http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8231144.stm
Interesting article, partly because of the misinformation in it. The author missed a great opportunity to point out that putting baby straight to the breast after birth provides the mother her own natural oxytocin boost, which helps with delivering the placenta and getting the uterus back to normal size.
The article makes it sound like oxytocin (probably actually pitocin?) shots are commonplace in British protocol -- why? It also calls this shot a "clotting drug," which of course it isn't. The point of pitocin is to make the uterus contract, which automatically reduces the risk of hemorrhage. Ergometrine is also not a clotting drug, but a vasoconstrictor. It always annoys me when science journalism is sloppy.
I don't think much of the doctor who wants to keep using these drugs as part of standard care in order to reduce postpartum bleeding from 18% to 6%. Can't they at least wait and see who actually needs the drugs? It looks like 82% of women are getting drugs they don't need, and which may interfere with their ability to nurse. That's criminal.
Now that I've got that off my chest, maybe I'll write a letter to the editor of the BBC!
Interesting article, partly because of the misinformation in it. The author missed a great opportunity to point out that putting baby straight to the breast after birth provides the mother her own natural oxytocin boost, which helps with delivering the placenta and getting the uterus back to normal size.
The article makes it sound like oxytocin (probably actually pitocin?) shots are commonplace in British protocol -- why? It also calls this shot a "clotting drug," which of course it isn't. The point of pitocin is to make the uterus contract, which automatically reduces the risk of hemorrhage. Ergometrine is also not a clotting drug, but a vasoconstrictor. It always annoys me when science journalism is sloppy.
I don't think much of the doctor who wants to keep using these drugs as part of standard care in order to reduce postpartum bleeding from 18% to 6%. Can't they at least wait and see who actually needs the drugs? It looks like 82% of women are getting drugs they don't need, and which may interfere with their ability to nurse. That's criminal.
Now that I've got that off my chest, maybe I'll write a letter to the editor of the BBC!
