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 4

post #61 of 94

 

Quote:
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.

 

I certainly didn't make it all up. 

 

I don't think pushing the diet is Marini's "scheme."  I think if it was, he would have been sued by now.  I think his scheme is to get families to come to seminars where he tells them how their horrible mistakes caused their child's autism, then get them to pay through the nose for heavy metal testing and chelation therapy (both of which have been extensively debunked elsewhere).  I think the notion that there is a diet jam-packed with "natural" substances (like the high levels of arsenic that are naturally-occurring in periwinkle, the first herb on Marini's list) helps him make his case that the corrupt western medical establishment wants to inject the world with massive quantities of heavy metals instead of doing things the "natural" way - i.e., the way Marini recommends. 

 

My research process consisted of running a series of google searches on "uses of (name of herb)" and reading the top 2-3 unpaid search returns, for anyone who would like to replicate. 

 

ETA: Please see the corrections to this post in post #63 below.


Edited by stik - 3/9/11 at 1:34pm
post #62 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizabethE View Post

 

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.

 


Elizabeth, I say this with the greatest respect - what other side?  Is there some alternate universe in which it would be a good idea for women to take black cohosh in early pregnancy?

 

I have said before, and I will continue to say, the advice on Unhindered Living is often factually incorrect and sometimes dangerous.  You've been provided with facts that back this conclusion up, but you encourage people to research all sides, as though some change of perspective would make these facts irrelevant.  At a certain point, you cross the line from open-minded to dismissive.  You've been very nice to everyone who has done research on issues you are presently uninterested in looking into, but in suggesting that other sides should be looked into (particularly as you don't say what those other sides might be), it kind of reads like you're saying that those facts, however true, interesting, well-researched, etc. they are, don't matter.

 

It's common in our culture, particularly in the media, to try and present two sides to everything.  On scientific subjects, this can result in people with some incredibly strange and unsubstantiated ideas getting press and attention which their work doesn't merit.  Unhindered Living is a fantastic alternate viewpoint - it presents material that is radically different from most of the rest of the available material on pregnancy and birth.  Unfortunately, that material is often utterly divorced from reality, easily refuted with small amounts of logic and research, and unworthy of serious consideration.

post #63 of 94

In the interests of being fair to Steven Marini, I no longer think the diet is his work.

 

I assumed that he came up with the diet because it appeared on the same page as his article on the dangers of Rhogam, http://www.vaccinetruth.org/rhogam.htm.  I was incorrect.    

 

When I look more carefully, I see that the page compiles several articles by different authors.  I am trying to track down the individual or entity that recommends baby-killing tea as an alternative to Rhogam right now.  While I don't think Marini is credible as an immunologist, he doesn't recommend dangerous herbal concoctions to pregnant women.  

 

ETA: The page at vaccinetruth.org links the diet to http://www.whale.to/a/rhogam.html, which links it back to what appears to be its origin, the Rhogam page on the Unhindered Living, http://www.unhinderedliving.com/rhogam.html.  The Unhindered Living page does not list an author.  However, the whale.to page names Judie C. Rall as the copyright holder of the article with the diet in it.  In various places (an Amazon.com profile, Unhindered Living, what I think is probably a promotional page for fengsuidesigns.com), I find Judy C. Rall describing herself as a spiritual advisor, an ordained minister of the Temple of Earth, and a feng shui consultant.  All these sources mention Unhindered Living, which leads me to believe that these are all the same person.  

 

On the other hand, the unhindered living page lists the copyright holder as Judie C. Snelson.  Her biography at http://www.unhinderedliving.com/aboutus.html describes her as 

 

Quote:
Judie C. Snelson, a native of Lawton, Oklahoma.  She is a Holistic Health Practitioner with a Bachelor's Degree in Holistic Nutrition, a Master's Degree in Behavioral Science and a pH.D in Religion. She is also a Certified Childbirth Educator, Certified Relaxation Therapist, Certified Feng Shui Consultant, Certified EFT Practitioner, Reiki Master and Ordained Minister. The Center for Unhindered Living is a learning community which teaches ways to overcome obstacles to your health, happiness, peace and prosperity.  Judie is also an Internet Marketing Specialist and the unschooling mother of two grown boys.

The picture on Snelson's bio page matches the one on Rall's amazon.com bio, as does the mention of being the unschooling mother of two grown boys.  I think they're the same person.  

 

She has also posted to a thread on an OB-GYN list asserting that she is 

 

Quote:
a "medical professional"

 

Further, from the same page: http://forums.obgyn.net/ob-gyn-l/?page=OBGYNL.0110/0158

 

 

Quote:
Your list does not specifify "doctors only" but says "medical professionals" only. This opens your list to anyone with medical training, as it should. I don't use the Dr. title (which I am entitled to use) unless I need it to be able to speak to people like you. I DON'T use it with the women I work with....it causes them to be distrustful of me.

 

The OBs didn't seem appreciative, and they didn't even know she recommends skipping Rhogam in favor of baby-killing tea.  Her "Doctor" title would seem to be a result of her PhD in Religion, and "the women I work with" would seem to be the participants in her childbirth classes, her Reiki, EFT, relaxation therapy and feng shui clients, and possibly the audience at unhinderedliving.com.  Her claims to be in keeping with a grandiose personality and a willingness to make unsubstantiated assertions with little concern about the consequences.  

 

In summary:

- My apologies to Stphen Marini.  He may not know anything about autism, genetics, or immunology, but he doesn't recommend baby-killing tea.

- Unhindered Living recommends the baby-killing herbal regimen, offering yet another reason to steer clear of that site.  


Edited by stik - 3/9/11 at 11:48am
post #64 of 94

Meepy-- I'm not trying to be dismissive, I'm trying to give benefit of the doubt. You say what other side-- well honestly, who knows? Since I'm not personally knowledgeable on this subject, since all I have to go on IS what I'm seeing here, I'm attempting to keep an open mind that someone with more knowledge on the topic could potentially disagree with some of this. I'm not necessarily supporting Marini or Unhindered Living, I'm just admitting that I don't know. You might think that's dismissive, and maybe it seems dismissive towards you, but again-- if this is all I have to go on, I've got to consider that maybe this isn't the last word. I don't really see much wrong with that. I haven't concluded one way or the other, so the jury is still out for me.

 

 

 

 

post #65 of 94

I think at some point in a conversation, you have to either define your concerns and shape some questions out of them, or admit that you don't actually care about the topic and walk away.  ElizabethE, you said in an earlier post that you're unmotivated to do research on this topic because it doesn't apply to you personally.  So what you seem to be advocating here is that *other women* should hold themselves open to the possibility that a baby-killing regimen of herbal supplements will change their Rh factor.  

 

Why should anyone do that?  

 

Doubt plays an important role in critical thought, but leaving room for doubt isn't an end in and of itself.  

post #66 of 94

I'm sorry, I thought I just did that.

 

No, in all seriousness, the subject deserves respect; it just so happens that I have no formal conclusions based on my own thus-far lack of passion on this particular subtopic. So, allow me to play devil's advocate.

 

I think in some point in a conversation, one has to make a choice about what points they are really here to vouch for versus what points ultimately don't matter to the issue. This choice includes allowing people to remain open-ended in their opinions out of nothing more perhaps than pure civility, or not.

 

What I am advocating, dear Stik, is that we all as women recognize who our information is coming from and what their motivating factors are for presenting such information before subscribing to any one belief or "fact". This stretches from the likes of Marini all the way to internet forum visitors. I still don't know if it's a baby killing regimen, and we've even been back and forth on who even advises it; and although I am not personally taking time to check into it, I sincerely encourage any of the women here to make those conclusions for themselves and cross-check it against multiple sources first. That's not really harmful, is it? After all, if you're right and they're smart, they're just going to conclude what you did, so it's "all good".

 

Yes, leaving room for doubt is no end. I leave that up to the individual. I don't ask them to join me in uncertainty, I encourage them to carry on in the quest for knowledge, even after I've "moved on" from a topic or you've presented your own case. Now, this is me, walking away again... :)

post #67 of 94

OK, well, my motivation is that I don't want anyone to accidentally kill their baby in the vain hope that doing so will allow them to avoid the need for Rhogam. 

 

I don't see any point in being polite about people who advocate herbal regimens they haven't researched without considering the potential harm.  I don't think civility is synonymous with being open-minded about things that are clearly wrong. 

 

The unhinderedliving.com people seem to also be of the mind that it is the responsibility of the individual consumer to research everything and make her own decisions.  Their site includes a disclaimer that notes that the info on the site isn't intended as medical advice, and then goes on to state that since the medical textbooks and journals that doctors learn from are available to the public, anyone can assemble a medical school education and thus make perfectly informed medical decisions on their own.  In my life, I find that often isn't true.  I have a lot of faith in my education and my instincts and I often simply don't have time to start at basic immunology or whatever and work my way to a form understanding of the medical issues involved to make truly informed decisions in a timely matter.  And time is a really important consideration in making health care decisions.  It forces a lot of people to fly by the seat of their pants. 

 

Not everyone has a ton of time.  You have 28 weeks to make a decision about the first Rhogam shot, if you start thinking as soon as you get pregnant.  You have another 12 weeks or so to think about the second shot.  Probably less if you're UCing, because you have to find someone who will order it for you.  Those windows will shorten if you have an abdominal trauma or any bleeding. 

 

I don't know why you're not convinced the herbal regimen under consideration is unsafe.  But yes, I described my research process so that anyone who wanted to could replicate it and see for themselves, and that's fine. 

 

But for anyone who, like you, isn't feeling particularly passionate or energetic but who may, unlike you, actually need the information anyway, and for anyone who is short on time, the only thing I've ever been in doubt of is the origin of the diet recommendation.  A bunch of those herbs are unsafe for pregnant women because they cause abortion.  

 

 

post #68 of 94

Duly noted. :) Hey, you could very well be right about everything.

 

I'm not suggesting you be civil when it comes to theories you feel are harmful from people you feel are nutty. Only in terms of exchanges with them, perhaps. You're allowed to think someone is insane and to tell us all about it. Good times.

post #69 of 94

I have read through this thread, and I have heard of the Rh changing diet, herbs, etc.  I have not attempted the regime myself, but my understanding of it is that you are supposed to try this when you are *not* pregnant.  From my understanding, pregnancy would be too late to change anything, if the herbs/diet would even do anything to help in the first place.  Anyway, I know it sounds totally unbelievable, but not everything can be explained by debate and scientific reasoning, so I continue to keep an open mind on the subject of Rh changes.

post #70 of 94

The diet is described on a page linked on unhinderedliving.com's "Online Childbirth Class."  http://www.unhinderedliving.com/childbirth.html

 

Nothing on the Childbirth class page, the Rhogam page, or any other on unhinderedliving.com's website suggests that the diet is not to be attempted during pregnancy, or that any of the herbal supplements included in it are unsafe for pregnant women. 

 

The author states

 

Quote:
I am simply sharing all this with you because I believe it is dangerous to take the Rhogam shot.  If you are  tested and are told you need the shot, please do not rush into this decision.  I believe that you have other options besides permanently damaging your immune system. 

 

This strongly implies that she has no idea that what she is proposing is even dangerous.  Why would you recommend against Rhogam because of its contents, as the author does:

 

Quote:
Reading the package insert on Rhogam is a very educational experience.  There are many risks to taking the shot, including anaphalactic shock.  Damage to the immune system can also be permanent.  Rhogam is made from human blood products which can harbor viruses that cannot be screened out.  With HIV and other harmful viruses out there, it is outrageous to think of exposing yourself to potential risk of getting it from a Rhogam shot.  It also is preserved in a mercury derivative, an extremely dangerous substance even in small quantities.  The package insert also says there are risks to the immune system of the mother or child if they have allergies.  Who among us doesn't have an allergy to something?

 

and then recommend an intensive herbal regimen that ALSO contains heavy metals (check out periwinkle), and can trigger allergies?  The only point in the herbs' favor is that they aren't made of human blood products.  I think causing miscarriage cancels that benefit.  In my opinion, the writer of the article on the Unhindered Living website is clearly proposing the diet as an alternative to Rhogam. 

 

I suppose God could work a miracle that would change your Rh factor, but that's what it would take.  Changing your diet will not change your DNA. 

post #71 of 94

Was this last post in response to mine?  I would like to calmly discuss what I know with you, but am completely turned off by your attitude.  I have not read the article on the birth site.  I am telling you that I have heard about this (diet/herbs/rh factor changing) and that it was not something left to be done while already pregnant.  Quoting the birth website at me will not change what I know.  I don't agree that DNA cannot be altered, and I continue to keep an open mind on the subject. 

post #72 of 94

Raf, I would love to see your scientific evidence on changing blood types with diet and herbs.

post #73 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by RAF View Post

Was this last post in response to mine?  I would like to calmly discuss what I know with you, but am completely turned off by your attitude.  I have not read the article on the birth site.  I am telling you that I have heard about this (diet/herbs/rh factor changing) and that it was not something left to be done while already pregnant.  Quoting the birth website at me will not change what I know.  I don't agree that DNA cannot be altered, and I continue to keep an open mind on the subject. 


I'm sorry to sound snippy at you.  Because I'm reserving my current snippiness for the folks at Unhindered Living who are allowing a diet that would result in accidental termination of a pregnancy to be part of an article published for the express purpose of offering advice to pregnant mothers without mentioning that it's not safe for pregnancy AT ALL.

 

Them, I'm pretty snippy at.  

 

I'd love to hear what you know about the Rh changing diet.  I'd love to see any other sources that discuss it.  I'd love to see your evidence that DNA can be altered.  

 

post #74 of 94

Really?  Why is that?
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by RAF View Post

 I don't agree that DNA cannot be altered



 

post #75 of 94


Stik, I appreciate your ability to respond so clearly and patiently. thumb.gif

post #76 of 94

eyesroll.gif

post #77 of 94

I've being creeping around here since my daughter was born 4 months ago. I joined specifically to post this.

 

I respect the decision to not have prenatal RhoGAM, my self, I am Rh -, but so is my DH, so I did not need it. However, if you give birth to an Rh + child, I think it is irresponsible to refuse it then (unless you are intending not to have anymore kids). No matter how perfect your birth was, you have NO WAY of determining if your blood has mixed with that of your baby until you are already sensitized. At that point, all your future children are at risk.

 

Someone earlier in the thread said RhoGAM is "... a huge dose of human blood product." It's actually 300μg of the blood product, which minute. There are risks to it (as there are any treatment), but they are minor compared to your baby getting hemolytic disease of the newborn. I work in NICU and have seen babies with it. It's devastating.

 

Last, at the risk offending people I just have to say, thinking you can change your blood with diet is ridiculous.

post #78 of 94

My last baby was born unassisted and I became sensitized to the little c antigen (also in the Rh family, but there is nothing to prevent sensitization).  So no, unassisted birth will not necessarily prevent sensitization. 

post #79 of 94

My personal opinion is that for those genuinely concerned for the health of others and who are not bent on just coming here to debunk UC, they are valuable for their openness and contribution to an intelligent and caring discussion.

 

All others can go sit and spin. Quit trying to act so concerned for others when you make it part of your regular life to just be miserable human beings. You're hypocrites. You don't care about anybody, you only care about sating your own petty egos. 

 

That was my vent, to no one in particular! :) Just putting my hypothetical frustrations out into the hypothetical world.

post #80 of 94
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElizabethE View Post

My personal opinion is that for those genuinely concerned for the health of others and who are not bent on just coming here to debunk UC, they are valuable for their openness and contribution to an intelligent and caring discussion.

 

All others can go sit and spin. Quit trying to act so concerned for others when you make it part of your regular life to just be miserable human beings. You're hypocrites. You don't care about anybody, you only care about sating your own petty egos. 

 

That was my vent, to no one in particular! :) Just putting my hypothetical frustrations out into the hypothetical world.

 

So, um, are you doing okay over there?  This seems unprovoked and very strange.
 

 

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?