Cord Clamping quotes
Cord Clamping

“Another thing very injurious to the child, is the tying and cutting of the navel string too soon; which should always be left till the child has not only repeatedly breathed but till all pulsation in the cord ceases.  As otherwise the child is much weaker than it ought to be, a portion of the blood being left in the placenta, which ought to have been in the child.”--- Erasmus Darwin, Zoonomia, 1801. [ref]

[July 2008] The ethics of Cord clamping and stem cell collection by Hilary Butler Immediate cord clamping is the equivalent of removing one third of an adults total blood supply (10 pints), or three and one third pints.  That is classified as a severe haemorrhage.  But in babies, immediately cord clamping is worse than a haemorrhage.  The blood in the cord and the placenta is what has “breathed” for the baby, as well as circulating food in, and waste out.  the baby needs that full quota of blood for correct intracranial pressure, lower blood volume, and to decrease the risk of anaemia in later life.  Furthermore, there are unanswered questions about whether depriving the baby of that "abundant" supply of the stem cells which Professor Williamson considers have such wonderful medicinal prospects when 'harvested', may contribute to the development of serious diseases later in life as a result. ......Immediate cord clamping should be called “unethical premature cord clamping”.  Delayed cord clamping should be renamed “normal” or “appropriate cord clamping”.  

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; thus, no obstetrical fault exists; the medico-legal professions are at fault. A Refutation of ACOG’s Report on Cerebral Palsy By George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG

I AM WILLING TO TESTIFY AND OFFER PROOF that immediate cord clamping at birth causes attention deficit disorders, learning disabilities, behavioral disorders, mental retardation, respiratory distress syndrome, and intraventricular hemorrhage, and cerebral palsy.  G. M. Morley, MB ChB FACOG  August 29, 2001 To Whom It May Concern

"I began to notice that often babies who were very quiet would begin to cry when their cord was cut. They would be very distressed, sometimes crying for more than 30 minutes. The question arose: "Does the baby know about its placenta?" and "Does the cutting of the cord hurt it?" There is now a growing body of evidence to support the view that babies do, indeed, have full awareness at birth (unless they are drugged) and that they do feel pain."---- Shivam Rachana, Lotus Birth [sourced]

"To sever the umbilicus when the child has scarcely left the mother's  womb in an act of cruelty whose ill effects are immeasurable. To conserve it intact while it still pulses is to transform the act of birth." -----Frederick Leboyer, Birth Without Violence  [sourced]

"[Nature] has arranged it so that during the dangerous passage of birth, the child is receiving oxygen from two sources rather than one: from the lungs and from the umbilicus. Two systems functioning simultaneously, one relieving the other: the old one, the umbilicus, continues to supply oxygen to the baby until the new one, the lungs, has fully taken its place. However, once the infant has been born and delivered from the mother, it remains bound to her by this umbilicus, which continues to beat for several long minutes: four . . . five .. . sometimes more. Oxygenated by the umbilicus, sheltered from anoxia, the baby can settle into breathing without danger and without shock. At leisure. .. . In addition, the blood has plenty of time to abandon its old route (which leads to the placenta) and progressively to fill the pulmonary circulatory system. During this time, in parallel fashion, an orifice closes in the heart, which seals off the old route forever. In short, for an average of four or five minutes, the newborn infant straddles two worlds. Drawing oxygen from two sources, it switches gradually from the one to the other, without a brutal transition. One scarcely hears a cry. What is required for this miracle to take place? Only a little patience."--Birth Without Violence by Frederick Leboyer [sourced]

Doris Haire writes: "Several years ago De Marsh stated that the placental blood normally belongs to the infant and his failure to get this blood is equivalent to submitting him to a rather severe hemorrhage. . . . Routine early clamping or milking of the umbilical cord may appear to save the professional a few minutes time in the delivery room but neither practice has been demonstrated to be in the best interest of either the essentially unmedicated mother or her infant. [Avery, M. "Decreased Blood Volume," The Lung and Its Disorders in the Newborn Infant 1:130-131, Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders Co.]  [sourced]

Placental transfusion resulting from late clamping, whereby the infant receives approximately an additional 25% of his total blood supply, is part of the physiological sequence of childbirth for most of the world's newborn infants in both developed and developing countries . . . The lithotomy position for birth, preferred by the American obstetrician because it is more convenient for him, makes placental transfusion inconvenient since there is no end of the bed on which the obstetrician can place the wriggling infant. The practice of "milking" the cord in order to save 3 minutes time does not appear to be in the best interests of the newborn infant." (The Cultural Warping of Childbirth, 21) [sourced]

William F. Windle writes: "To clamp the cord immediately is equivalent to subjecting the infant to a massive hemorrhage, because almost a fourth of the fetal blood is in the placental circuit at birth. Depriving the infant of that much blood can be a factor in exacerbating an incipient hypoxemia and can thus contribute to the danger of asphyxial brain damage. (Windle, William F., Scientific American, 1969:77 in Laura Kaplan Shanley, Unassisted Childbirth, 31) [sourced]

After birth, between a fourth and a third of your baby's oxygenated blood remains in your placenta for up to ten minutes. If you give birth in the hospital, your baby is virtually certain not to receive this blood. Without your consent (informed or otherwise), your obstetrician will cut your baby's umbilical cord the moment he emerges from the birth canal, putting your newborn into a state of oxygen deprivation and circulatory shock...... your obstetrician is not interested in science. He lives in myth. In your OB's mind, cutting the cord immediately is "good" because, well, because it is good. "Just because" is the real "reason" behind immediate cord cutting. When your doctor cuts the cord, your baby will gasp for breath before his nasal passages have naturally drained their mucous and amniotic fluid. He will be held by the heels and pounded on the upper back to expel a possible mucous-plug. Your baby's loss of blood sets the stage for cold stress, infant jaundice, iron deficiency (iatrogenic anemia) for up to ten months after birth, erythroblastosis (Rh disease) in a subsequent child, and delayed maternal placental expulsion, which again sets the stage for maternal hemorrhage when your doctor jerks on the umbilical cord stump to remove your placenta (see Reason #5, "You don't want to hemorrhage").
    Deprived of between one-fourth and one-third of his rightful blood, your baby's brain cells, starved for oxygen, will begin to die. As W.F. Windle clearly demonstrated in his experiments that led to the Scientific American article, "Brain damage by asphyxia at birth," brain damage is the inevitable result. (See Reason #76, "You don't want your baby to be brain damaged.") Even if your obstetrician waits to cut the cord until it stops pulsing,  he will still be cutting too early. Even when blood going back to the placenta stops flowing (pulsing), nonpulsing blood going from the placenta into your baby is still flowing. Chapter 74 - You don't want your baby's umbilical cord cut too soon [from Jock Doubleday's eBook, "Spontaneous Creation: 101 Reasons Not to Have Your Baby in a Hospital, volume 2.]

Of further adverse consequences, Doris Haire writes: "Early clamping has been demonstrated by research to lengthen the third stage of labor and increase the likelihood of maternal hemorrhage, retained placenta, or the retention of placental fragments [Botha, M. "The Management of the Umbilical Cord in Labour," S. Afr. J. Obstet., 6(2):30-33, 1968]. The latter condition frequently necessitates the mother's return to the hospital in order to stop inordinate bleeding and to prevent infection. Because early clamping tends to interfere with the spontaneous separation of the placenta, making the need for obstetrical intervention more likely . . . such a practice also tends to increase the incidence of fetomaternal hemorrhage or transfusion. Fetomaternal transfusion, which occurs when fetal blood cells pass into the maternal circulatory system, increases the likelihood of an Rh negative mother of an Rh positive baby developing antibodies. Whether early clamping increases the incidence of anemia in the rapidly growing child has not been sufficiently investigated, but research has demonstrated that the red cell volume of late clamped infants [i.e., infants whose umbilical cords are clamped after pulsing stops] increases by 47%." (The Cultural Warping of Childbirth, 22)  [sourced]

ACOG recommends and teaches immediate amputation of the placenta at birth to obtain cord blood studies for medico-legal documentation; the results have no bearing on child care.  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” (ACOG Practice Bulletin 138 (B138)  is a standard of medico-legal care; thus, no obstetrical fault exists; the medico-legal professions are at fault. A Refutation of ACOG’s Report on Cerebral Palsy By George Malcolm Morley, MB ChB FACOG

"False medical reasons are given for immediately clamping the premature babies.  Premature babies just happen to have more valuable Mother cells, (cord stem cells) then a full-term baby.  I would think they would go to cord blood banks, with or without the parents consent.  All babies, all sizes, whenever born, are being risked to hasty clamping.  NO discrimination, in the size or gestation period of the baby, in most instances.  Most parents will not say anything, after being humiliated and conned in child birth.  But when we have no complaints, the medical malpractice and the corruption will continue. 
    The Mother cells, sought after by science researchers, are the cord stem cells to be used in experimental research to attempt to treat disease. The diseases are likely rooted, originally in the bad birth practices.  Hasty clamping, currently, a trend, on an international scheme."

DECEIT INVOLVED IN BLOOD DENIED THE BABY:  This taking of the baby's blood, in many instances, will be done in secret. Hidden from the mother and the father will be the actual  volume of the blood drained out of the placenta, anywhere from 50 ccs to over 1 cup of blood, 250 ccs (8.8 ounces).  Sometimes the draining is done while the placenta is yet warm in the mother's womb.   This is because they have experimented to prove that warm blood transfuses faster into bags or tubes.   The fact is the mother is actually none-the-wiser.  This is because she cannot feel the blood being drained from the baby's placenta.  It is the baby's deprived blood, not the mother's blood that is sought.  There are mostly unproven medical reasons the doctor and the nurse use to clamp the cord before it had naturally ceased to pulsate.  Both may be in collusion with each other, and may collaborate with policies of the hospital, who may collaborate with policies set by who knows who set them?  Many of the hospitals do send the placenta and blood to drug companies.
     My best guess how long some of the babies were assaulted by unethical doctors and nurses is to the First World War.     While mum's the word on this one as to few survivors of those times, we know the doctors were involved in blood transfusions.  And there is definite recordings of research and experiments that the use of the umbilical cord stem cell blood from babies was used in transfusions all the way back to 1939, during the Second World War.  But the big trend in going public with cord stem cells was not until the 1980's.  What really was going on all this time to many of our babies that we trusted to birth in the hospital for the best of care?
     While most BC Hospitals, on the lower mainland, at the maternity wards would not reveal where the blood from placentas go, and the placentas themselves.  But, at the Royal Alexander Hospital in Edmonton, Alberta,  lab technicians admitted they are given two and three tubes of placenta blood to do the hospital's directed research of the day.   Alberta's Health and Wellness Minister, the Hon. Gary Mar , who has a criminal law degree, accepted this as normal medical procedure.  This was accepted as acceptable practice by the Alberta College of Physicians and Surgeons, too.  No questions asked as to protection of the baby's right to all property rights of its placenta , that I call a blood bag.
    THEORIES:  I present three theories or motives  that I maintain are connected to false medical teachings and practices.  The most common is the taking of the components of the babies blood , more precious then gold, to all medical fields that get a spin-off from creating a situation, where the child does not start life with opportunities to have optimal health.  The medical societies treat illness and disorders but do not actively prevent them or research the likely association and similarities of disorders by looking at drugs , position of birth,   clamping of the cord , and vaccinations .    The facts are, whether hasty umbilical cord clamping is Social Darwinism, Blood and Organ robbing, or Time Efficiency, all three are inexcusable reasons for clamping off a functioning organ.  This is apparently done with no regard of Constitutional Rights of the infant. Sadly, for want of public outcry, no justice official, police or law firm, will protect the babies from being exploited.  The practice will continue until the new generations are better educated.