or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by carriebft

There are actually many studies showing that the eye aniontment lowers infections from other bacteria in the first couple weeks of life, esp staph. I have some saved on my computer somewhere if people want to see them. I am not saying  go get the ointment( like I said, I would not even though we did deal with an infection), but i think its important to have the right info out there. It isn't just hospitals saying it will prevent other infections: there is quite a bit of...
I wasn't aware that eye ointment helps prevent infection in the first couple weeks from other bacteria not related to STDs. My daughter did get an infection in both eyes and we declined the ointment. I think i would continue to decline though because she got the same stuff they would have put on her at birth and i controlled the goop with breastmilk as well. she was fine after one day of use. It seems like a bit much to get it on all my kids though just because of that...
We vaccinate...we have added more to our  schedule as our family has grown and we have done more research. PLus situations have changed and we also travel a lot. We have seen no ill effects. Our children are incredibly healthy. The only VPD we have seen is rotavirus (older two got it and were not vaccinated) but that was before the vaccine with my oldest. None of my kids have ever had ear infections, they do not have asthma or allergies...they have never been...
not saying its perfect, but there are some interesting bits in there. and obviously room for more study; the next measure I would think that would be useful would be unvaxed, lesser vaxed, full vaxed, and i assume they could provide this with the data they already have     sorry for errors nak
you feel you can get nothing because the numbers are unequal? there are some reliable stats that can come of such numbers. It's not like, say, 12 v 4 or something ridiculous like that as we have seen released and touted as a study before, kwim?
I know this is the type of study many here have been waiting for and asking for, though not perfect since its looking back but better than a lot of what we have:   http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/03/110304091458.htm     the paper is here with the methods outlines:   http://www.aerzteblatt.de/int/article.asp?id=80869
There are certain diseases that are more complicated for infants and ones that are more common for infants as well. So, whereas Hep B is complicated if an infant gets it, it is highly unlikely to happen if your infant is not exposed through you, family members, or care providers.   Hib, PCV (pneumoccocal disease) and pertussis are more dangerous to infants. Hib and pneumoccocal have a higher rate of "going invasive" in children under 5 and both can cause quite a few...
Well I think the question becomes, are there complications that occur at home with a CPM present and these complications are not recognized or treated correctly more often than happens in the hospital? Are CNMs more likely to recognize and correctly treat complications? what does the data we have tell us?   So, we are starting to see data that hypoxia is more common at home (study out of australia was recently released on this); and that certain kinds of midwives...
I dunno, like I said, I used a CNM, and I felt I got the midwifery model of care. Yes, she did have rules on certain things (she doesn't attend home VBACs, for example) but we had long appointments, involvement from the family, respect for my choices, home visits, accessibility at all times, natural alternatives (her office is full of info on chiropractic, doulas, etc), laboring was not 'hospital like' at all. My care was very based on ME and my choices. But my midwife...
on the GBS thing- nurse midwives here in PA can do IV antibiotics for GBS at home; I am not sure of the laws/practices where you are, but you can be treated for GBS positive at home. I had a homebirth 2 weeks ago and took the IV antibiotics sitting on a birth ball in my room :)
New Posts  All Forums: