# Vitamin K Injection



## Bex1p

Me and my now ex partner had decided not to give this unless it was a traumatic birth as we weighed up the pros and cons and I was just wondering if anyone has any views on it?

Now we have split I havent got the support and fear is creeping in that I may make the wrong decision.


----------



## wannabubba#4

Are you planning on breast feeding hun??

Breast fed babies are more prone to Vit K deficiancy seemingly - maybe worth thinking about. 

Also are you planning not giving vit K at all, or just going with oral supplements instead?

xxx


----------



## Bex1p

I was planning on not giving it at all and undertaking a vitamin k enriched diet myself as I am breastfeedling.

I'm also not keen on the immunisations and we werent going to go ahead with them either.

I feel we were born with an immune system for a reason so why go sticking needles in our children full of things that would be classed as toxic waste if spilled!

It's all very daunting.


----------



## Rmar

If you were to go with vit k administration, ask for it to be administered orally. Keep an open mind and ask lots of questions if it is ever recommended to you.

I, personally, wouldn't give vit k unless there was a specific reason to. Like you said, a traumatic birth or other things that increase the risk at the same level as that.


----------



## Dolly.

We were considering the oral vitamin k but it is not as effective as the injection so have decided to go with the injection, even though I hate the idea of needles stuck in my baby. For me personally I wouldn't like to take the risk of them not having it.


----------



## JenStar1976

We had the injection too. As want2beamummy says, just wouldn't want to take the risk. Bex1p: what did you do with your other children? x


----------



## Bex1p

JenStar1976 said:


> We had the injection too. As want2beamummy says, just wouldn't want to take the risk. Bex1p: what did you do with your other children? x

I blindly gave them it safely assuming it was the norm and came at no risk, but over the years ive come to question alot and have discovered alot about many things. So many people just sit back and accept what they are told as gospel, as I once did.

Unless my baby is at risk I think I will decline the injection and consider the oral administration......i'd never forgive myself if something did go wrong but I also dont want to unnecessarily force who knows what into his bloodstream.


----------



## aob1013

Leni will have all immunisations/vaccinations, they are there for a reason.


----------



## Bex1p

But so are immune systems :shrug:


----------



## Bex1p

An informing article for anyone interested

https://www.unhinderedliving.com/immunizations.html

:flower:


----------



## aob1013

Bex1p said:


> But so are immune systems :shrug:

My opinion is only relevant to my situation, i believe vaccinations/immunisations are there for a reason, which is why Leni will have all of them.


----------



## Luzelle

I have thought about immunisations and injections, it feels horrible to let them do it to my tiny baby. And it is foreign to his body etc, studies of autism etc etc.
BUT: In South Africa, Polio has been eradicated for many years. Now, suddenly children in one province started getting it. It just came from out of nowhere, seemingly. Many were affected very badly. Same thing happened with some other preventable disease, can't remember which one, as well. The children got it because they had no immunity - their parents thought it unneccesary since the disease was supposed to have been eradicated.
What happens to a small child when it gets polio/measles etc when it has no immunity, or low immunity? THat is why so many children died in infancy a century ago.
The vitamin K -as I said, I don't like them sticking needles in my baby. But it is for his own best sake.
It is not easy making decisions about our children! But rather we think about it and reason it out than just jumping on the mindless bandwagon and just joining 'everybody else'. I think it will make us better parents.


----------



## Bex1p

"But rather we think about it and reason it out than just jumping on the mindless bandwagon and just joining 'everybody else'. I think it will make us better parents."


Definately! There are so many studies out there to read it would be silly of us not to make an informed decision........although I have read a hell of alot and I still won't be 100% satisfied with my decision! I guess it's just one of those things.


----------



## aob1013

Luzelle said:


> It is not easy making decisions about our children! But rather we think about it and reason it out than just jumping on the mindless bandwagon and just joining 'everybody else'. I think it will make us better parents.

I agree :thumbup:

I'm so glad i have done a ton of research both from professionals and on the internet to make an informed decision about immunising/vaccinated my son - we are so pleased with our decision.

Everyone definately needs to educate themselves on the pro's/con's of everything, will definately make us better parents :D


----------



## Charlii Lou

aob1013 said:


> Leni will have all immunisations/vaccinations, they are there for a reason.

Same here i couldnt forgive myself if i didnt let my little man have them & something happened to him:flower:


----------



## milkmachine

Bex1p said:


> An informing article for anyone interested
> 
> https://www.unhinderedliving.com/immunizations.html
> 
> :flower:

:thumbup:


----------



## Pops

Missy will be having the injection, in fact, it is in our fridge as I type!

We have considered all options for every aspect of this pregnancy, birth and afterwards and this was one area where we could not see any possible reason not to have this as there was not enough evidence against it to make us be prepared to take the risks involved in her not having it.

She will also be having all of her immunisations as we go along too for the same reasons.

xxx


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

Bex1p said:


> But so are immune systems :shrug:

A babies immune system isn't fully developed until 6 montsh fo age
xx


----------



## Bex1p

Aidan's Mummy said:


> Bex1p said:
> 
> 
> But so are immune systems :shrug:
> 
> A babies immune system isn't fully developed until 6 montsh fo age
> xxClick to expand...

Precisely....as it develops at it's own natural pace and that's were I think some of the problems come in I.E forcing it to develop quicker against only certain illnesses whilst depressing what has been developed so far.

It's a trade off.

An article explains it alot better than me! haha I'll try find it.


----------



## Bex1p

https://www.mercola.com/article/vaccines/immune_suppression.htm


----------



## lozzy21

My baby will be having the vit k oraly.

Yes we have immune systems but they cannot fight off everything, millions of people have died from things like TB and meningitus when they are easily stopped. I could never forgive myself if i decided not to vaccinate and my child were to loose there sight or worse to something that could have been prevented.


----------



## Dolly.

I think immunisations are important, I would hate myself if my little man got a disease I could have prevented him getting. You just don't know what's out there, I believe developing medicine is generally for our benefits, if professionals thought they were pointless then surely they would not be advised?


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I have to disgree with the article. An immune system can only become immune to something if theyy have had a form of the virus or infection. The things are children are immunized against are nasty diseases that can have VERY bad effects. Loss of limbs, eye sight etc Or even death . The immune system will not naturally protect children agaisnt certain diseases. You only have to look at history and child deaths to see the proof . Children used to die from these as their young immune systems couldn't fight the disease. Even some adults struggled to fight it. Therefore giving our children a weakend form in a vaccination elimates that risk. I have read and read and read. And the pros outwiegh the cons by far. My son has has all his immunisations and will continue to do so.

If people continue to discard what they are being told by health proffessionals we will have a epeidemic on our hands and lives will be lost or seriously affected by something an injection could have stopped

As a trainee childrens nurse. I know we are doing it in the childrens best interest and I back it 100%
xx


----------



## aob1013

It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:


----------



## Celesse

I wanted vit k via injection but in Newcastle they don't give it by injection apart from to premmie and poorly babies.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I can assure you health proffesionals have no hidden agenda. We go into our job to save lives.
xx


----------



## Sam292

Here is the wikipedia definition of "Herd immunisation"

Herd immunity (or community immunity) describes a type of immunity that occurs when the vaccination of a portion of the population (or herd) provides protection to unprotected individuals.[1] Herd immunity theory proposes that, in diseases passed from person to person, it is more difficult to maintain a chain of infection when large numbers of a population are immune. The higher the proportion of individuals who are immune, the lower the likelihood that a susceptible person will come into contact with an infectious individual. Vaccination acts as a sort of firebreak or firewall in the spread of the disease, slowing or preventing further transmission of the disease to others.[3] Unvaccinated individuals are indirectly protected by vaccinated individuals, as the latter will not contract and transmit the disease between infected and susceptible individuals.[2] Hence, a public health policy of herd immunity may be used to reduce spread of an illness and provide a level of protection to a vulnerable, unvaccinated subgroup. Since only a small fraction of the population (or herd) can be left unvaccinated for this method to be effective, it is considered best left for those who cannot safely receive vaccines because of a medical condition such as an immune disorder or for organ transplant recipients.

Basically, (and this is only my take on things) if you don't get your child immunised, it is unlikely that they will catch a life threatening disease because the majority of surrounding people do vaccinate. But the more people that choose not to vaccinate, the less protection there will be. Is it really fair to be benifiting from the immunity of others because you are not willing to vaccinate your own child? As I said, that's just my opinion but it seems unfair on those who are not able to vaccinate their children for medical reasons.


----------



## Bex1p

No it wouldnt be fair but it also wouldnt be fair to have to pump your 8 week old baby full of mercury because everyone else has.

Why has it even got mercury in it!?


----------



## aob1013

I have no problem 'pumping my baby full of mercury' oh and anti freeze AND aborted fetus's :lol: ... because medical professionals advise it.

I will never ever never ever ever never take any notice of internet links, i ONLY go by what actual medical professionals tell me to do.

As Heather said, medical professionals go into their jobs to save lives, not mess them up :wacko:

Thankfully, people choosing not to immunise are in the minority, and i hope it stays that way.


----------



## JenStar1976

Here's a quote from the attached NHS link:

"A further study, published recently in the medical journal 'The Lancet', found that ethylmercury is very rapidly eliminated from babies' bodies and did not accumulate. The paper found that the level of mercury in blood was no higher in children after vaccination than at birth. Claims of neurological damage have been based on toxicity from methyl mercury, not present in thiomersal. "

https://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/Library/News/Mercury_Press_Release_16-01-03


----------



## Bex1p

JenStar1976 said:


> Here's a quote from the attached NHS link:
> 
> "A further study, published recently in the medical journal 'The Lancet', found that ethylmercury is very rapidly eliminated from babies' bodies and did not accumulate. The paper found that the level of mercury in blood was no higher in children after vaccination than at birth. Claims of neurological damage have been based on toxicity from methyl mercury, not present in thiomersal. "
> 
> https://www.immunisation.nhs.uk/Library/News/Mercury_Press_Release_16-01-03

Thanks for the link! Just thinking about it all gives me braxton hicks!


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

The levels of substances in the immunisations cannot harm babies. If found to do so they will be reudced

You're theroy in herd immunation is slightly floored. The more people that 'use' this method the closer we are to having a serious out break. And the less chance you're children will be immune

I would rather 'pump' my 8 week old full of murcury. Rather than put their qaulity of life or actual life at risk by not vaccinating them
xx


----------



## lozzy21

Aidan's Mummy said:


> The levels of substances in the immunisations cannot harm babies. If found to do so they will be rudced
> 
> Ure theroy in herd immunation is slightly floored. The more peopel that use this 'use' this method the closer we are to having a serious out break. And the less chance yoru children will be immune
> 
> I would rather 'pump' my 8 week old full of murcury. Rather than put their qaulity of life or actual life at risk by not vaccinating them
> xx

I agree completly. Some of the ingrediants may not be nice things but they are less threatening that the desises they are protecting against.

Just look at the symptoms and side effects of the illness's you are refusing to vaccinate against, surely the benifits outweight the risks.


----------



## winegums

hehe i knew this would turn into a vaccination debate! :p

p.s if anyone is thinking of giving vit k orally i really wouldnt bother. they have done studies showing that it is not absorbed properly from the gut and it isnt very effective etc.

babys bleeding to death is a pretty big risk to take for me personally when it can be prevented by a vitamin. it's not even got aborted babies or anti freeze or acid or heavy metals or ANY of that stuff that people seem to have such a problem with yet they still want to make a fuss! it just baffles me


----------



## andbabymakes3

I refused the Vit K because I didn't feel it necessary in my situation, however Holly has had her 'normal' immunisations and will continue to do so. 

All of the diseases we immunise against are nasty. Not something that will make your LO a little bit ill - really nasty diseases. I refused the swine flu jab as I didn't feel enough research had been done, however the rest of them have been around for donkeys years.

I would never forgive myself if I refused them and she contracted one of the diseases. It's my job as her mummy to make decisions as I see fit and in good faith. 

However - I would never criticise somebody who didn't immunise their child. It is a totally personal decision and one which should not be swayed by the opinions of others.


----------



## marley2580

We had the oral (3 doses) as both mine were em-CS, I would have been happy not giving them it if their births had been straightforward. When you look at the actual risks the vit k is meant to reduce, you find for most babies it's a tiny risk. If you are happy with not giving it then don't, it doesn't mean your baby will then bleed to death. 

I don't think this is the right forum for the immunisations debate.


----------



## Bex1p

No your right, maybe should be in natural parenting which I have just seen.
Some good threads in there which i'll read.

Should I close this off or move it or do admin do that?


----------



## hopeandpray

that article didn't make alot of sense to me. a lot of the countries where AIDS is a big problem have much much lower vaccination rates than we have over here. it completely oversimplifies everything. vaccines do NOT supress your immune system. i have here sitting beside me a man that has been studying and practising medicine for over 3 decades and he says it isn't true


----------



## hekate

so many of you say that you would never forgive yourself if you did not vaccinate and your baby caught a illness....

but that goes for both arguments! I would never forgive myself if I caused an illness that could have been prevented by allowing it to be vaccinated!
apart from the autism debate and the mercury in the vaccine....vaccines have proven links with increased rates of asthma and diabetes....these are major and livelong illnesses compared to some very minor childhood illnesses we vaccinate against.....

each make their on decision, but please don't believe that the "other side" is not also acting the the best interest of their child!


----------



## aimee_1691

sorry to say but its people who refuse to immunise their children that cause academics...and in general i would rather my child suffer from minor side affects that become seriously ill with something that could have been prevented


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

The austim threat is a load of rubbish sorry it is. Having studied child development in depth I can assure you a child is born with austim
xx


----------



## winegums

this may sound cruel but i'd rather give my son an injection and risk something like asthma than not give it and him die a slow and painful death :thumbup:


----------



## Charlii Lou

winegums said:


> this may sound cruel but i'd rather give my son an injection and risk something like asthma than not give it and him die a slow and painful death :thumbup:

Same here:flower::thumbup:


----------



## lozzy21

Having seen my dad go through menigitus twice id give anything to stop any one else from having to go through it. He only survived because he was a fully grown adult, it would have killed a baby or child in days.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

An example of what a child can contract if not immunsied


*Pertussis*
&#8226;Pertussis, or whooping cough, is most common in babies or teens or the elderly. Coughing is the most common symptom and can be so extreme that the patient's ribs may break. She may have problems breathing as well. This disease can lead to pneumonia, which further complicates the patient's status. Pertussis is airborne, which means that it can spread through the air pretty easily. 

I agree with Lozzy menigtis is a disease that can send a child down hill rapidly
xx


----------



## aob1013

Aidan's Mummy said:


> An example of what a child can contract if not immunsied
> 
> 
> *Pertussis*
> Pertussis, or whooping cough, is most common in babies or teens or the elderly. Coughing is the most common symptom and can be so extreme that the patient's ribs may break. She may have problems breathing as well. This disease can lead to pneumonia, which further complicates the patient's status. Pertussis is airborne, which means that it can spread through the air pretty easily.
> 
> I agree with Lozzy menigtis is a disease that can send a child down hill rapidly
> xx

OH had whooping cough as a baby, and nearly died ....... the pain his Mum went through, watching him nearly die :sick:

There is no way in HELL that is happening to me, i will do everything i can to prevent it.


----------



## winegums

my uncle had whooping cough and then got mumps, he was in pain for months and months before he died he was swollen up, couldn't move, tears rolling down his face with pain. I wouldn't want to see anyone go through what him and nan went through


----------



## lozzy21

I for one dont want to see these back as standard in our hospitals because people refuse to vaccinate against polio

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Iron_Lung_ward-Rancho_Los_Amigos_Hospital.gif


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

That is terrible aob and winegums. Thats why I feel it is vital that aidan has been vaccinated

That isn't nice lozzy. Don't want to see them in our hospitals at all
xx


----------



## Rmar

I actually had no idea this would turn into a vax debate. Probably because I have decided to view all vaccinations seperately. Sure, the idea is the same but no all vaccinations are created equally. Obviously, because they do separate things. That and I view the vit k as different than most other vaccinations.

Maybe it would benefit to look at each individually. It is a subject that takes many years to study and I have, so far, dedicated about 500 hours to it. Take your information wherever you can get it. Don't abandon a doctors advice for something you have read on the internet and don't abandon a doctors advice because of information you have gotten elsewhere. Go to more than just one doctor and seek a doctor that decides against vaccination to see what they can offer as well as the other side.

Look at facts and figures, anecdotes, anything that will aid you in feeling completely comfortable in your decision no matter what you end up deciding. 

Going against the what others have said, I have had rubella, measels, whooping cough and chicken pox. I have never been gravely ill and did not end up in hospital. Yes, it can happen, but not always. There is definately a risk in not vaccinating. I can't question that. But does it outweigh the benefits? It's not my choice how you answer that question.


----------



## KandyKinz

There is certainly benefits and risks to each approach and I am still flumbling around on the fence in regards to my personal stance but here's my views so far. 

First off, I do think this is an appropriate spot for this thread. Yes the vitamin K injection occurs after the birth but it is done just hours if not immediately following the birth so it's a decision that parents must make prenatally and many of us pregnant folks don't actually venture over to the parenting boards until after our little babes are born.

Secondly, the vitamin K injection works quite differently then other immunizations. Other immunizations trigger the immune system in attempts to create a relatively long lasting immunity to disease while vitamin K is used to supplements the babies already existent vitamin K supply to help the blood to clot and the protection is relatively short term.... until the baby begins producing their own vitamin K. {interesting but relatively useless fact, babies born vaginally produce vitamin K sooner, because they are more likely to come into contact with bacteria from their mother's anus :blush:... Who knew that would be a good thing?!?! Another reason to lower those c-section rates...) Anyways back to vitamin k, essentially we are giving the baby more of what it already has... plus the additives they use in the formulation of the injection.... 

And yes there are different "types" of mercury. To date there is no study thus far to indicate that the type they are using is harmful..... But that doesn't mean that in 20 years they won't discover or confirm that what we were giving our babies was actually causing cancer or MS or Autism or ADD or Early Onset Alzheimer or the list goes on and on and on and on..... (note: there were studies that PROVED that links to cancer and autism existed... but then those studies were examined to be "faulty" and the associations were discredited.... Who was actually right.... Who knows???)

Also..... Babies are born with less then 50% of an adults vitamin K concentration.... So as the scientific humans we are, we have decided to fix that.... But I can't help but think that maybe there is a reason babies are born with low concentrations in vitamin K following birth? Perhaps it's crucial for their development in some way or another????? Yes, the babies do get a little vitamin K from the placenta, and a little vitamin K from breastmilk, but even if the mother has an excellent diet and supplements with vitamin K herself... those babies levels have still been shown to be deficient in vitamin k... again maybe's it's suppose to be that way??? Nature doesn't f*ck up that often!

Now onto risk factors... Yes prematurity, hypoxia, birth trauma, c-section and breastfeeding increase the chances the baby will suffer from hemorrhagic disease of the newborn it's important to note that in over 50% of cases there are NO RISK FACTORS.... Now that is the scary aspect of it all that bothers me. Thank god it's relatively rare. 

Every study I have looked at states different incidences.. Likely due to the fact that there was a mass movement to give all newborns supplemental vitamin K prior to conducting adequate studies on the incidence of these bleeding conditions.... But anyways, the risk is about 1/10000-15000 if no vitamin K is given and about 1/100,000 -250,000 if vitamin K is given. Regardless of the "exact" numbers it is quite clear that this vitamin K supplementation is highly effective at preventing VKBD. (not like the GBS thing.... when antibiotics are not given babies have a 1/1000 chance of getting it... when antibiotics are given babis have a 1/2000 chance of getting it.... but I won't go there now....) back to vitamin K.

VKBD is a VERY scary thing. I thankfully have never met a baby who has experienced this and I have only ever had a handful of mothers refuse the injection but I did work with a midwife who once had a client who had a baby who experienced this and the results were fatal as they are in up to 30% of cases... And if death does not occur brain damage is likely. The midwife was EXTREMELY shaken by the experience and I think her tension had rubbed off on me a bit. 

A little on my thoughts of oral doses... They are good in that they are less invasive and do not cause pain... And they are protective against vitamin k deficiency bleeding in comparison to giving no vitamin k at all, but they are approximatley 4 times less effective then their vitamin K injection counterpart even when compliance is perfect and the baby receives ALL of the doses of the vitamin K. It's suggested that they get atleast 3 doses, but there was one study in Denmark which gives babies oral vitamin k weekly until 3 months of age. Also of interest, there are some countries in which oral vitamin K is not even offered! Canada is one of them. The vitamin K they use has not been "tested" orally and therefore the fomulation they used is suppose to be for injection only. Some midwives will give this vitamin K orally, but they are not suppose to as it is not licenced to be admisisterd orally.

Last but not least... yes I do believe that health care providers go into the profession to help people... But I also believe that they are just regular people... And there are generally two types of people... One group who accepts the norms of society and conforms to what everyone else does, those are the type of "easy" clients who do not question their doctors or midwives recommendations they are also the type of clinical practioners that do not question their "college guidelines", do little research outside the box and just follow mainstream practice until a big "movement" tells them to do otherwise... Then there are the other group of people who analyze everything critically. They don't take everything to be written in stone and they do not conform to societals norms unless doing so is their preferred route. Those health care providers in this group tend to know that there is no hard and fast rule as to what the best plan of care is and they realize that medicine is constantly changing.. What they do now may not be the right thing tomorrow and that acknowlege that clients have every right to question current procedures and decide for themselves how to procede... Just food for thought.....


----------



## KandyKinz

Rmar said:


> I actually had no idea this would turn into a vax debate. Probably because I have decided to view all vaccinations seperately. Sure, the idea is the same but no all vaccinations are created equally. Obviously, because they do separate things. That and I view the vit k as different than most other vaccinations.
> 
> Maybe it would benefit to look at each individually. It is a subject that takes many years to study and I have, so far, dedicated about 500 hours to it. Take your information wherever you can get it. Don't abandon a doctors advice for something you have read on the internet and don't abandon a doctors advice because of information you have gotten elsewhere. Go to more than just one doctor and seek a doctor that decides against vaccination to see what they can offer as well as the other side.
> 
> Look at facts and figures, anecdotes, anything that will aid you in feeling completely comfortable in your decision no matter what you end up deciding.
> 
> Going against the what others have said, I have had rubella, measels, whooping cough and chicken pox. I have never been gravely ill and did not end up in hospital. Yes, it can happen, but not always. There is definately a risk in not vaccinating. I can't question that. But does it outweigh the benefits? It's not my choice how you answer that question.


I couldn't agree with you more!!!


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

KandyKinz said:


> There is certainly benefits and risks to each approach and I am still flumbling around on the fence in regards to my personal stance but here's my views so far.
> 
> First off, I do think this is an appropriate spot for this thread. Yes the vitamin K injection occurs after the birth but it is done just hours if not immediately following the birth so it's a decision that parents must make prenatally and many of us pregnant folks don't actually venture over to the parenting boards until after our little babes are born.
> 
> Secondly, the vitamin K injection works quite differently then other immunizations. Other immunizations trigger the immune system in attempts to create a relatively long lasting immunity to disease while vitamin K is used to supplements the babies already existent vitamin K supply to help the blood to clot and the protection is relatively short term.... until the baby begins producing their own vitamin K. {interesting but relatively useless fact, babies born vaginally produce vitamin K sooner, because they are more likely to come into contact with bacteria from their mother's anus :blush:... Who knew that would be a good thing?!?! Another reason to lower those c-section rates...) Anyways back to vitamin k, essentially we are giving the baby more of what it already has... plus the additives they use in the formulation of the injection....
> 
> And yes there are different "types" of mercury. To date there is no study thus far to indicate that the type they are using is harmful..... But that doesn't mean that in 20 years they won't discover or confirm that what we were giving our babies was actually causing cancer or MS or Autism or ADD or Early Onset Alzheimer or the list goes on and on and on and on..... (note: there were studies that PROVED that links to cancer and autism existed... but then those studies were examined to be "faulty" and the associations were discredited.... Who was actually right.... Who knows???)
> 
> Also..... Babies are born with less then 50% of an adults vitamin K concentration.... So as the scientific humans we are, we have decided to fix that.... But I can't help but think that maybe there is a reason babies are born with low concentrations in vitamin K following birth? Perhaps it's crucial for their development in some way or another????? Yes, the babies do get a little vitamin K from the placenta, and a little vitamin K from breastmilk, but even if the mother has an excellent diet and supplements with vitamin K herself... those babies levels have still been shown to be deficient in vitamin k... again maybe's it's suppose to be that way??? Nature doesn't f*ck up that often!
> 
> Now onto risk factors... Yes prematurity, hypoxia, birth trauma, c-section and breastfeeding increase the chances the baby will suffer from hemorrhagic disease of the newborn it's important to note that in over 50% of cases there are NO RISK FACTORS.... Now that is the scary aspect of it all that bothers me. Thank god it's relatively rare.
> 
> Every study I have looked at states different incidences.. Likely due to the fact that there was a mass movement to give all newborns supplemental vitamin K prior to conducting adequate studies on the incidence of these bleeding conditions.... But anyways, the risk is about 1/10000-15000 if no vitamin K is given and about 1/100,000 -250,000 if vitamin K is given. Regardless of the "exact" numbers it is quite clear that this vitamin K supplementation is highly effective at preventing VKBD. (not like the GBS thing.... when antibiotics are not given babies have a 1/1000 chance of getting it... when antibiotics are given babis have a 1/2000 chance of getting it.... but I won't go there now....) back to vitamin K.
> 
> VKBD is a VERY scary thing. I thankfully have never met a baby who has experienced this and I have only ever had a handful of mothers refuse the injection but I did work with a midwife who once had a client who had a baby who experienced this and the results were fatal as they are in up to 30% of cases... And if death does not occur brain damage is likely. The midwife was EXTREMELY shaken by the experience and I think her tension had rubbed off on me a bit.
> 
> A little on my thoughts of oral doses... They are good in that they are less invasive and do not cause pain... And they are protective against vitamin k deficiency bleeding in comparison to giving no vitamin k at all, but they are approximatley 4 times less effective then their vitamin K injection counterpart even when compliance is perfect and the baby receives ALL of the doses of the vitamin K. It's suggested that they get atleast 3 doses, but there was one study in Denmark which gives babies oral vitamin k weekly until 3 months of age. Also of interest, there are some countries in which oral vitamin K is not even offered! Canada is one of them. The vitamin K they use has not been "tested" orally and therefore the fomulation they used is suppose to be for injection only. Some midwives will give this vitamin K orally, but they are not suppose to as it is not licenced to be admisisterd orally.
> 
> Last but not least... yes I do believe that health care providers go into the profession to help people... But I also believe that they are just regular people... And there are generally two types of people... One group who accepts the norms of society and conforms to what everyone else does, those are the type of "easy" clients who do not question their doctors or midwives recommendations they are also the type of clinical practioners that do not question their "college guidelines", do little research outside the box and just follow mainstream practice until a big "movement" tells them to do otherwise... Then there are the other group of people who analyze everything critically. They don't take everything to be written in stone and they do not conform to societals norms unless doing so is their preferred route. Those health care providers in this group tend to know that there is no hard and fast rule as to what the best plan of care is and they realize that medicine is constantly changing.. What they do now may not be the right thing tomorrow and that acknowlege that clients have every right to question current procedures and decide for themselves how to procede... Just food for thought.....

Oh I know that and I know not all cases of the disease these children can contract can be life threatening to each individaul child. Some many have no really adverse affects whereas others can deteroate radpidly. As a trainee health care proffessional and a mother I have done resarch coming out of my ears. Especially as the matter invovles something so important, my son. I can assure you I am very confident from hours of reading that the benifits do out weigh the risks. Medical science is always changing. Have a read of the nursing journal etc and you will see this. If a patheint ever questions an immunisation I will tell them my findings of my research. I will never 'conform' to my college books. And you will find MOST health proffessionals are like this as we are all encouraged to do our own research in to very single bit of medicine we will be taught


I just hope that in years to come I don't see an outbreak that could have easily been prevented. Like I said some children may not be adversly affected by some diseases but som will. And no one knows how any individual child will react. 

Are you will to take that risk? Because after reading and reading and reading i am not. From a mothers point of view the benfits outweigh the risks by far IMO
xx


----------



## marley2580

Please remember that there are people on here that choose either to selectively vaccinate or to not vaccinate. We are respectful of people who choose to vaccinate, I don't think it's too much to ask for the reverse to be true.

Lozzy, it is extremely unlikely for Polio to ever make a comeback to this country as most cases were due to contaminated swimming pools and the chlorination of swimming pools stops that.


----------



## aob1013

marley2580 said:


> Please remember that there are people on here that choose either to selectively vaccinate or to not vaccinate. We are respectful of people who choose to vaccinate, I don't think it's too much to ask for the reverse to be true.
> 
> Lozzy, it is extremely unlikely for Polio to ever make a comeback to this country as most cases were due to contaminated swimming pools and the chlorination of swimming pools stops that.

I agree, and being told we are 'pumping our children full of mercury' isn't nice either.


----------



## Bex1p

aob1013 said:


> marley2580 said:
> 
> 
> Please remember that there are people on here that choose either to selectively vaccinate or to not vaccinate. We are respectful of people who choose to vaccinate, I don't think it's too much to ask for the reverse to be true.
> 
> Lozzy, it is extremely unlikely for Polio to ever make a comeback to this country as most cases were due to contaminated swimming pools and the chlorination of swimming pools stops that.
> 
> I agree, and being told we are 'pumping our children full of mercury' isn't nice either.Click to expand...

You don't believe there is mercury in it so that statement doesn't apply to you. I meant for me, if I gave my baby them I would feel I could be pumping him full of mercury, at this moment in time, hopefully until I am satisfied with my findings and decide to go ahead...nobody else.

For just so much as asking peoples opinions I have gotten in response it is unfair not to vaccinate, I am making a fuss and made to feel that just researching means I am willing to be 'one of those people' that will help start an epidemic.

I just asked for views which I have gotten, i'm not anti vaccination and I dont think I will come to be....but it's also good to hear everyone elses reasons for and against as every little helps.


----------



## aob1013

I agree with you Bex, but the problem with this kinda thing on the forum is it brings out opinions not fact, kwim? Maybe it would help you more in your research to make an appointment with your MW or GP so they can give you fact, not just their opinion? Alot of people get emotional about this topic, so thats when fact/fiction gets a bit skewed x


----------



## winegums

marley2580 said:


> Lozzy, it is extremely unlikely for Polio to ever make a comeback to this country as most cases were due to contaminated swimming pools and the chlorination of swimming pools stops that.

if people stop giving vaccinations it will be likely. not in our lifetime but maybe when our children have children.

Other countries still have polio. If everyone stops vaccinating then anyone who goes to other countries are at risk. If they contract it and bring it back. Even one little person. No one will be immune and everyone has a chance of contracting it. That's how these things spread and that's why they had to create vaccinations.


----------



## Bex1p

aob1013 said:


> I agree with you Bex, but the problem with this kinda thing on the forum is it brings out opinions not fact, kwim? Maybe it would help you more in your research to make an appointment with your MW or GP so they can give you fact, not just their opinion? Alot of people get emotional about this topic, so thats when fact/fiction gets a bit skewed x

It would be brilliant to find a MW or GP that had all the facts and answers but alot of these people were quite happy to vaccinate pregnant women with the swine flu vaccination which allegedly caused alot of miscarriages, which obviously isnt their fault as they are just doing what they are told and that's what worrys me!

Saying that, I dont doubt there are alot who have done their own research but were do the facts that they have researched come from?

I must sound overly paranoid ha ha I'm not, but I do believe there is somehow more than meets the eye to alot of things involving governments, big pharma, money, control and power but thats a whole different story!

I just question everything and it definately seems i'm not the only one as all you ladies have also studied this....it's just taking me abit longer to come to a decision.

As for the vitamin k which is my primary concern as I have to make my choice within 3-5 weeks, eek, I think I will go with the oral form and my own diet unless there is a problem. I'd love to be able to just say yes give him the injection and not have to worry about it but that wouldnt be the case for me, i'm going to worry either way (as we all do) and as you say, this is why emotions run high on the subject...I didnt quite expect to start all this though! Ha ha definately got more than I bargained for!

Abit OT but another thing thats come to my attention is when the cutting of the umbilical cord. Baby benefits from not having it cut until after the cord has stopped pulsing so why had I never heard of this before? I feel like they dont tell us anything! Its really quite sad:nope:


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

Ithink everyone in this thread has been respectful

I was stating a fact. If people continue to not have vaccinations in our childrens or childrens childrens life time, diseases that were erased will come back

ETA: Becki hun if you ask most will tell you. If they don't they are not doing their job properly :hugs:
xx


----------



## Dolly.

I agree with the cord pulsating thing, no professional has mentioned this to me either, it's funny because we are supposed to make informed decisions...I wasn't even given an choice of where to give birth, I was told what hospital is would be and that was that...


----------



## lozzy21

marley2580 said:


> Please remember that there are people on here that choose either to selectively vaccinate or to not vaccinate. We are respectful of people who choose to vaccinate, I don't think it's too much to ask for the reverse to be true.
> 
> Lozzy, it is extremely unlikely for Polio to ever make a comeback to this country as most cases were due to contaminated swimming pools and the chlorination of swimming pools stops that.

Polio is spread from person to person mostly by people not washing there hands after going to the toilet. If we stop vaccinating all it takes is one person to not wash there hands after going to the toilet to give it to 10+ people and they pass it to another 10. We could be back to pandemic preportions in 6 months if no one was vaccinated.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

want2beamummy said:


> I agree with the cord pulsating thing, no professional has mentioned this to me either, it's funny because we are supposed to make informed decisions...I wasn't even given an choice of where to give birth, I was told what hospital is would be and that was that...

Then your MW was not doing her job properly.
xx


----------



## Dolly.

Aidan's Mummy said:


> want2beamummy said:
> 
> 
> I agree with the cord pulsating thing, no professional has mentioned this to me either, it's funny because we are supposed to make informed decisions...I wasn't even given an choice of where to give birth, I was told what hospital is would be and that was that...
> 
> Then your MW was not doing her jon properly
> xxClick to expand...

Clearly, there are also no antenatal classes anymore or tours of the delivery suite, I've got most of my information from my own research and through the NCT classes we have done


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I would speak to her about your concerns and ask why you have no choice. If you wish the cord to be left pulsating then I would write it in your birth plan. The only time they may go against this is if the babies ro your life is at risk and even then tehy should ask
xx


----------



## lozzy21

want2beamummy said:


> Aidan's Mummy said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> want2beamummy said:
> 
> 
> I agree with the cord pulsating thing, no professional has mentioned this to me either, it's funny because we are supposed to make informed decisions...I wasn't even given an choice of where to give birth, I was told what hospital is would be and that was that...
> 
> Then your MW was not doing her jon properly
> xxClick to expand...
> 
> Clearly, there are also no antenatal classes anymore or tours of the delivery suite, I've got most of my information from my own research and through the NCT classes we have doneClick to expand...

They should be, again if you were not offerd then your midwife is not doing her job propperly.


----------



## subaru555

aob1013 said:


> It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:

So called medical professionals aren't always right by a long shot.

The sooner people start to realise that the better. Like you said they are only advising and in a lot of cases their advice isn't what's best for us personally.

I think people should question things more rather than refusing first.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

You can always question it. I question it and I still come to the same conclusion. Not as a trainee nurse either. I questioned it as a mother and my childs welfare was first and foremost I would never go with advise if I found it to ahev adverse affects
xx


----------



## Drazic<3

I think as long as we remember that we might have strong opinions, but we all want the best for our children, these debates are fine. Plus, I agree it should be in here. I don't see how the Vitamin K debate, as it is given so soon after birth, is of the same relevance in the parenting sections. 

Research can be highly informative, but also incredibly dangerous. The internet allows people a platform to mass produce and distribute tonnes of information. For every 1000 websites, there is probably one helpful, fully educated and PROPERLY researched document. The other 999 will be full of opinion and misguided, though well intentioned, 'facts'. These scare us all and don't help. 

Plus, I don't feel I will be pumping my girl full of mercury - because the type given is associated with minimal reside and effects. If you really want to think conspiracy - why would the Government PAY to give our children these injections if they wern't relevant? It's all about cost-benefit analysis - they cost less to vaccinate than to treat for the illness. It isn't sinister. Genuinely, I feel I have to vaccinate my children because others are choosing not to, bringing back otherwise unheard of illness. But as for Vitamin K, she will be having it if all is well, as I believe strongly it is in her interest, and have done enough research to see the studies which linked it to leukaemia have failed again and again (as with MMR) to be replicated.

Like all of you - I feel this is the best decision for my child. It's all we can do.


----------



## winegums

to be honest for the amount of information that you can have about pregnancy and birth midwives do NOT have time to go through most of it. This is why you get pregnancy books and leaflets and go on websites etc.

They generally not saying it's the best way but do the most efficient thing. I.e. clamp and cut not leave it. HOWEVER many trusts are starting to leave the cord at least a couple of minutes before clamping and cutting as standard practise.

This is one of the reasons people pay for independant midwives. Don't forget we are LUCKY to have the nhs and all the free treatment we get, we are LUCKY to have midwives and not doctors telling us to lay flat on our back with our legs in stirrups.

So for me I don't think they should be telling us all this information. I'm happy for my midwife to do all the screening she needs, take all the blood and pee she needs, do all the scans that need to be done rather than use the time to talk to me about options i could research more thoroughly on my own. Don't forget that is the primary reason they are there to make sure everything is ok with mum and baby


----------



## aob1013

Bex1p said:


> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> I agree with you Bex, but the problem with this kinda thing on the forum is it brings out opinions not fact, kwim? Maybe it would help you more in your research to make an appointment with your MW or GP so they can give you fact, not just their opinion? Alot of people get emotional about this topic, so thats when fact/fiction gets a bit skewed x
> 
> It would be brilliant to find a MW or GP that had all the facts and answers but alot of these people were quite happy to vaccinate pregnant women with the swine flu vaccination which allegedly caused alot of miscarriages, which obviously isnt their fault as they are just doing what they are told and that's what worrys me!
> 
> Saying that, I dont doubt there are alot who have done their own research but were do the facts that they have researched come from?
> 
> I must sound overly paranoid ha ha I'm not, but I do believe there is somehow more than meets the eye to alot of things involving governments, big pharma, money, control and power but thats a whole different story!
> 
> I just question everything and it definately seems i'm not the only one as all you ladies have also studied this....it's just taking me abit longer to come to a decision.
> 
> As for the vitamin k which is my primary concern as I have to make my choice within 3-5 weeks, eek, I think I will go with the oral form and my own diet unless there is a problem. I'd love to be able to just say yes give him the injection and not have to worry about it but that wouldnt be the case for me, i'm going to worry either way (as we all do) and as you say, this is why emotions run high on the subject...I didnt quite expect to start all this though! Ha ha definately got more than I bargained for!
> 
> *Abit OT but another thing thats come to my attention is when the cutting of the umbilical cord. Baby benefits from not having it cut until after the cord has stopped pulsing so why had I never heard of this before? I feel like they dont tell us anything! Its really quite sad:nope*:Click to expand...

It must differ from area to area. I've always been given the pro's and con's of all immunisations and injections during pregnancy. Today at my antenatal class we were told that it's best to wait until the cord has stopped pulsating before cutting it .. it must differ where everyone is x


----------



## aob1013

subaru555 said:


> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:
> 
> So called medical professionals aren't always right by a long shot.
> 
> The sooner people start to realise that the better. Like you said they are only advising and in a lot of cases their advice isn't what's best for us personally.
> 
> I think people should question things more rather than refusing first.Click to expand...

So called medical professionals? They ARE medical professionals, they have studied and completed their course and have experience, they have been trained to save lives and look after people - if they had some hidden agenda then that would go against everything a medical professional does.
I will never ever believe anything otherwise.

All these consipiracy theories about the government/NHS/Polic are just ridiculous :lol:


----------



## winegums

aob1013 said:


> subaru555 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:
> 
> So called medical professionals aren't always right by a long shot.
> 
> The sooner people start to realise that the better. Like you said they are only advising and in a lot of cases their advice isn't what's best for us personally.
> 
> I think people should question things more rather than refusing first.Click to expand...
> 
> So called medical professionals? They ARE medical professionals, they have studied and completed their course and have experience, they have been trained to save lives and look after people - if they had some hidden agenda then that would go against everything a medical professional does.
> I will never ever believe anything otherwise.
> 
> All these consipiracy theories about the government/NHS/Polic are just ridiculous :lol:Click to expand...

i agree 'so called' lol! they ARE medical professionals. They have studied for years.

What i don't understand is all these people that are scared of the goverment....... don't they think that if there was such a problem with things i.e. vaccinations NO ONE in power would use them. NO ONE in the government would be vaccinated because they 'know the truth'. no doctors or so called healthcare professionals would be vaccinated. half the bloomin country wouldn't be vaccinated. we would be rife with disease, hospitals would be full of the diseases we are preventing!


----------



## Drazic<3

aob1013 said:


> subaru555 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:
> 
> So called medical professionals aren't always right by a long shot.
> 
> The sooner people start to realise that the better. Like you said they are only advising and in a lot of cases their advice isn't what's best for us personally.
> 
> I think people should question things more rather than refusing first.Click to expand...
> 
> So called medical professionals? They ARE medical professionals, they have studied and completed their course and have experience, they have been trained to save lives and look after people - if they had some hidden agenda then that would go against everything a medical professional does.
> I will never ever believe anything otherwise.
> 
> *All these consipiracy theories about the government/NHS/Polic are just ridiculous* :lol:Click to expand...

I agree. I don't understand the nature of paranoia which comes in this country sometimes. Maybe being so lucky for so long as made us unable to appreciate the opportunities around us?

Although I don't always agree with my MW, I strongly believe at the end of the day she wants to see a healthy mum and a healthy baby - why on earth would she join the profession if she didn't? I chose not to have the swine flu vaccination and she supported me. She advised me to look at the evidence and decide for myself.


----------



## special_kala

River has had all of her vaccinations including vitk but this baby wont he havijg the vitk injection as I still remember how river screamed when they did it. More so then any other injection.

I will prob go for the oral one. 

I think that the routine vaccinations need to be done not just for your baby but for society as a whole. It's selfish to risk your child giving a younger/weaker child something that could kill them.


I'm usually don't agree with all the conspiracy stuff but doctors me and hv have to follow the line so even if they had a problem with something they couldn't say anything. A paramedics told my sil that there was no way he would get swine flu vaccination but was told by his superiors that he had to day he had.


----------



## marley2580

To be clear, when i said it shouldn't be discussed in here I meant the wider vaccination debate, rather than the vit k debate.

I know that the majority of medical professionals are there to help people and are very well read etc. But they still base many judgements on their opinion. I was told by a medical professional that a home birth vbac was too risky and that I should be in hospital strapped to a monitor. I know he was only wanting me and the baby safe, but that's the same argument that many docs in the US are using to give women C-Sections for hardly any reason at all - because it's 'controllable'. Medical professionals do NOT all agree that vaccinations are to be given without question, there are a few that believe that the risks outweigh the benefits for many children.


----------



## KandyKinz

Aidan's Mummy said:


> KandyKinz said:
> 
> 
> There is certainly benefits and risks to each approach and I am still flumbling around on the fence in regards to my personal stance but here's my views so far.
> 
> First off, I do think this is an appropriate spot for this thread. Yes the vitamin K injection occurs after the birth but it is done just hours if not immediately following the birth so it's a decision that parents must make prenatally and many of us pregnant folks don't actually venture over to the parenting boards until after our little babes are born.
> 
> Secondly, the vitamin K injection works quite differently then other immunizations. Other immunizations trigger the immune system in attempts to create a relatively long lasting immunity to disease while vitamin K is used to supplements the babies already existent vitamin K supply to help the blood to clot and the protection is relatively short term.... until the baby begins producing their own vitamin K. {interesting but relatively useless fact, babies born vaginally produce vitamin K sooner, because they are more likely to come into contact with bacteria from their mother's anus :blush:... Who knew that would be a good thing?!?! Another reason to lower those c-section rates...) Anyways back to vitamin k, essentially we are giving the baby more of what it already has... plus the additives they use in the formulation of the injection....
> 
> And yes there are different "types" of mercury. To date there is no study thus far to indicate that the type they are using is harmful..... But that doesn't mean that in 20 years they won't discover or confirm that what we were giving our babies was actually causing cancer or MS or Autism or ADD or Early Onset Alzheimer or the list goes on and on and on and on..... (note: there were studies that PROVED that links to cancer and autism existed... but then those studies were examined to be "faulty" and the associations were discredited.... Who was actually right.... Who knows???)
> 
> Also..... Babies are born with less then 50% of an adults vitamin K concentration.... So as the scientific humans we are, we have decided to fix that.... But I can't help but think that maybe there is a reason babies are born with low concentrations in vitamin K following birth? Perhaps it's crucial for their development in some way or another????? Yes, the babies do get a little vitamin K from the placenta, and a little vitamin K from breastmilk, but even if the mother has an excellent diet and supplements with vitamin K herself... those babies levels have still been shown to be deficient in vitamin k... again maybe's it's suppose to be that way??? Nature doesn't f*ck up that often!
> 
> Now onto risk factors... Yes prematurity, hypoxia, birth trauma, c-section and breastfeeding increase the chances the baby will suffer from hemorrhagic disease of the newborn it's important to note that in over 50% of cases there are NO RISK FACTORS.... Now that is the scary aspect of it all that bothers me. Thank god it's relatively rare.
> 
> Every study I have looked at states different incidences.. Likely due to the fact that there was a mass movement to give all newborns supplemental vitamin K prior to conducting adequate studies on the incidence of these bleeding conditions.... But anyways, the risk is about 1/10000-15000 if no vitamin K is given and about 1/100,000 -250,000 if vitamin K is given. Regardless of the "exact" numbers it is quite clear that this vitamin K supplementation is highly effective at preventing VKBD. (not like the GBS thing.... when antibiotics are not given babies have a 1/1000 chance of getting it... when antibiotics are given babis have a 1/2000 chance of getting it.... but I won't go there now....) back to vitamin K.
> 
> VKBD is a VERY scary thing. I thankfully have never met a baby who has experienced this and I have only ever had a handful of mothers refuse the injection but I did work with a midwife who once had a client who had a baby who experienced this and the results were fatal as they are in up to 30% of cases... And if death does not occur brain damage is likely. The midwife was EXTREMELY shaken by the experience and I think her tension had rubbed off on me a bit.
> 
> A little on my thoughts of oral doses... They are good in that they are less invasive and do not cause pain... And they are protective against vitamin k deficiency bleeding in comparison to giving no vitamin k at all, but they are approximatley 4 times less effective then their vitamin K injection counterpart even when compliance is perfect and the baby receives ALL of the doses of the vitamin K. It's suggested that they get atleast 3 doses, but there was one study in Denmark which gives babies oral vitamin k weekly until 3 months of age. Also of interest, there are some countries in which oral vitamin K is not even offered! Canada is one of them. The vitamin K they use has not been "tested" orally and therefore the fomulation they used is suppose to be for injection only. Some midwives will give this vitamin K orally, but they are not suppose to as it is not licenced to be admisisterd orally.
> 
> Last but not least... yes I do believe that health care providers go into the profession to help people... But I also believe that they are just regular people... And there are generally two types of people... One group who accepts the norms of society and conforms to what everyone else does, those are the type of "easy" clients who do not question their doctors or midwives recommendations they are also the type of clinical practioners that do not question their "college guidelines", do little research outside the box and just follow mainstream practice until a big "movement" tells them to do otherwise... Then there are the other group of people who analyze everything critically. They don't take everything to be written in stone and they do not conform to societals norms unless doing so is their preferred route. Those health care providers in this group tend to know that there is no hard and fast rule as to what the best plan of care is and they realize that medicine is constantly changing.. What they do now may not be the right thing tomorrow and that acknowlege that clients have every right to question current procedures and decide for themselves how to procede... Just food for thought.....
> 
> Oh I know that and I know not all cases of the disease these children can contract can be life threatening to each individaul child. Some many have no really adverse affects whereas others can deteroate radpidly. As a trainee health care proffessional and a mother I have done resarch coming out of my ears. Especially as the matter invovles something so important, my son. I can assure you I am very confident from hours of reading that the benifits do out weigh the risks. Medical science is always changing. Have a read of the nursing journal etc and you will see this. If a patheint ever questions an immunisation I will tell them my findings of my research. I will never 'conform' to my college books. And you will find MOST health proffessionals are like this as we are all encouraged to do our own research in to very single bit of medicine we will be taught
> 
> 
> I just hope that in years to come I don't see an outbreak that could have easily been prevented. Like I said some children may not be adversly affected by some diseases but som will. And no one knows how any individual child will react.
> 
> Are you will to take that risk? Because after reading and reading and reading i am not. From a mothers point of view the benfits outweigh the risks by far IMO
> xxClick to expand...

Having spent the last several years as a midwifery student I too have spent alot of time researching this topic, not just using dr.google but from midwifery and obstetrical journals and in the end I still feel that there is certain merit in both perspectives (vitamin K vs no vitamin K). Quite honestly I tend to be in favour of the medication, because it does reduce the incidence DRAMATICALLY but I still am skeptical of it's assumed safety and because of that I completely respect any parent who chooses not to conform to this mass movement. 

And I am glad to hear that you do keep up with the research, but I do not believe that "most" health care professionals do so. I've done several placements and worked with midwives, obstetricians, family physicians and nurses and unfortunately there are many that blindly conform to their hospital regulations despite research.... (off topic but just as an example: admission EFM strips. There has been alot of research on it, they show to increase intervention rates without improving outcomes and the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (in canada) have advised not to perform them... yet at many hospitals in my province they are still done routinely because that is the hospital regulations and those who work there have chosen not to speak up...) It's just that there are many medical professionals that don't keep up with research and then there are some that do but then they don't have the guts to change their practice anyways :nope:


Then the other off topic cord cutting issue....
I tend to favour the delayed cord clamping method because it is the more natural approach and it just seems as though that is what is suppose to happen... But standards of practice regarding this issue is highly variable, at least in Canada. There has been good research to suggest it reduces the risk of infant anemia and there has been not so great research to suggest it increases the risk of newborn jaundice (there are many conflicting studies, some strongly support this statement and others prove absolutely no association... who to believe???:shrug:) Anyways, in my community it is the obs standard of practice to cut and clamp right away (in a teaching hospital!). Often even before they hand the baby to the mother (a non so ideal practice in my opinion :growlmad:), then I have met some midwives who do not clamp or cut until the cord stops pulsating. They have somewhere deemed this the most acceptable method and tend not to even discuss it with their clients unless the client brings it up. Then there are midwives who bring this subject up antenatally, engage in an informed choice conversation and then go with whatever the client decides... My point is different health care professionals act in different ways and they all do so for the babies best interest based on their own opinions of the research in addition to what they were "taught" to do.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I really resent the so called health proffesionals comment. I will go to Uni for 3 years of hard work. I think I would have earned the right to be given respect for that and not 'so called'

As for the vit K Aidan was given it without my consent. I only foudn this out a few months ago diu to a thread similar to this one. I was very upset as I hadn't researched it and I wasn't given the choice. 
xx


----------



## KandyKinz

Aidan's Mummy said:


> I really resent the so called health proffesionals comment. I will go to Uni for 3 years of hard work. I think I would have earned the right to be given respect for that and not 'so called'


Are you attending Uni for the status in the end? If so, that's sad. :nope: I've now completed several 7 years for two degrees and consider myself no more above anyone else on this thread. Equality is key, not superiority.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

KandyKinz said:


> Aidan's Mummy said:
> 
> 
> I really resent the so called health proffesionals comment. I will go to Uni for 3 years of hard work. I think I would have earned the right to be given respect for that and not 'so called'
> 
> 
> Are you attending Uni for the status in the end? If so, that's sad. :nope: I've now completed several 7 years for two degrees and consider myself no more above anyone else on this thread. Equality is key, not superiority.Click to expand...

How dare you. No I am attending Uni to go into a proffesion that I have wanted to do for years. My passion is children and I wan't to help improve their qaulity of life and make their stay in hospital a little bit less daunting whilst caring for their individual needs.

No I am not going for the status. But i resent being called 'so called' proffessioanlw hen we are trying our best to help people and we work hard to do that!!


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

A student MW delivered Aidan and I totally agree. She was amazing

Hopefully us student nurses can make a step towards change :) In fact lets hope all the new students in the different branches can
xx


----------



## aob1013

subaru555 said:


> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> subaru555 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> aob1013 said:
> 
> 
> It scares me to think what will start happening if people continue refusing what medical professionals advise us to do :wacko:
> 
> So called medical professionals aren't always right by a long shot.
> 
> The sooner people start to realise that the better. Like you said they are only advising and in a lot of cases their advice isn't what's best for us personally.
> 
> I think people should question things more rather than refusing first.Click to expand...
> 
> So called medical professionals? They ARE medical professionals, they have studied and completed their course and have experience, they have been trained to save lives and look after people - if they had some hidden agenda then that would go against everything a medical professional does.
> I will never ever believe anything otherwise.
> 
> All these consipiracy theories about the government/NHS/Polic are just ridiculous :lol:Click to expand...
> 
> Good for you!
> 
> You must have been one of the lucky ones who've had great care throughout your life and never been wrongly diagnosed! Or had to take pills which weren't necessary which the "fabulous medical professional" wrongly gave you because they "thought" they should and then later realised that they were wrong and you'd been taking something for nothing.
> 
> Just because they have completed a course does NOT mean they are always right - get into the real world! They still kill people, make big mistakes, have disciplinary meetings etc. Yes they have medical licenses and I've got a driving licence - that doesn't mean that I drive the same way as everyone else that has a driving licence or will make the same decisions as everyone else that can drive when I'm on the road. Yeah, I've been there, learned how to do it etc, that doesn't mean I'll always do it right!!!!!
> 
> A good example for you - Medical professionals who are trained to help people be able to get pregnant who then tell someone they need a hysterectomy and then all of a sudden change their mind a month later? Give me a break...
> 
> I think you should respect peoples opinions on how they feel about their medical care and the practitioners caring for them because your care is different from each individual person on here.
> 
> Midwives are constantly apologising to me because they've done something wrong or something is missing from my notes, not got the necessary equipment, don't understand something in my notes, wrote something down wrong. It's a joke.
> 
> I've even been sent to see the consultant who then asked me "how is your pelvic floor healing?" "what?" "well we've got it down that you had previous pelvic floor surgery" "nope" "oh, ok it must be wrong, off you go home then and we'll swap you back to midwife led care"
> 
> Maybe is you had a life full of medical professionals being wrong and making mistakes then you would question everything too.
> 
> Don't be so shallow and have some respect.Click to expand...

I've had fantastic healthcare throughout my life, because NHS professionals do a great job :D

I respect your opinion of course, but i totally disagree with it.


----------



## Drazic<3

Bex1p said:


> Morning everyone.
> 
> Just for the record i'm not a conspiracy theorist! I just think you have to go down that way of thinking sometimes to get all the info you need as there is always two sides.....
> 
> Now this is OT again and I am aware that it is an internet link, but it is also from a national newspaper. I do know you can't believe everything you read from either..but, does this not seem quite wrong to you?
> 
> https://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/176880
> 
> I hope it doesn't start another heated debate....and I think my 'pumping baby full of mercury' comment will haunt me forever! :blush: but i'd just like to know your thoughts on it really and wether you believe it to be true or not.
> 
> Thanks!

Sorry, but I take EVERYTHING the Express or the Mail (or most of the British media for that matter) say with a pinch of salt. They make these grand sensationalist statements to sell papers, then are forced to put in a tiny, little, 36th page apology and amendum a few weeks later when the damage is already done. The damage the Express in particular has done with lies about the HPV vaccine (all proven as such) and in general it's views on mass asylum seeker chav paedophile murderers who are taking over the UK make my skin crawl. 

If it is a concern, I would contact your hospital and ask for their indivudual statement on the issue :)


----------



## Bex1p

The mass media certainly does like to brainwash us....


----------



## aob1013

Course they do! I seriously laughed out loud this morning while reading The Daily Mail, they said that cleaning products around the house increase the chance of breast cancer ........

Yeahhhhhh okkkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk :rofl:


----------



## Bex1p

The thing is, while I wouldn't totally believe that and throw all my cleaning products out it also wouldn't suprise me as it is chemicals afterall and who knows what damage they could be found to be doing one day.

BUT.....if we truly believed everything that was said we'd all be living in a tiny sealed room not daring to eat or breathe!

My poor cousin went through a paranoid phase around the time of the anthrax attacks. He wouldn't go outside and got obsessed with poison thinking people were putting it in his tea and alsorts!

It's fear mongering, it drives me mad!


----------



## Rmar

Lol, I like to be informed but some sources are just so sketchy it makes me cringe. I laugh at it but I also die a little inside to think of the people who think it is credible.


----------



## winegums

Aidan's Mummy said:


> Thank you winegums. If I remember correctly you are in the proffession?
> xx

I'm starting uni next september :D can't wait :cloud9:


----------



## winegums

Bex1p said:


> Morning everyone.
> 
> Just for the record i'm not a conspiracy theorist! I just think you have to go down that way of thinking sometimes to get all the info you need as there is always two sides.....
> 
> Now this is OT again and I am aware that it is an internet link, but it is also from a national newspaper. I do know you can't believe everything you read from either..but, does this not seem quite wrong to you?
> 
> https://www.dailyexpress.co.uk/posts/view/176880
> 
> I hope it doesn't start another heated debate....and I think my 'pumping baby full of mercury' comment will haunt me forever! :blush: but i'd just like to know your thoughts on it really and wether you believe it to be true or not.
> 
> Thanks!

do you know many people call that paper the daily fail due to how much rubbish it prints :wacko:


----------



## hekate

MrsRH said:


> hekate said:
> 
> 
> so many of you say that you would never forgive yourself if you did not vaccinate and your baby caught a illness....
> 
> but that goes for both arguments! I would never forgive myself if I caused an illness that could have been prevented by allowing it to be vaccinated!
> apart from the autism debate and the mercury in the vaccine....*vaccines have proven links with increased rates of asthma and diabetes*....these are major and livelong illnesses compared to some very minor childhood illnesses we vaccinate against.....
> 
> each make their on decision, but please don't believe that the "other side" is not also acting the the best interest of their child!
> 
> please give your evidence for this as I don't think this is true
> xClick to expand...

I read an article and there are too many sources quoted for me to write down....but they were very credible resource links e.g. from the Journal of Allergy and Clinical Immunology (volume 121, Issue 3 , Pages 626-631)....
also diabetes is a listed side-effect of vaccinations (see Merck, manufacturer of MMR vaccinations (page 7 of 12 of their information leaflet)


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

winegums said:


> Aidan's Mummy said:
> 
> 
> Thank you winegums. If I remember correctly you are in the proffession?
> xx
> 
> I'm starting uni next september :D can't wait :cloud9:Click to expand...

Good luck hun :D


ETA: I call the daily mail the daily fail too :rofl:
xx


----------



## Drazic<3

This seems a very appropriate time to post this. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eBT6OSr1TI


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

Soo true and hilarious :rofl:
xx


----------



## louise1302

hahahahahahahahaha :rofl:


----------



## winegums

lol!


----------



## KandyKinz

Aidan's Mummy said:


> And maybe you shouldn't judge every signel health proffessional on your experiances. You may have had some bad experiaces but some are bloody good at their job and want nothing more than to provide the best care they can. People in socitey today seem to tar everyone with the same brush over some bad expriances. I have exprianced bad health care but i would not make out they are all bad. As I have also experianced some amazing health care that was second to none where the nurses and doctors were amazing and really cared for me.
> 
> It seems today everyone is quick to judge without looking at people as individuals and more of a group. You get good and bad in all proffessions but people seem to concentrate on the negative.
> 
> I have seen it happen as a teen mum and to me it seems to happen throughout life. I wish people could be more open minded :nope:
> 
> ETA: I am sorry you have had bad experiances but we are notall bad. Alot do their job well and the minority make it bad
> 
> x

That is exactly the point we are trying to make, you can't just accept or "judge" a health care professional because they have spent so many years training and have a degree on the wall. I don't believe myself or anyone else on this thread have said that all health care professionals are awful, we were just trying to convey our belief that the client/patient themselves have to play a role in their own care in collaboration with their careprovider in order to ensure the best outcomes. And part of playing a role is doing your own research and having your own opinions. This also means acknowledging that although your health provider plays a large role in your health care and can act as a great resource source, they are just a small piece of the puzzle as they have limitations. They are only human, they do not hold top secret "health care" information that the general public is not entitled too.


----------



## Aidan's Mummy

I didn't say they did hold top secret information. And I have said in previous posts we are encouraged to do our own research in every bit of medicine we are taught
xx


----------



## KandyKinz

I am just saying clients should do their own research too.


----------



## winegums

KandyKinz said:


> I am just saying clients should do their own research too.

that's why most nurses, midwives etc encourage you to do your own research and don't tell you what to do and expect you to blindly follow.


----------



## KandyKinz

winegums said:


> KandyKinz said:
> 
> 
> I am just saying clients should do their own research too.
> 
> that's why most nurses, midwives etc encourage you to do your own research and don't tell you what to do and expect you to blindly follow.Click to expand...

So essentially, we're all saying the same thing yet argueing about it?!?!? I think pregnancy must have made us all mental becauase things certainly seemed alot calmer on the ttc boards.


----------



## aob1013

Once the hormones hit, you've had it :lol: x


----------



## summer rain

Hi

back on topic; I personally don't have a problem with the injection. I've done my research into it and it seems the main worry about the injection is due to studies done in the early 70s regarding the injection causing an increased risk of a certain rare type of childhood leukemia but it hasn't been backed up since. I am not blindly pro-vaccination/injections; for example I didn't give any of my boys the BCG even though it is recommended for all babies living in the metropolitan area of London and particularly those whose parents/grandparents come from certain countries; but having looked into it the risks outweighed any potential benefits for me. For example I have known babies who developed bone abscesses at the scar site; leading to long term mobility problems in that particular arm. Also I haven't seen any evidence that the change in policy from giving certain teenagers the BCG to widely giving it to babies; has reduced rates of TB infection at all. But with the vitamin K injection I don't see any harm in it; and it prevents a potentially very serious problem that can occur. I don't know anyone personally who has developed cancer in childhood after having the injection either; because these things are extremely rare.

Soph x


----------



## Joyzerelly

We've chosen not to have it. My midwife said she thought almost all babies don't need it anyway and that it was absolutely fine not to have it in any form, she was very supportive. I'm going to ensure that I get a good supply of Vit K myself and then my baby will get it naturally from my milk... Apparently 'the major source of Vitamin K is green, leafy, vegetables - kale, collards, spinach, and turnip greens are the highest.' I'm also going to continue taking Pregnacare while breastfeeding which contains 92% of the recommended daily dose. (Sanatogen mum-to-be contains none at all). I also think that the Pregnacare I'm taking now should mean that my baby has ok Vit K levels at birth.


----------



## Bex1p

Joyzerelly said:


> We've chosen not to have it. My midwife said she thought almost all babies don't need it anyway and that it was absolutely fine not to have it in any form, she was very supportive. I'm going to ensure that I get a good supply of Vit K myself and then my baby will get it naturally from my milk... Apparently 'the major source of Vitamin K is green, leafy, vegetables - kale, collards, spinach, and turnip greens are the highest.' I'm also going to continue taking Pregnacare while breastfeeding which contains 92% of the recommended daily dose. (Sanatogen mum-to-be contains none at all). I also think that the Pregnacare I'm taking now should mean that my baby has ok Vit K levels at birth.

That was really helpful, thanks.


----------



## KandyKinz

Joyzerelly said:


> We've chosen not to have it. My midwife said she thought almost all babies don't need it anyway and that it was absolutely fine not to have it in any form, she was very supportive. I'm going to ensure that I get a good supply of Vit K myself and then my baby will get it naturally from my milk... Apparently 'the major source of Vitamin K is green, leafy, vegetables - kale, collards, spinach, and turnip greens are the highest.' I'm also going to continue taking Pregnacare while breastfeeding which contains 92% of the recommended daily dose. (Sanatogen mum-to-be contains none at all). I also think that the Pregnacare I'm taking now should mean that my baby has ok Vit K levels at birth.

The main source of vitamin K is actually the bacteria that lives in our intestines... It's the synthesizes vitamin K for us.


----------



## Joyzerelly

KandyKinz said:


> The main source of vitamin K is actually the bacteria that lives in our intestines... It's the synthesizes vitamin K for us.

Yes, I've read that this could be one of the reasons babies are born next to the anus... they take bacteria to help kick start their own Vitamin K production. My post was indicating the main FOOD sources of Vit K.


----------



## Anna_due Dec

im not trying to be mean but it seems to me that you aren't really asking for advice but are just wanting emotional back up (which is fine). Its just you dispute people who disagree with you and thank people for being helpful if they agree. 
I think its important to help your child build an immune system but there are some things they will never be immune to no matter what and the diseases are devastating. I too have done the research and have chosen to immunise except my latest son wasn't given his chicken pox shot but i may yet, it's so hard to know what is the right thing to do. Someone earlier said that a midwife told them the vit k isn't necessary but i've heard the opposite said so how do you know? Its one of those things, damned if you do, damned if you don't. It's just a matter of weighing up the risks but one thing to consider...an awful lot of the anti-immunisation information comes from non-reputable sources. The pro-stab (as i call it) comes from doctors and the government. I know the immunisations were linked to autism and that information is jammed down your throat by the anti-stabs but the people who did that research actually retracted it afterwards because they knew it was wrong but not before it was wildly circulated. Scientists have tested and re-tested but can not find a link but yet anti-stabs still say it because it scares mums. All i'm saying is get your info from places you are positive you can trust and weigh up the risks ie. what happens most often the disease or the reaction from the stab and which has the worst affect on bub. Goodluck, loving them soooooo much makes theses decisions a nightmare.

For the record, i'm pro vit k.


----------



## Bex1p

No I just thanked the people with informative posts and wrote whatever popped into my head as a question really, I never have been very tactful! A downfall of mine!

Maybe I did want back up, or just to know there where likeminded people. But i've made my decisions now and i'm 100% happy with them, finally!


----------



## Anna_due Dec

I wasn't having a go, i do the same thing. I make decisions then it feels good when people agree so i can relax. Well done on making your decision. As i said, it's so hard to know what to do with even the experts disagreeing. We all just want to do the best for our babies and there is no instruction manual. I think the more you worry the more it shows you are a good mum xoxox Goodluck with your next beautiful (obviously very loved) baby :)


----------



## Bex1p

Anna_due Dec said:


> I wasn't having a go, i do the same thing. I make decisions then it feels good when people agree so i can relax. Well done on making your decision. As i said, it's so hard to know what to do with even the experts disagreeing. We all just want to do the best for our babies and there is no instruction manual. I think the more you worry the more it shows you are a good mum xoxox Goodluck with your next beautiful (obviously very loved) baby :)

Yeah I realise you weren't having a go. It was just difficult because the babys father and I had made the decision together and then all of a sudden I realised it was down to me. 100% sole responsibilty and it freaked me out!

Thank you and good luck also! :flower:


----------

