Reply to Med-free labor trend

Forum Index » Off-Topic

Reply to "Med-free labor trend"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Wow, this topic has been done to death, dug up and done again...

I had two med-free births because I wanted to experience labor/delivery fully (yes, even the pain) and have the best shot at avoiding a C-section. The first labor was great, the second was much harder, but I'd still skip the epidural if I had another one. I really don't care what anybody else does, as long as they are making an educated decision rather than just being terrified by people going "IT HURTS SO MUCH, YOU *NEED* AN EPIDURAL." If you want one, have one, but don't tell other people *they* can't do it without one. Clearly the experience is different for different people. To each her own.[/quote]

Again, you are not responding with factual information, [b]refusing an epidural does not decrease nor increase the chance of a C-section[/b]. The educated decision is that there is a safe prudent medical solution to the pain of child birth. Refusing to use it is pure ignorance and has been perpetuated by a community of ignorant people who don't have the education, knowledge or capacity to even speak or talk about childbirth. yes this is america and there is freedom of speach but when it jepordizes or harms people it needs to be addressed and stopped.

This is the stupidness of the natural birth crowd. Part of the problem is the naming, it shouldn't be called "natural" it should be called 
"Primitive" or "Refuse modern medicine" crowd. What if you started bleeding out and needed a doctor would you just let it run it's course because it's natural? Please say yes so that there is one less of you spreading false information and fear into community.[/quote]

Actually, it is YOU who is not responding with factual information.  There is research suggesting that getting an epi before 5 cm increases the odds of needing a c-section.  Getting an epi at 2 cm gives a woman a 50/50 chance.[/quote]

You are mistaken. Do not spread false and dangerous information. [b]You are not certified, trained or studied to even analyze sources of data and studies. It's one thing to cherry pick 1 study out of hundreds of opposing studies by credidble medical organizations[/b].

The researchers found that there was no difference in the rate of Cesarean section between the before and after groups. Nor was there a difference in the incidence of difficult vaginal births requiring forceps or vacuum instruments. On average, however, the women in the after group experienced an increase in labor duration of 25 minutes as compared to the before group. The increase in labor duration was confined to the second stage of labor, from the time when the woman's cervix is completely dilated until the baby is actively expelled from the birth canal. The length of the first stage of labor, during which the cervix dilates, did not differ between the two groups.

Dr. Zhang said that this prolongation of labor did not appear to have a negative impact on either mothers or infants.

The two groups also differed in the timing of when their infants required assistance from medical instruments. The need for use of forceps or vacuum extraction to assist the baby through the birth canal appeared later in the after group than in the before group. Dr. Zhang explained that, in the before group, these extraction procedures were more often used when the baby was higher up in the birth canal. For the after group, the procedures were used when the baby was much farther along in the birth canal.

This shift in the timing of the procedures meant that, in general, less force was needed for the after group to aid in the delivery of the infant from the birth canal. Dr. Zhang explained that this translates into a reduced risk for infants and mothers needing the extraction procedure. Extraction by forceps carries a slight risk of injury to the muscles surrounding the birth canal and temporary bruising or nerve damage to the infant's face. Vacuum extraction carries a small risk of bleeding or bruising on the infant's scalp.

The researchers concluded that their findings indicated that labor epidural analgesia does not increase the likelihood of cesarean delivery. "The length of active phase of labor appeared unchanged; however, labor epidural analgesia likely prolongs the second stage of labor."

http://www.nichd.nih.gov/news/releases/epidural.cfm 
[/quote]

Did you not "cherry pick" a single study yourself?

The study that I quoted was a randomized trial.  And FYI, I have been trained to analyze sources of data and studies.  Made a nice living at it too.[/quote]

STOP saying natural birth, it is a lie, call it PRIMITIVE birthing. Are you a doctor? if not STFU about your irrelevant analysis skills. I can analyze data in other aspects bit I am not as idiotic [b]as you to claim I can analyze EVERYTHING[/b].

[b]I don't come to your fucking job and knock the squeegee out of your hand.[/b] [b]Stop claiming to be an expert at mine[/b] with the continual flow of diarrhea coming out of your mouth in regards to your ignorant and FALSE knowledge of child birthing and modern medicine YOU KNOW NOTHING. You aren't trained, you didn't study this topic for a decade, you DON'T KNOW HOW to analyze medical reports or findings. STFU. [b]People like you spread the lies about vaccines and autism resulting in helpless children contracting viruses and putting the entire public at risk[/b]. If you were in a public place with a crowd of common decent people and started spewing this crap every single person would line up and bitch slap you one by one until you STFU.
[/quote]

Right... because I said that I could do all those things in bold.  I'm going to go out on a limb here [not really] and say that you need therapy.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics