Cord clamping horror (part 2): What is Amy's agenda?

CORD CLAMPING HORROR (PART 2): WHAT IS AMY'S AGENDA?

PREGNANT WOMEN By immediately clamping umbilical cords, OBs are temporarily
(surgically) asphyxiating babies and robbing them of up to 50% of their
blood volume.

This OB horror is being visited upon EVERY CESAREAN BABY, according to
George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG. See Dr. Morley's astonishing statement
below. --Amy blithely snipped this!

To prevent this horror, simply demand that your OB or CNMwife NOT clamp -
until your baby's cord has stopped pulsating and your baby is pink and
breathing and not in need of resuscitation.

Talk to your OB or CNMwife today.

AMY E. AUSTIN: BLITHE PROMOTER ("TRUST YOUR OB") OF ROBBING BABY BLOOD

Coincidentally, Amy E. Austin arrived on misc.kids.pregnancy at about the
time I finally realized the gravity of this crime - and put the issue to
Peter Hollands, PhD the world's top cord blood researcher. (My post
documenting PETER'S DODGE - and Amy's arrival/reply to that post - are
reproduced below.)

John Que erroneously indicates that Amy E. Austin did not dispute my claim
that she LIED when she said that I am opposed to cord blood harvesting.

Actually, Amy *did* dispute my claim.

She embellished her lie.

Amy says I have an agenda.

I do have an agenda - I want to immediately STOP the grisly cord blood
horror.

What is AMY'S agenda?

As every cesarean baby is robbed of up to 50% of its blood volume (see Dr.
Morley's statement below)...

Why is Amy still lying - now embellishing her lie - still arguing JUST LIKE
PETER HOLLANDS - for blind trust in OBs?

See below...


"John Que" wrote in message
...

wrote in message
oups.com...

Howard McCollister wrote:

No offense, Amy, but you must be new around here...

None taken, Howard. I've gone a round or two with Todd before.

I'd like to take this opportunity to apologize to
misc.health.alternative and sci.med - Todd insists on crossposting his
agenda to hell and back, and I don't always check the crossposting
before I reply. I'll work on being better about that in the future.

Thanks,
Amy


Amy, I note you don't dispute Todds claim that you charged
him with opposing the harvesting of placental cord blood.
Did you assume that this was his position on the basis of
his opposing premature cord clamping and make the
charge on that basis? Then just apologize as he has clearly
clarified his position if it wasn't clear before.



My claim is that Amy LIED - falsely indicating that I am opposed to cord
blood harvesting.

Actually, Amy *did* dispute my claim. See below.

RELEVANT HISTORY

On Jan 29, 2005, Amy acknowledged that I am in favor WAITING before
harvesting:

"You just love your hypotheticals... What if by waiting, you do
more harm than would've been done if you had cut the frigging cord and
gotten that baby to breathe?"
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/
misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/1474a2efaa85aecf

On February 23, 2005, Amy LIED and indicated I am opposed to harvesting (!):

"Don't listen to Todd - he's going to try to scare you into not
donating. I can't claim to know or understand his agenda."
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/
misc.kids.pregnancy/msg/42a83242f19d67e0

What is AMY'S agenda?

Instead of simply admitting her LIE - she embellished it - saying (in
effect) that I *am* (in effect) opposed to cord blood harvesting because
after WAITING to harvest there is "nothing left to harvest."

COINCIDENTALLY, AMY ARRIVED ON MISC.KIDS.PREGNANCY AS THE WORLD'S LEADING
CORD BLOOD RESEARCHER BEAT A HASTY RETREAT...

Here is the first post of mine that Amy "responded" to - followed by Amy
"response"...

BEGIN first Gastaldo post that Amy "responded" to...
Peter Hollands, PhD/CellsForLife : Please see the
very end of this post.


PREGNANT WOMEN: Do NOT let the obstetrician immediately clamp your baby's
umbilical cord - talk to your OB about this today.


Immediate cord clamping/cord blood harvesting temporarily asphyxiates babies
and robs them of massive amounts of blood volume and blood cells that they
would otherwise have transfused to themselves.


THE CORD BLOOD VOLUME STANDARD DRIVES THIS CHILD ABUSE


Francis Verter, PhD and Joana Ramos say:


"Public banks reject a large fraction of...cord blood donations...the
majority of these rejections are based on 'low' volume...It could be argued
that...the volume standard should be open to reconsideration."
http://www.parentsguidecordblo*od.co...rConcerns.html


Peter Hollands, PhD says:


"It is well known that it is often difficult to obtain sufficient
cells for a transplant from an umbilical cord blood sample."
http://www.myelinresearch.com/*2002_08_01_archive.html
http://www.ivf.net/artman/publ*ish/article_89.shtml


Babies are BORN with "sufficient cells" - we are robbing them without their
consent. We should take only what they leave.


OPEN LETTER (archived for global access; see below)


Matthew L. Schissler
Chairman & CEO of Cord Blood America, parent company to Cord
Partners, Inc. (www.cordpartners.com), a private cord blood banking
company.



Matthew,


The volume standard is no doubt partly responsible for the obvious child
abuse called "immediate cord clamping." (Peter Hollands, PhD offered a dodge
when I put the issue of timing of clamping. See below.)


Does Cord Blood America explicitly state anywhere that cord blood should
only be harvested after the cord has stopped pulsating and the baby is pink
and breathing and not in need of resuscitation?


I am in favor of cord blood banking as long as the baby is not robbed of
blood volume (and blood cells, including stem cells) that s/he would
otherwise have transfused to him/herself.


Thank you for posting to the usenet (misc.kids.pregnancy) and recommending
the website maintained by Francis Verter, PhD quoted above.


I will copy Francis via .


Hopefully, she will state right up front on www.parentsguidecordblood.com
website she maintains that cord blood should
only be harvested after the cord has stopped pulsating and the baby is pink
and breathing and not in need of resuscitation.


Hopefully you will do the same on the Cord Blood America website.


ALL cord blood banking websites should call attention to the child abuse and
the simple way to end it - by stopping immediate cord clamping.


Sincerely,


Todd


Dr. Gastaldo



PS Pediatricians indicate that immediate cord clamping is UNETHICAL...


"The importance of larger numbers of stem cells to the success of
engraftment could encourage...cord clamping is done too soon after
birth...the infant may be deprived of a placental blood transfusion,
resulting in lower blood volume and increased risk for anemia in later
life...There may be a temptation to practice immediate cord clamping
aggressively to increase the volume of cord blood that can be harvested for
cord blood banking. This practice is unethical and should be
discouraged...."
PEDIATRICS Vol. 104 No. 1 July 1999, pp. 116-118


PETER HOLLANDS' CORD CLAMP TIMING DODGE...


"In terms of cord blood collection we do not advocate either early or late
clamping, simply normal practice."
--Peter Hollands, PhD to Todd Gastaldo, DC


Peter Hollands, PhD


Peter,


Your glib sentence is a dodge.


Immediate cord clamping IS "simply normal practice" - in babies with medical
problems at delivery (!), as in your statement,


....[b]abies with medical problems at delivery...[should have their cords]
clamped immediately so [they] can be attended to by neonatal
paediatricians..."


Babies with medical problems at delivery may be suffering BRAIN DAMAGE and,
as you say,


"If there were damaged areas of brain...then stem cells could potentially
repair these lesions."
http://www.cord-blood.org/id15*.htm (Can stem cells cure Epilepsy?)


I was pleased to see that AAP says in its cord blood banking statement:
"Cord blood collection should not be done in complicated deliveries..."
http://pediatrics.aappublicati*ons.o...ull/104/1*/116


Complicated deliveries can be a cause of "medical problems at delivery."


I believe OBs are causing some complicated deliveries by closing birth
canals up to 30% and keeping birth canals closed when babies get stuck.


I hope you will inform pregnant women in your circle of family and friends
and tell them how easy it is for them to allow their birth canals to open
the "extra" up to 30%.


Todd


Dr. Gastaldo



PS I quoted AAP:


"[i]mmediate cord clamping aggressively...is unethical and should be
discouraged...."
PEDIATRICS Vol. 104 No. 1 July 1999, pp. 116-118


I forgot to add: ALL immediate cord clamping is agressive [since] the baby
is robbed of blood or blood products that s/he would otherwise have
tranfused to him/herself...


----- Original Message -----
From: Peter Hollands
To: Todd Gastaldo

Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 12:16 PM
Subject: A sad birthday...and Dr. Hollands' 'logical medical
thought'...


Dear Todd,


Thank you for this interesting information. In terms of cord blood
collection we do not advocate either early or late clamping, simply normal
practice.


Regards,


Peter


Dr Peter Hollands PhD, CSci, FIBMS
Scientific Director
Cells for Life Ltd & Victoria Angel Registry of Hope
www.cellsforlife.com


All information in this email is confidential and intended solely for the
addressee. Unauthorized dissemination, distribution or copying of this
information is prohibited and may be unlawful. Although Cells for Life
strives to maintain a virus-free network, all recipients are advised to
check this email and any attachments for viruses. Cells for Life shall not
accept any liability for the transmission or emanation of viruses from this
email.


----- Original Message -----
From: Todd Gastaldo
To:
Cc:
Sent: Tuesday, January 18, 2005 3:04 PM
Subject: A sad birthday...and Dr. Hollands' 'logical medical thought'...


A SAD BIRTHDAY...AND DR. HOLLAND'S "LOGICAL MEDICAL THOUGHT"...


For the sad birthday, see below.


TIPS FOR PREGNANT WOMEN: Dr. Hollands' 'logical medical thought'
(immediate cord clamping so neonatologists can resuscitate) is NOT logical
according to George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB, FACOG, i.e.,


OB or CNMwives should not clamp your baby's cord until it has stopped
pulsating and your baby is pink and breathing and not in need of
resuscitation.


Also, do not let the OB or CNMwife place you dorsal or semisitting as
you push your baby out - unless you want your birth canal closed up to 30%.
It's easy to allow your birth canal to OPEN the "extra" up to 30%. See the
URL in the postscript.


Talk to your OB or CNMwife about these matters BEFORE your birth.


PETER HOLLANDS, PhD (Cells for Life, Ltd), please rethink your "logical
medical thought."


See below.


THE SAD BIRTHDAY...


Kelly Moscarello wrote to me on Jan. 16, 2005:


"Today is [little Bella's] 2nd birthday. No presents or party as she
cannot open up any presents and she will vomit at the sight of cake. Maybe
next year. I hope...My friend...who I met in Fort Lauderdale Florida,
had a severely brain injured child too. Her name was Lief. She died on
Thursday nite. She was born August 26th, and was comatose, vent-dependent,
tube-fed, etc, etc. She died without ever once having opened her eyes to
look at her mom. So sad."


OPEN LETTER


Kelly Moscarello


Kelly,


Thank you for calling my attention back to immediate cord clamping after
Donna Young first called my attention to it...


I will try to always mention your little Bella whenever I write about
immediate cord clamping.


I was really hoping that the idea of hospitals paying for oxygen for
brain-injured babies (HBOT) would catch on given that hospitals are blithely
DENYING babies oxygen at birth.


With hospitals STILL asphyxiating babies routinely, who knows the idea
still might catch on - it could even catch on after hospitals stop
asphyxiating babies at birth.


ASPHYXIATION OF BABIES


Some readers of this Open Letter may not yet be aware that
birth-canal-closing (see the postscript) and immediate cord clamping are
BOTH terrible asphyxiations.


WORSE...


Immediate cord clamping robs babies of significant numbers of STEM CELLS
thought to be able to repair brain tissue...


Peter Hollands, PhD (Cells for Life, Ltd) writes:


"If there were damaged areas of brain...then stem cells could
potentially
repair these lesions."
http://www.cord-blood.org/id15*.htm (Can stem cells cure Epilepsy?)


Bizarrely, Peter Hollands, PhD (Cells for Life, Ltd) writes:


"This concept of not clamping until the cord stops pulsating has no
basis in logical medical thought...[b]abies with medical problems at
delivery...[should have their cords] clamped immediately so [they] can be
attended to by neonatal paediatricians..."
http://www.cord-blood.org/id15*.htm (Click on "Share your learnings"
then
on
"I don't recommend cord blood banking" ---Note: Someone else wrote
this. Peter RECOMMENDS blood banking - and so do I - but whereas I say we
should never immediately clamp cords - Peter is in favor of immediate
clamping "babies with medical problems.")


(Kelly, thanks for calling my attention to some of these quotes from
Peter Hollands, PhD.)


PETER...


WHAT ABOUT BABIES WITH **BRAIN DAMAGE** MEDICAL PROBLEMS AT DELIVERY?


What if stem cells DO repair brain lesions?


What if little Bella's cerebral palsy would have been LESS - perhaps FAR
less - had the paramedic not aped MDs in immediately clamping little Bella's
cord - cutting off her access to her placental stem cells?


We can't know - but we can WONDER whether little Bella would have used
more stem cells to repair her brain...


Retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB, FACOG attacks your
"logical medical thought."


According to Dr. Morley, immediate cord clamping creates "asphyxiated,
hypovolemic" babies - perhaps causing some cases of AUTISM and CEREBRAL
PALSY, as in,
"ACOG's routine treatment (B138) of these depressed neonates is
immediate
cord clamping to obtain cord blood pH studies. The child's only
functioning source of oxygen - the placenta - is amputated together with
30%
to 50+% of its natural blood volume. Total asphyxia is imposed until the
lungs function...[as]...the depressed (asphyxiated, hypovolemic) child
starts its
extra-uterine life in hypovolemic shock...


"B138 was first published in 1993. Every cesarean section baby, every
depressed child, every premie, and every child born with a neonatal team
in
the delivery room has its cord clamped immediately to facilitate the
panicked rush to the resuscitation table. The current epidemic of
immediate
cord clamping coincides with an epidemic of autism.


"For the trial lawyers, it is essential that the 'true genesis' of
cerebral
palsy remains unknown, because that 'true genesis' (B.138) is a standard
of
medico-legal care..."
http://www.cordclamping.com/ac*og-cp.htm


Peter Hollands, PhD once wrote:


"It is well known that it is often difficult to obtain sufficient
cells for a transplant from an umbilical cord blood sample."
http://www.myelinresearch.com/*2002_08_01_archive.html
http://www.ivf.net/artman/publ*ish/article_89.shtml


It only "logical" to immediately clamp cords if one is trying to "obtain
sufficient cells for a transplant."


(There are truly logical occasions to immediately clamp - but they arise
only rarely.)


PEDIATRICIANS TO THE RESCUE...


"The importance of larger numbers of stem cells to the success of
engraftment could encourage...cord clamping is done too soon after
birth...the infant may be deprived of a placental blood transfusion,
resulting in lower blood volume and increased risk for anemia in later
life...There may be a temptation to practice immediate cord clamping
aggressively to increase the volume of cord blood that can be harvested for
cord blood banking. This practice is unethical and should be
discouraged...."
PEDIATRICS Vol. 104 No. 1 July 1999, pp. 116-118


KEY POINT: Immediate cord clamping forces babies to "donate" cord stem
cells to OTHER PEOPLE.


Now, to be sure, in umbilical cord blood banking promotion, the OTHER
PEOPLE are the babies themselves - LATER IN LIFE - but...


F. Leonard Johnson, MD of Oregon Health and Science University/OHSU
says:
"...[A]t most only 0.04 percent of the cord blood units stored for
the baby's exclusive use might actually be used--and this is very likely
a
gross overestimate."
http://www.cord-blood.org/id21*.htm
http://health.groups.yahoo.com*/grou...t/message/3086


Since an estimated 4.6% of "healthy" term neonates suffer unexplained
brain bleeds.


Since there are unexplained paralyses and unexplained DEATHS following
birth...


I think 100% of babies would want ALL of their stem cells at birth and
not have some that they would otherwise have tranfused to themselves stored
for them for use later in life.


Sincerely,


Todd


Dr. Gastaldo



PS Kelly, thanks for writing to find out if I am doing OK. I was pretty
depressed recently. I'm much better now; but obviously, some depression
about this or that is a picnic compared to having to care 24-7 for a
brain-injured child.


Copied to:


Peter Hollands, PhD
Scientific Director
Cells for Life Ltd.
#201-377 Church Street
Markham, Ontario,
Canada L6B 1A1
Tel: 905 472 0060
Email:
http://www.ivf.ca/phollands.ht*m


Peter,


Some more "logical medical thought" for you...


Williams Obstetrics teaches medical students to close birth canals up to
30% and KEEP birth canals closed when babies get stuck. See The Four OB
Lies at the URL given below.


Williams Obstetrics teaches medical students to pull on tiny spines with
hands, forceps and vacuums - with the birth canal closed up to 30%.


It's gruesome mass spinal manipulation by MDs...


OBs sometimes pull so hard they rip spinal nerves out of tiny spinal
cords.


Some babies die - some babies get paralyzed - most "only" have their
spines gruesomely wrenched.


ALL spinal manipulation is gruesome with the birth canal senselessly
closed up to 30%.


Additionally, OBs are committing SURGICAL felonies/batteries - slicing
vaginas/abdomens en masse (episiotomy/c-section) - surgically/fraudulently
inferring they are doing/have done everything possible to open birth
canals - even as they close birth canals up to 30%.


To be sure, allowing birth canals to open the "extra" up to 30% will not
prevent all episiotomies or c-sections or instrumental deliveries - but
there is no reason women should have to ask for the "extra" up to 30% - no
reason for OBs to keep birth canals closed when babies get stuck.


For The Four OB Lies - and for details on gruesome spinal manipulation
by OBs - and for simple
instructions on how easy it is for women to OPEN the birth canal the
"extra"
up to 30%...


See Pediatricians: What about DURING birth?
http://health.groups.yahoo.com*/grou...t/message/3142


Peter, you once offered a hypothetical situation...


"A couple with two children and one of the parents suffers damage to the
spine in an accident resulting in paralysis from the neck down. The couple
decide that they would like to create an embryo to provide stem cells to
repair the damage to the spine and give that parent the chance to return to
normal life. Is this acceptable?"
http://www.ivf.net/artman/publ*ish/article_89.shtml


How can you say,


"...[b]abies with medical problems at delivery...[should have their
cords] clamped immediately so [they] can be attended to by neonatal
paediatricians..." (?)


What if the medical problem is paralysis as in your hypothetical
situation?


What if stem cells help repair brachial plexus paralysis?


Thanks for reading.


Sincerely,


Todd


Dr. Gastaldo



This post will be archived for global access within 24 hours. Search
http://groups.google.com for "A sad birthday...and Dr. Hollands' 'logical
medical thought.'"


wrote in message
oups.com...
Dear Ericka:
I am the Chairman & CEO of Cord Blood America, parent company to Cord
Partners, Inc. (www.cordpartners.com), a private cord blood banking
company.
In reading all of the comments attached, it is obvious that many
people, including medical professionals, are misinformed about
umbilical cord blood, its stem cells and the chances of use.


I suggest you read up on the industry and really understand what you
are discarding if you choose not to privately bank. There are 22
private companies in the United States that provide cord blood banking.
Some better than others. A good place to start is
www.parentsguidecordblood.com, a non-biased website which talks about
each and every company.


snip


END Gastaldo's post to Cord Blood America


Copied to:


Peter Hollands, PhD
Scientific Director
Cells for Life Ltd.
#201-377 Church Street
Markham, Ontario,
Canada L6B 1A1
Tel: 905 472 0060
Email:
http://www.ivf.ca/phollands.ht*m


Peter,


Again, it was a dodge for you to say: "In terms of cord blood collection we
do not advocate either early or late clamping, simply normal practice."


Immediate cord clamping IS "simply normal practice" - in babies with medical
problems at delivery (!), as in your statement,


....[b]abies with medical problems at delivery...[should have their cords]
clamped immediately so [they] can be attended to by neonatal
paediatricians..."


Babies with medical problems at delivery may be suffering BRAIN DAMAGE and,
as you say,


"If there were damaged areas of brain...then stem cells could potentially
repair these lesions."
http://www.cord-blood.org/id15*.htm (Can stem cells cure Epilepsy?)


Please explicitly advocate what retired obstetrician George Malcolm Morley,
MB ChB, FACOG advocates...


Cord blood should only be harvested after the cord has stopped pulsating and
the baby is pink
and breathing and not in need of resuscitation.


Thanks for reading.


Sincerely,


Todd


Dr. Gastaldo



This Open Letter will be archived for global access in the Google usenet
archive. Search http://groups.google.com for "The cord blood volume
standard drives child abuse"


END first Gastaldo post that Amy E. Austin responded to...

BEGIN Amy's first "response"...Note her "trust the OB" theme - which was
Peter Holland's theme...



Todd wrote:


snip

I know I'm new here, so I want to be clear that I mean this as
constructive criticism. Reading your posts is like hearing a shrill,
small dog (like a toy poodle) barking frantically into the wind.
You're such an alarmist that I have a very difficult time taking
anything you say seriously. Maybe you should tone it down, because at
least as far as I'm concerned, any truth in your messages is being
completely lost in the delivery.


My doctor (an OBGYN, not a chiropractor, incidentally) told me that
collecting cord blood is safe, and that they collect a small amount of
blood. I have been told by multiple sources that there is no risk to
my baby or myself. I'm having it collected for research, so that I can
help advance the treatment of Huntington's disease, so that I can help
one of my best friends. She is going to die a horrible death if they
don't figure something out in the next 15 years or so. I think my baby
will be proud to know that s/he helped someone the very day s/he was
born.


I would encourage any woman who is on the fence to talk to her own
doctor about the risks and the benefits of cord blood donation. And
again, I welcome any woman who would like more information about
donation for research purposes to contact me. I would be happy to
share what I have learned.


Sincerely,
Amy

END Amy's first response to Todd

BACK TO AMY'S AGENDA...

WHAT IS IT?

Amy wrote: "Todd insists on crossposting his agenda to hell and back"

John Que indicated that I do NOT crosspost "to hell and back"...

"We all" know Todd's posting habits. His posting were similar in the
1990's. This posting isn't badly crossposted, IMO, as it is only
to three news forum and two of which I read already.


I say again:

PREGNANT WOMEN By immediately clamping umbilical cords, OBs are temporarily
(surgically) asphyxiating babies and robbing them of up to 50% of their
blood volume.

This OB horror is being visited upon EVERY CESAREAN BABY, according to
George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG. See Dr. Morley's astonishing statement
below.

To prevent this horror, simply demand that your OB or CNMwife NOT clamp -
until your baby's cord has stopped pulsating and your baby is pink and
breathing and not in need of resuscitation.

Talk to your OB or CNMwife today.

Thanks for reading everyone.

Sincerely,

Todd

Dr. Gastaldo


This post will be archived for global access in the Google usenet archive.
Search http://groups.google.com for "Cord clamping horror (part 2): What is
Amy's agenda?"