Historical Evidence: Benefits of Delayed Cord Clamping

Image result for baby delivery images
On the importance of delayed cord clamping, with some eye-opening information that will help you to understand why hospitals now push the vitamin k shot, instead of allowing the infant’s body to heal from birth trauma the way it was intended...with the infants own blood and stem cells.
Thanks so much to Unnur Brynjólfsdóttir for this excellent research and commentary!!!
"Charles White an eminent obstetrician in Manchester, England (6) could not have put it better in 1773
“… the common method of tying and cutting the umbilical cord in the instant the child is born, is likewise one of those errors in practice that has nothing to plead in its favour but custom. Is it possible that this wonderful alteration in the human machine should properly be brought about in one instant of time, and at the will of a bystander? Let us leave the affair to nature, and watch her operations and it will soon appear that she stands not in need of our feeble assistance, but will do the work herself at a proper time, and in better manner. In a few minutes the lungs will gradually be expanded and the great alterations in the heart and blood vessels will take place. As soon as this is perfectly done, the circulation in the umbilical cord will cease itself… By this rash, inconsiderate method of tying the umbilical cord before the circulation in it is stopped, I doubt not but many children have been lost, many of their principal organs have been injured, and foundations laid for various disorders."
It's been known for quite some time what too early cord clamping and cutting does. They did it anyways. Why has this been hidden fro. Midwives and Drs education??????
"Obstetrics: Cutting the Cord Too Soon
Friday, Apr. 19, 1963
“The lungs of most newborn infants begin to work exactly on schedule. But among some babies, particularly the premature, the lungs fail to expand properly. The chest sags, breathing is rapid and the child turns blue. Many deaths during the first week after birth are attributable to this condition, which doctors describe as the “respiratory distress syndrome."
“Obstetricians have long noted that babies suffering from such troubles either were delivered by Caesarean section, or were premature infants, or born of diabetic mothers. But in the A.M.A. Journal, a group of pediatricians* from the University of California suggests that the most important factor is the time at which the obstetrician clamps and cuts the infant's umbilical cord.
“The California pediatricians base their theory on a study of 129 infants. Among 41 whose umbilical cords were clamped before they took their second breath, 21 showed moderate to severe respiratory distress.
“In another group of 52 infants whose umbilicals had been clamped some time after the second breath, only six suffered the same symptoms. The condition of the infants who retained their umbilical cords longest was by far the best.
“There are sound reasons, say the doctors, for a slowdown in cutting the umbilical cord. Delay allows a gradual change from fetal to regular circulation without putting stress on blood vessels in the lungs and elsewhere in the body.
The carefree manner in which the newly born infant is “disconnected” from his mother, concludes the report, “is in sharp contrast to the meticulous care with which the thoracic surgeon separates his patient from the heart-lung machine."
“Even the old Greeks knew this.
The controversy about the best time to clamp the cord at birth started over 2000 years ago with Aristotle,1 who observed that:
“Frequently the child appears to be born dead, when it is feeble and when, before the tying of the cord, a flux of blood occurs into the cord adjacent parts. Some nurses who have already acquired skill squeeze (the blood) back out of the cord (into the child’s body) and at once the
baby, who had previously been as if drained of blood, comes to life again. "
They make money selling this blood that's why this information has been hidden from education of midwives and Drs.
"People working in hospitals will tell you to sign your legal consent when you’re having a baby – which you haven’t read because you’re in pain, you’re having contractions, and are full of “I don’t know”, you’re absolutely in the most vulnerable place you can be. You sign because you need the care of those health care providers. And what you’ve done is you’ve signed away your baby’s blood and stem cells. And the hospital actually makes a load, a boatload of money, on the sale of that."-- Robin Lim
"In some instance, doctors early cord clamp so the placenta and its cord blood can then be sold to the highest bidder. When parents sign consent allowing the hospital to "dispose" of the placenta and other remnants of birthing, they can be sold for medical research as opposed to being burned, for as much as $30,000 each. This figure was reported by the Children's Hospital in Randwick, Australia. This was confirmed in the 10th edition of the Principles of Anatomy and Physiology, 2003 page 1076. "
"Still, change could bring opposition. A move to advise delayed clamping could affect cord blood banking for transplants, research, and private industry. The reason: the earlier cords are clamped, the more stem cells they can offer, some report....
... Each cord is worth $20,000 to $40,000."
"Parents usually have no clue that the blood of their child is being taken for research, and this is not accidental. Parents usually sign the fine print allowing their hospital to "dispose" of the cord blood and placenta, which is actually saved, and then sold to the highest bidder. "
“I have the feeling that cord blood has in fact been stolen from us for decades. This [information] needs to be spread widely. And the question, why hasn't this been in the curriculum of Drs and midwives education??? To not cut the cord immediately? Since this has been known for decades. Why have they been cutting the cord so early all those years if this has been known for so long???
“Cause cord blood is valuable and they knew that in the 50's.”