or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › Any Rh Negative UCers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Any Rh Negative UCers? - Page 3

post #41 of 94

Link #2- Yeah that's a horrible source for any actual information!

 

Yes, blood systems can mix (obviously if you can pass along nutrients or drugs, right?)!

No, these incompatabilities didn't just crop up because of medical advances. They were found due to medical advancement. Before they were found babies would just die. If homebirth prevented this, um, how did I end up with an incompatability?? Taking herbs, changing your diet, and doing enemas don't change your blood! You can't tell me people actually believe this website?? LOL

 

Link #3- Diet won't prevent anything. Again, interventions don't cause it.

 

Link #1- "However the company that manufactures RhoGam lobbied to have it's use expanded to all RH- mothers during and after pregnancy to 'guarantee' that all high risk mothers were protected."

 

You mean they wanted to see so many babies not die?? The horrors! And Rhogam will harm your baby?? Please!

 

http://www.childrenshospital.org/az/Site1006/mainpageS1006P0.html

You may wanna look at REAL medical sites!

post #42 of 94

Daisycoming, you should be aware that there is a lot of outdated information and some outright falsehoods on the links that you cite.  For example, Rhogam has been mercury-free since (IIRC) 2001.  There are some Rhogam alternatives that were never manufactured with thimerosal at all.  There *are* safety reasons to administer Rhogam during pregnancy - if you experience bleeding or abdominal trauma and are exposed to your baby's Rh+ blood, you can develop sensitization that could harm future pregnancies well before the post-natal shot could be given.  Additionally, I would beware of anything linking to whale.to.  They are not a trustworthy source.

 

Unhinderedliving.com is strange and hazardous.  You cannot change your Rh type by adhering to any particular diet, and the writer there gets nuttier as she gets into other topics. Her advice on at least one kind of pregnancy complication is potentially fatal if followed.

 

I haven't checked out the third one, and so cannot comment.

post #43 of 94

Sorry about the sources. Thanks for the link.

post #44 of 94
Thread Starter 

Dayiscoming, I actually agree that some women are able to change their Rh factor through diet.Of course we have no evidence that every woman can do that, but some have and I think that's awesome! For those who have no faith in it, obviously, what's the point in changing your diet? It turns out that I am Rh+,so there would be no use changing my diet for THAT reason. If I were Rh- I honestly think I would give it a try. Of course, if it didn't work, there's always PP Rhogam. I personally love the site Unhindered Living...maybe it's just because I'm a "crunchy"! As with EVERY site, you have to take what you read with a grain of salt. There are some things I entirely agree with on Unhindered Living, and others not so much. But then again, that's with every site.

 

 

post #45 of 94

Everyone who posts the diet is quoting an article by Stephen Marini.  There are a number of reasons to think Marini is a quack.  For starters, he's a chiropractor, and immunology and hematology are way outside his scope of practice.  He claims that the diet works by cleansing the blood.  

 

Which makes no sense.

 

Rh+ individuals HAVE rhesus factor in their blood.  It's genetic.

 

Rh- individuals DO NOT HAVE rhesus factor in their blood.  This is also genetic.

 

You can't cleanse the blood of something that isn't there.  

 

It is far more likely that people who have "changed" their blood type have fallen prey to a laboratory error that misread their blood type on one of the two occasions on which they were tested than that their blood type actually changed.  

 

The diet is as follows:

 

 

Quote:
1. Changing their diet and eliminating all sugar, white flour, caffeine,

sodas, processed foods, and alcohol.

2. Using a lower bowel tonic and occasional colonics to keep the bowel
clear.

3. Use of herbs to cleanse the blood such as:

A. Periwinkle

B. Red Raspberry Leaf Tea

C. A tea made from red clover blossoms, chaparral, licorice root,poke
root,
peach bark, Oregon grape root, stillingia, cascara sagrada,sarsparilla,
prickly ash bark, burdock root, and buckthorn bark.

D. A few capsules of: goldenseal root, blessed thistle, cayenne,
cramp bark, false unicorn root, ginger, red raspberry leaves, squaw vine
and uva ursi.

And a few capsules of: black cohosh, sarsparilla, ginseng, licorice,
false unicorn, holy thistle and squaw vine.

4. Also, included in the diet blood builders, such as grape juice,
molasses, beets, and others.

 

Step by step, here are the problems with it:

 

Item 1 - Which sugars are the problem? Truly eliminating all sugars would kill you.  Even if you assume he means all refined sugars, and naturally occurring sugars are OK, the rest of this item indicates that this is an expensive, calorie restricted diet.  That's OK if you want to lose weight, but it won't affect your blood type.

 

Item 2 - Why are "improve your life/change the way your body works" diet types so hung up on the colon?  Frequent bowel movements and a "clear" gut aren't going to do anything to your blood at all.  If there is a lot of blood in your bowel movements, you should seek immediate medical attention.  Also, diarrhea can be dangerous for pregnant women.  So this diet is DANGEROUS for a whole bunch of people who might feel they have an urgent need to change their blood type.  In any case, the problem that causes hemolytic disease of the newborn is with the immune system, not the digestive system.

 

Item 3 - Black cohosh causes contractions and is used as an abortificent.  Fine if you're not pregnant.  Potentially risky if you are pregnant and don't want to be.  Really, really bad if you are pregnant and would like to remain so for 40 weeks.  Also, that's a LOT of medicinal herbs.  I don't know a lot of those.  I would be deeply concerned about how they would interact, if any of them cause bleeding or interfere with clotting, and if they might cause diarrhea.  I know licorice causes diarrhea.  Cayenne is a common feature in "negative calorie" diets popular among bulemics.  You might feel like you're undergoing a life-altering experience on all those, but if you do you're really just sick and should stop taking so many damn drugs.

 

Seriously, if a medical doctor proposed that a pregnant women needed to take THIRTY different medications (or a nursing woman, or any woman not undergoing chemotherapy, and even then I think that number is large) we would all freak out.  That's a TON of stuff with side effects and potential problems with interactions,  and safety issues for the fetus/nursing babe/patient herself.  Medicinal herbs got a reputation for working because they also have measurable effects on the body, not all of which are considered desirable in all patients, and taking 30 different herbs at once should also be a scary idea.  

 

Despite the risks of combining all of these (to me, mysterious) substances, they definitely will not irradiate your bone marrow and alter your DNA, which is what it would take to change your blood type. 

 

Item 4 -  Grape juice, molasses, and beets won't hurt you, though they do contradict the sugars and processed foods prohibition in item 1.  All those things were once considered blood builders because of the Law of Signs that prevailed in medieval medicine - they look kinda like blood in color or texture.  Medieval folk healers did discover some things that are genuinely helpful.  The idea that beets, molasses, and grape juice (or red wine - also popular) helped with blood loss, or blood infections, or the immune system isn't among them.

 

 

ETA: While a description of the diet was on the same page as Marini's article, Marini did not create or recommend the diet described here.  I have corrected this misattribution in post 63 on this thread.

 


Edited by stik - 3/9/11 at 1:27pm
post #46 of 94

Less attack, more fact. That's where we should keep this. Let's strive for better, thanks.

post #47 of 94

Understanding and evaluating the source of information is really important when using that information to make decisions.

post #48 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizabethE View Post

Less attack, more fact. That's where we should keep this. Let's strive for better, thanks.



Less attack, more fact. Yes! Asking for "more reputable sources" is hardly an attack in itself, though. These are crucial decisions, and decisions should be based on actual facts.

post #49 of 94


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by WinterPrego View Post

Dayiscoming, I actually agree that some women are able to change their Rh factor through diet.Of course we have no evidence that every woman can do that, but some have and I think that's awesome! For those who have no faith in it, obviously, what's the point in changing your diet? It turns out that I am Rh+,so there would be no use changing my diet for THAT reason. If I were Rh- I honestly think I would give it a try. Of course, if it didn't work, there's always PP Rhogam. I personally love the site Unhindered Living...maybe it's just because I'm a "crunchy"! As with EVERY site, you have to take what you read with a grain of salt. There are some things I entirely agree with on Unhindered Living, and others not so much. But then again, that's with every site.

 

 


It is impossible to change Rh factor through diet, as it is part of your genetic code. That would be like saying you can change your eye color based on what you eat.

 

post #50 of 94


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Delicateflower View Post





ABO antibodies do cross the placenta

 

[quote]HDN can also be caused by an incompatibility of the ABO blood group. It arises when a mother with blood type O becomes pregnant with a fetus with a different blood type (type A, B, or AB). The mother's serum contains naturally occurring anti-A and anti-B, which tend to be of the IgG class and can therefore cross the placenta and hemolyse fetal RBCs.[/quote]

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK2266/

 

Thanks for the link, it has a lot more detail than I've found anywhere else.
 

 

post #51 of 94

Stik and Mittens--

 

it's not that I disagree with your sentiments on facts as you've expressed them in your most recent comments.

 

What I am saying is that... before we just tell each other flat out what garbage one another's sources are (which is specifically one thing I saw and which I responded to), maybe we can use logic instead to guide towards whichever sources we may personally deem more accurate (and why), and also do one another the service of actually explaining why something is not "reputable". I think that would be critical to truly making an informed decision... versus just being plain critical. Something may seem obviously not reputable to you, but if it were that apparent to everyone, we/they would not be pointing in that direction. And just simply saying something is nutty or untrue doesn't exactly tell anyone how or why-- we'd just have to take your word for it.

 

In the end though, the person may walk away thinking their sources are still reputable; but never will this be more true than if you didn't take the time to explain your judgment to them.

 

That's what I meant by less attacks, and more facts.

post #52 of 94

ElizabethE, I explained why Marini is not reputable in an earlier post on this thread.  And I explained my concerns about the efficacy and safety of the "change your Rh factor" diet in the post a little further up this page.  My logic and the reasons behind my strong opinion about the reputability of sources are laid out, in detail, in both posts. 

 

In both cases, my posts are strongly worded.  I feel pretty strongly.  I would hate for someone to think that she's making a few little adjustments in her diet to try to make exposure to a human blood product unnecessary and wind up accidentally aborting her baby (and possibly sensitizing her immune system to Rh factor at the same time so that she can never have a normal pregnancy again).  Which is completely possible on the "change your Rh factor" diet as I have seen it described. 

 

There's a time and place for my kind and gentle words, but I do not think it appropriate or helpful to be tactful about people who encourage pregnant women to do things that are known to be extremely dangerous for them and likely fatal for their babies. 

 

ETA: I mistakenly attributed the recommendation for herbal abortion tea for Rh negative moms to Marini.  Please see my correction in post 63.


Edited by stik - 3/9/11 at 1:28pm
post #53 of 94

Stik, I thought you did a great job presenting your information. I also did not think your choice of words was in any way unnecessarily harsh or uncalled for. :)

post #54 of 94

I was confused by your wording.

 

I'm glad you found me reasonable because I did some more digging and I'm going to continue to be harsh. 

 

One of the things I studied in college was the history of medicine.  Carol Smith-Rosenberg wrote a fascinating article about abortion in colonial America, entitled "Taking the Trade."  It should still be available if you dig.  Smith-Rosenberg listed some of the key phrases 18th-century advertisers used to hint that certain substances would terminate a pregnancy.  These were things like "cures amenorrhea," "restores/regulates the menstrual cycle," etc.  I found these and similar phrases used in descriptions of periwinkle, cramp bark, squaw vine, and false unicorn root in addition to the black cohosh.  The tea Marini is recommending is like a recipe for herbal abortion (which I also don't recommend - Smith-Rosenberg's research suggests a high mortality rate for DIY herbal abortions.)  Modern sources list many of these substances as unsafe for pregnancy.  And I haven't looked them all up yet.

post #55 of 94

Ack! One of the sources I quoted was recommending herbal abortion? If so, I had no idea. Personally, very anti-abortion - no matter which kind.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

I was confused by your wording.

 

I'm glad you found me reasonable because I did some more digging and I'm going to continue to be harsh. 

 

One of the things I studied in college was the history of medicine.  Carol Smith-Rosenberg wrote a fascinating article about abortion in colonial America, entitled "Taking the Trade."  It should still be available if you dig.  Smith-Rosenberg listed some of the key phrases 18th-century advertisers used to hint that certain substances would terminate a pregnancy.  These were things like "cures amenorrhea," "restores/regulates the menstrual cycle," etc.  I found these and similar phrases used in descriptions of periwinkle, cramp bark, squaw vine, and false unicorn root in addition to the black cohosh.  The tea Marini is recommending is like a recipe for herbal abortion (which I also don't recommend - Smith-Rosenberg's research suggests a high mortality rate for DIY herbal abortions.)  Modern sources list many of these substances as unsafe for pregnancy.  And I haven't looked them all up yet.



 

post #56 of 94

The article wasn't recommending herbal abortion, per se.  A better phrasing would be something like "could easily lead a woman to terminate her pregnancy by accident." 

 

The article described a diet that purported to change your Rh factor.  The diet included large quantities of herbal supplements and teas that would likely result in abortion if taken by a pregnant woman.  This risk was not acknowledged in the article. 

 

Frightening a woman about the accepted and largely effective treatment for a preventable condition and encouraging her to take a poisonous herbal concoction that kills her baby instead is one of the most despicable things I can imagine. 

 

 

 

 

post #57 of 94

Stik,

 

Wow, didn't realize that. Thanks for the info. 

post #58 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

 

Frightening a woman about the accepted and largely effective treatment for a preventable condition and encouraging her to take a poisonous herbal concoction that kills her baby instead is one of the most despicable things I can imagine. 

 

 

 

 



I agree, but do you think that was the intention?

post #59 of 94

Honestly, I don't care if it was intentional or not. 

 

I think there might be a number of people who would innocently repeat the advice with no idea what it really entails.  After all, we encourage people to use diet to treat all kinds of things because there are many conditions for which dietary changes are the most effective, safest treatment for many patients.  Blood pressure and cholesterol come to mind as examples.  Lots of people go vegan or TF or gluten-free or paleo without serious health consequences.  "Try this diet" sounds really harmless to a lot of people.  We don't all research the components of a diet we're recommending but not trying, especially if the diet is recommended by a health care provider (even if it's not our own health care provider).  Health care providers are supposed to look out for people's health.  I'm not angry at the posters who recommended the diet here.  I'm sure they were just as uninformed as I was before I started researching the herbs Marini was recommending. 

 

Now if people continue to recommend the magical, Rh-factor-changing, baby-killing diet, I might get pretty angry at them too. 

 

For the moment, I reserve my ire for Marini.  *He* wrote an article aimed at pregnant women concerned about the possible side effects of Rhogam.  In it, *he* recommended a regimen of herbal teas and supplements.  If taken as described, those herbs would cause miscarriage.  There is absolutely no possibility that the diet (or any diet) would accomplish what Marini says it does.  Therefore, the results of attempting the diet for the article's main audience would be completely harmful, with no possibility of benefit

 

My conclusion: Marini is a sorry excuse for a health care provider who should retract his article as publicly as possible and seek to have it removed from the many places on the web where it has been re-posted, and in the future, he should limit his writing and his scope of practice to topics and conditions he actually knows something about. 

 

ETA: Marini did not write the article recommending the Rh-changing, baby-killing diet.  While I still think his advice on the treatment of Rh incompatibility and sensitization is irresponsible, he's not at fault for the bizarre herbal regimen recommended on a page that also summarized an article he wrote.  See full correction in post 63.  


Edited by stik - 3/9/11 at 1:31pm
post #60 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by stik View Post

Honestly, I don't care if it was intentional or not. 

 

I think there might be a number of people who would innocently repeat the advice with no idea what it really entails.  After all, we encourage people to use diet to treat all kinds of things because there are many conditions for which dietary changes are the most effective, safest treatment for many patients.  Blood pressure and cholesterol come to mind as examples.  Lots of people go vegan or TF or gluten-free or paleo without serious health consequences.  "Try this diet" sounds really harmless to a lot of people.  We don't all research the components of a diet we're recommending but not trying, especially if the diet is recommended by a health care provider (even if it's not our own health care provider).  Health care providers are supposed to look out for people's health.  I'm not angry at the posters who recommended the diet here.  I'm sure they were just as uninformed as I was before I started researching the herbs Marini was recommending. 

 

Now if people continue to recommend the magical, Rh-factor-changing, baby-killing diet, I might get pretty angry at them too. 

 

For the moment, I reserve my ire for Marini.  *He* wrote an article aimed at pregnant women concerned about the possible side effects of Rhogam.  In it, *he* recommended a regimen of herbal teas and supplements.  If taken as described, those herbs would cause miscarriage.  There is absolutely no possibility that the diet (or any diet) would accomplish what Marini says it does.  Therefore, the results of attempting the diet for the article's main audience would be completely harmful, with no possibility of benefit

 

My conclusion: Marini is a sorry excuse for a health care provider who should retract his article as publicly as possible and seek to have it removed from the many places on the web where it has been re-posted, and in the future, he should limit his writing and his scope of practice to topics and conditions he actually knows something about. 


Obviously if everything you are saying is true, there is a reason to be angry towards this person. The only reason I brought up intentions was that I wondered if you felt this was his scheme or something.

 

I don't really have any other background or knowledge on this subject other than what I am hearing everyone share right here. I can only take everyone's word for it, or go ahead and research it right now myself, which I'm too lazy to at the moment because it doesn't apply to me, personally. If it did, though, I would do some serious extensive research on all sides of this topic and I certainly think it's beyond good of an idea for those in this situation to do the same.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Unassisted Childbirth
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Pregnancy and Birth › Birth and Beyond › Unassisted Childbirth › Any Rh Negative UCers?