73%) were delivered by other midwives.
Discussion—Women may choose home birth for a variety of
reasons, including a desire for a low-intervention birth in a familiar
environment surrounded by family and friends and cultural or religious
concerns. Lack of transportation in rural areas and cost factors may
also play a role.
In the last several decades, there have been considerable
changes in childbearing patterns in the United States. Historically, the
percentage of out-of-hospital births declined from 44% in 1940 to 1%
in 1969, and has remained about 1% for several decades (1–3).
Out-of-hospital births include those born in a residence (i.e., home
births), in a freestanding birthing center (i.e., one that is not part of a
hospital), clinic or doctor’s office, or other location. Some out-of
hospital births are intentional, whereas others are unintentional due to
an emergency situation (i.e., precipitous labor or labor complications,
could not get to the hospital in time). This report examines trends and
characteristics of home and other out-of-hospital births in the United
States from 1990 to 2006.
Methods
Data shown in this report are based on birth certificates for the
approximately 4.3 million live births registered in the United States in
2006, and equivalent data from previous years. Descriptive tabula
tions are presented and analyzed. Records where place of birth was
not stated were excluded before percentages were computed. This
report includes data on items that are collected on both the 1989
Revision of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth (unrevised) and
the 2003 Revision of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth
(revised); see ‘‘Technical Notes.’’ Data on place of delivery were
comparable between the two revisions, although the 2003 revision
added a new data item on whether a home birth was planned or
unplanned. Information from the new item is presented for the 19
states that had adopted the revised birth certificate by January 1,
From the Abstract of the Center for Disease Control's Report:
Objectives—This report examines trends and characteristics of
out-of-hospital and home births in the United States.
Methods—Descriptive tabulations of data are presented and interpreted.
Results—In 2006, there were 38,568 out-of-hospital births in the
United States, including 24,970 home births and 10,781 births occurring
in a freestanding birthing center. After a gradual decline from 1990 to
2004, the percentage of out-of-hospital births increased by 3% from
0.87% in 2004 to 0.90% in 2005 and 2006. A similar pattern was found
for home births. After a gradual decline from 1990 to 2004, the
percentage of home births increased by 5% to 0.59% in 2005 and
remained steady in 2006. Compared with the U.S. average, home birth
rates were higher for non-Hispanic white women, married women,
women aged 25 and over, and women with several previous children.
Home births were less likely than hospital births to be preterm, low
birthweight, or multiple deliveries. The percentage of home births was
74% higher in rural counties of less than 100,000 population than in
counties with a population size of 100,000 or more. The percentage
of home births also varied widely by state; in Vermont and Montana
more than 2% of births in 2005–2006 were home births, compared with
less than 0.2% in Louisiana and Nebraska. About 61% of home births
were delivered by midwives. Among midwife-delivered home births,
one-fourth (27%) were delivered by certified nurse midwives, and
nearly three-fourths (73%) were delivered by other midwives.
Discussion—Women may choose home birth for a variety of
reasons, including a desire for a low-intervention birth in a familiar
environment surrounded by family and friends and cultural or religious
concerns. Lack of transportation in rural areas and cost factors may
also play a role.
In the last several decades, there have been considerable
changes in childbearing patterns in the United States. Historically, the
percentage of out-of-hospital births declined from 44% in 1940 to 1%
in 1969, and has remained about 1% for several decades (1–3).
Out-of-hospital births include those born in a residence (i.e., home
births), in a freestanding birthing center (i.e., one that is not part of a
hospital), clinic or doctor’s office, or other location. Some out-of
hospital births are intentional, whereas others are unintentional due to
an emergency situation (i.e., precipitous labor or labor complications,
could not get to the hospital in time). This report examines trends and
characteristics of home and other out-of-hospital births in the United
States from 1990 to 2006.
Methods
Data shown in this report are based on birth certificates for the
approximately 4.3 million live births registered in the United States in
2006, and equivalent data from previous years. Descriptive tabula
tions are presented and analyzed. Records where place of birth was
not stated were excluded before percentages were computed. This
report includes data on items that are collected on both the 1989
Revision of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth (unrevised) and
the 2003 Revision of the U.S. Standard Certificate of Live Birth
(revised); see ‘‘Technical Notes.’’ Data on place of delivery were
comparable between the two revisions, although the 2003 revision
added a new data item on whether a home birth was planned or
unplanned. Information from the new item is presented for the 19
states that had adopted the revised birth certificate by January 1,
Here's a great article in the NYTimes today about vaginal birth after cesarean at a hospital in Arizona.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/health/07birth.html
How do they have a 13.5% cesarean rate when the rest of the country has a 32% likelihood of a cesarean?
And how is it that 32% of women who have had prior cesareans have successful vaginal births at this hospital, where it is less than 10% in the rest of the country.
Here are some answer to these question from the article:
- Midwives catch (deliver) all normal, low risk babies. The doctors are only there for high-risk interventions. In contrast, most other hospitals in the US, doctors deliver all births.
- Doctors are not given bonuses for cesareans, where in most hospitals this is the case.
- The hospital and doctors are federally insured against malpractice, in contrast to other hospitals, where private insurers have threatened to raise premiums or withdraw coverage if vaginal birth after Caesarean is allowed.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/07/health/07birth.html
How do they have a 13.5% cesarean rate when the rest of the country has a 32% likelihood of a cesarean?
And how is it that 32% of women who have had prior cesareans have successful vaginal births at this hospital, where it is less than 10% in the rest of the country.
Here are some answer to these question from the article:
- Midwives catch (deliver) all normal, low risk babies. The doctors are only there for high-risk interventions. In contrast, most other hospitals in the US, doctors deliver all births.
- Doctors are not given bonuses for cesareans, where in most hospitals this is the case.
- The hospital and doctors are federally insured against malpractice, in contrast to other hospitals, where private insurers have threatened to raise premiums or withdraw coverage if vaginal birth after Caesarean is allowed.
I used a Certified Profession Midwife (CPM) and had a glorious life-changing Vaginal Birth after Cesarean at home. Mississippi Senators are trying to make them illegal in their state. If you live in Mississippi call your Senators today and tell them that you want CPMs to remain legal.
| | Issued: February 24, 2010 Do You (or Does Anyone You Know) Live in MISSISSIPPI?
|
A documentary by childbirth anthropologist Vicki Elson. Please visit www.birth-media.com for more info, ordering, etc. ...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Gd7pqeESE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V9Gd7pqeESE
Terry Gross interviews investigative author who wrote a book on the history of childbirth (15 minutes).
'Get Me Out': Making Babies Through The Ages : NPR
Randi Hutter Epstein's book Get Me Out: A History of Childbirth From the Garden of Eden to the Sperm Bank is full of delightful — and sometimes disturbing — anecdotes like this one. The author explores the medical and cultural history of pregnancy and childbirth, from folk remedies and old wives' tales to ultrasound images and fertility drugs.
'Get Me Out': Making Babies Through The Ages : NPR
Randi Hutter Epstein's book Get Me Out: A History of Childbirth From the Garden of Eden to the Sperm Bank is full of delightful — and sometimes disturbing — anecdotes like this one. The author explores the medical and cultural history of pregnancy and childbirth, from folk remedies and old wives' tales to ultrasound images and fertility drugs.
KQED Radio: Pregnancy-Related Deaths on the Rise?
Points to call out:
This was a breaking story that uncovers a study held at the state level which is not being released. The word cover-up was mentioned.
Maternal death rates have tripled in California over the last 10 years study finds.
Cesareans are one of the big reasons for this increase.
OBs not telling patients about the real risk of cesareans. For example, repeat cesareans are not as safe as vaginal birth but vaginal births after cesareans are being banned around the country.
CPMC seems to want to only increase technology to avoid hemorrhages, prevention of blood clots from prolong bed rest, cardiovascular problems but Elliot Main, chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the California Pacific Medical Center, doesn't mention pulling back on the cesareans performed or other interventions.
Death certificates now have a check box since 2003 to indicate if the deceaced was pregnant within a year or her death.
Better reporting may have contributed to a 30% increase that just wasn't reported before but that still leaves the other 70%.
African women across all economic levels are 4% more likely to die during childbirth. Why? No one knows.
Obesity is a new and added risk to pregnancy and labor.
Maternal Death Rate in California is the same as US.
CDC cautious to release numbers. Yeah! because it's a HUGE public health issue that no one is dealing with.
when you pass 15% cesarean rate things start going south.
Aaron Caughey, associate professor at UCSF and director of the Center for Clinical and Policy Perinatal Research within the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology says that we need to improve care of women in labor. YEAH!!!
Young healthy women are dying, people around the death call it a death before its time, the only reason why these women are dying is because they had a cesarean.
There's a lot of people who get hurt that don't die...that's me.
Dr. Aaron Caughey says that women pregnant now should spend early labor at home! stay healthy during pregnancy, a lot about taking care yourself
Points to call out:
This was a breaking story that uncovers a study held at the state level which is not being released. The word cover-up was mentioned.
Maternal death rates have tripled in California over the last 10 years study finds.
Cesareans are one of the big reasons for this increase.
OBs not telling patients about the real risk of cesareans. For example, repeat cesareans are not as safe as vaginal birth but vaginal births after cesareans are being banned around the country.
CPMC seems to want to only increase technology to avoid hemorrhages, prevention of blood clots from prolong bed rest, cardiovascular problems but Elliot Main, chief of Obstetrics and Gynecology at the California Pacific Medical Center, doesn't mention pulling back on the cesareans performed or other interventions.
Death certificates now have a check box since 2003 to indicate if the deceaced was pregnant within a year or her death.
Better reporting may have contributed to a 30% increase that just wasn't reported before but that still leaves the other 70%.
African women across all economic levels are 4% more likely to die during childbirth. Why? No one knows.
Obesity is a new and added risk to pregnancy and labor.
Maternal Death Rate in California is the same as US.
CDC cautious to release numbers. Yeah! because it's a HUGE public health issue that no one is dealing with.
when you pass 15% cesarean rate things start going south.
Aaron Caughey, associate professor at UCSF and director of the Center for Clinical and Policy Perinatal Research within the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology says that we need to improve care of women in labor. YEAH!!!
Young healthy women are dying, people around the death call it a death before its time, the only reason why these women are dying is because they had a cesarean.
There's a lot of people who get hurt that don't die...that's me.
Dr. Aaron Caughey says that women pregnant now should spend early labor at home! stay healthy during pregnancy, a lot about taking care yourself
The San Francisco Chronicle just reported on a new study that once again says that we are not keeping our women and children safe in hospitals. The study says that the last time they saw a spike this high was in the 1930s. Are all those machines, drugs, and cesareans really making us safer? Why is it safer to give birth in Kuwait or Bosnia than in California?
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/03/MNER1BRFT4.DTL&tsp=1
Take Action, educated yourself, ask questions, and demand better care for our pregnant mamas and their babies.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/03/MNER1BRFT4.DTL&tsp=1
Take Action, educated yourself, ask questions, and demand better care for our pregnant mamas and their babies.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/health/04infant.html?_r=2&hpw
----------------
Another factor in the United States, she said, is the increasing use of Caesarean sections and labor-inducing drugs to deliver babies early. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has guidelines stating that babies should not be delivered before 39 weeks without a medical reason, but doctors may be declaring a medical need more quickly than they did in the past.
----------------
----------------
Another factor in the United States, she said, is the increasing use of Caesarean sections and labor-inducing drugs to deliver babies early. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has guidelines stating that babies should not be delivered before 39 weeks without a medical reason, but doctors may be declaring a medical need more quickly than they did in the past.
----------------
High rates of premature birth are the main reason the United States has higher infant mortality than do many other rich countries, government researchers reported Tuesday in their first detailed analysis of a longstanding problem.
In Sweden, for instance, 6.3 percent of births were premature, compared with 12.4 percent in the United States in 2005, the latest year for which international rankings are available. Infant mortality also differed markedly: for every 1,000 births in the United States, 6.9 infants died before they turned 1, compared with 2.4 in Sweden. Twenty-nine other countries also had lower rates.
If the United States could match Sweden’s prematurity rate, the new report said, “nearly 8,000 infant deaths would be averted each year, and the U.S. infant mortality rate would be one-third lower.”
The first author of the report, Marian F. MacDorman, a statistician at the National Center for Health Statistics, said in an interview that the strong role prematurity played came as a surprise to her.
Dr. Alan R. Fleischman, medical director for the March of Dimes, said the new report was “an indictment of the U.S. health care system” and the poor job it had done in taking care of women and children. The report, Dr. Fleischman added, “puts together two very important issues, both of which we knew about but hadn’t linked tightly.”
Infant mortality is widely used as a way to gauge the health of a nation, and the relatively high rates in the United States have long dismayed health officials. Most European countries — as well as Australia, Canada, Hong Kong, Israel, Japan, New Zealand and Singapore — have lower rates of infant death than the United States.
Premature infants in the United States are more likely to survive than those elsewhere. Yet they are still more likely to die than full-term babies, and the sheer numbers born prematurely in the United States — more than 540,000 per year — drive up infant mortality.
The high levels of prematurity in the United States have various causes.
Dr. Fleischman said the smallest, earliest and most fragile babies were often born to poor and minority women who lacked health care and social support. The highest rates of infant mortality occur in non-Hispanic black, American Indian, Alaska Native and Puerto Rican women. But other minorities have some of the lowest infant mortality rates in the United States: Asian and Pacific Islanders, Central and South Americans, Mexicans and Cubans.
When it comes to prematurity, infertility treatments — drugs that stimulate ovulation and procedures that implant more than one embryo in the uterus — also play a role by raising the odds of twins or higher multiples, which have an increased risk of being born too soon.
Professional groups for fertility doctors recommend limiting the number of embryos transferred to avoid multiple births, but ultimately doctors and patients make their own decisions. Dr. MacDorman said that because most insurance in the United States did not cover infertility treatments, some patients chose to transfer multiple eggs in hopes that doing so would increase the odds of pregnancy and reduce expensive procedures.
“In Europe, they may have been more successful in limiting the number of embryos transferred,” Dr. MacDorman said, “because there is more national health insurance and people don’t have to pay out of pocket.”
Another factor in the United States, she said, is the increasing use of Caesarean sections and labor-inducing drugs to deliver babies early. The American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists has guidelines stating that babies should not be delivered before 39 weeks without a medical reason, but doctors may be declaring a medical need more quickly than they did in the past.
“I don’t think there are doctors doing preterm Caesarean sections or inductions without some indications,” Dr. MacDorman said, “but there sort of has been this shift in the culture. Fifteen or 20 years ago, if a woman had high blood pressure or diabetes, she would be put in the hospital, and they would try to wait it out. It was called expectant management.
“Now I think there’s more of a tendency to take the baby out early if there’s any question at all.”
These births — called “late preterm,” which occur after 34 to 37 weeks of pregnancy, instead of the normal 38 to 42 weeks — are the fastest-growing subgroup of premature births. A late preterm baby’s risk of dying is about three times that of a full-term infant. But late preterm babies are still far more likely to survive than very premature ones, and the very early babies account for much of the death rate, Dr. Fleischman said.
Taking care of women’s illnesses and problems like drinking, drug use and smoking before and during pregnancy can help prevent prematurity, he said, adding that a state program in Kentucky to provide home visits by nurses to poor women during pregnancy had decreased preterm births.
Dr. MacDorman said prematurity was not the only factor behind infant mortality in the United States. She said full-term babies in this country also had higher death rates than those in Europe from sudden infant death syndrome, accidents, assaults and homicides.
Wow! I sobbed through this whole video. All that I can say is I feel the exact same way. Thanks Lydia for sharing this on your blog.
My Journey to a VBAC from Lindsey Meehleis on Vimeo.
Well, I am writing a book. Yes, I can actually see the light at the end of the tunnel. I am going to pull this off while being a stay-at-home mom with a 3-month old and a 3-year old. I don't even have a babysitter. Although I am looking if you know anyone. It's me and boys all day every day. I love it! I picked the hardest time of my life to accomplish a goal that I've had since I was 10-years old. I love food and cooking, but it turns out that my book is about neither. It's about birth. It's about my polar opposite experiences giving birth to two children. One was a planned hospital natural birth (aka. no drugs) that went wrong and ended in a lot of drugs and the icing on the cake, a cesarean. And, the other one was a planned home birth that changed my life forever.
All this to say that I am not doing a lot of creative cooking right now because I am sooooo busy with the kids and my book at night. I did make a pumpkin pie last night which turned out great. I'll post that soon.
All this to say that I am not doing a lot of creative cooking right now because I am sooooo busy with the kids and my book at night. I did make a pumpkin pie last night which turned out great. I'll post that soon.
In Birth by the Numbers, Eugene R. Declercq, PhD, Professor of Maternal and Child Health, Boston University School of Public Health, presents the sobering statistics of birth in the United States today.
I think that you have to wait for it to download, but it is sure worth the wait. I love the stats on how mothers requesting cesarean sections aren't the reason why cesarean rates have sky rocketed. In reality, that number is so so small. Yeah! Mothers aren't blame.
I think that you have to wait for it to download, but it is sure worth the wait. I love the stats on how mothers requesting cesarean sections aren't the reason why cesarean rates have sky rocketed. In reality, that number is so so small. Yeah! Mothers aren't blame.
Thanks for bring this to my attention Lydia. I cried watching these pictures. They reminded me so much of my recent home birth.
http://www.emilyweaverbrownphotography.com/darkroom/share/?n=peterson_birth#1jpg
http://www.emilyweaverbrownphotography.com/darkroom/share/?n=peterson_birth#1jpg
I love my niece, Emily, so much. She was the first baby in my life. I spoke French to her until she was three, something I didn't do with my own son. She turned seven this month and I wanted to share my thoughts on life with her. So, I wrote her this little story and slipped it into her birthday card. Would anyone like to share a story that they have written for their children about life?
---------
There lived a little girl named Penelope. She was seven years old. Although she was only in first grade, everyone always asked her, "What do you want to be when you grow-up?" She never knew what to say because she didn't know who she was yet. She wished for the future and to be big so that she would finally be able to answer the question.
---------
There lived a little girl named Penelope. She was seven years old. Although she was only in first grade, everyone always asked her, "What do you want to be when you grow-up?" She never knew what to say because she didn't know who she was yet. She wished for the future and to be big so that she would finally be able to answer the question.
Many years later when she was married, had a house, and a dog, she realized that she still didn't know who she was nor what she wanted to be when she grew-up. Yet she was grown-up and had a job. Where were the answers?
Our infant mortality ranking is 42nd on the world stage which means 41 countries have better statistics. This places us right in the middle of the following countries: Guam, Cuba, Croatia and Belarus, with over double the infant deaths compared to the top 10 countries of the world. (CIA World Factbook).
Here is a short video on reducing infant mortality and improving the health of babies in the United States. One of the producers is Shelley Campbell from San Rafael: http://www.reducinginfantmortality.com/. Learn more about the film here.
Here is a short video on reducing infant mortality and improving the health of babies in the United States. One of the producers is Shelley Campbell from San Rafael: http://www.reducinginfantmortality.com/. Learn more about the film here.
I don't look happy in our vacation video. I felt happy but the pictures show a stone faced and serious mom. My lips are so tightly closed that I can see lines where they bunch together. Zack took a video of Mikey eating spaghetti because it was hilarious. Mikey was naked (think hot Mexico) and working so hard to stuff one strand of spaghetti into his month. He was covered in red sauce. When the camera shows me, my eyes are so wide that it looks like I don't have eyelids. I am so focused on feeding Mikey that I am missing the comedy of the whole scene. But I swear, I wasn't. I was happy and giddy the whole time. I guess it was on the inside because my face showed a totally different story.
[Previously published for sfgate.com/moms]
I've decided to start forcing a smile. Not like a fake smile but more of a relaxed face smile. I've heard laughing is therapeutic and in Bali they meditate with a smile. So I've decided to practice relaxing my face, parting my lips slightly, and curling up the ends of my mouth as often as I think about it.
Now that I am aware of my tight face syndrome, I can feel it. I felt it driving towards the Laurel Village parking lot, and then I loosened it and found a parking spot right away. I felt my lips tighten and pucker while picking poultry at the grocery store. I relaxed and felt happier instantly. I smile when I do the dishes. I smile when I type on the computer. I smile when I play with Mikey.
Being a mom is sometimes so intense that I have to stay focused and on task, but now I am doing it with a smile.
[Previously published for sfgate.com/moms]
I've decided to start forcing a smile. Not like a fake smile but more of a relaxed face smile. I've heard laughing is therapeutic and in Bali they meditate with a smile. So I've decided to practice relaxing my face, parting my lips slightly, and curling up the ends of my mouth as often as I think about it.
Now that I am aware of my tight face syndrome, I can feel it. I felt it driving towards the Laurel Village parking lot, and then I loosened it and found a parking spot right away. I felt my lips tighten and pucker while picking poultry at the grocery store. I relaxed and felt happier instantly. I smile when I do the dishes. I smile when I type on the computer. I smile when I play with Mikey.
Being a mom is sometimes so intense that I have to stay focused and on task, but now I am doing it with a smile.