Printable View
I still don't care what's in it - I am still giving it to my unborn. You can give all the information you like and parents still have the right to choose what they want to do for their family. It is great however to have the information just so you know what is in it.
I am more concerned what aminal parts they put in Devon and hotdogs.
I am off to bed but I can't find anything in your link that says it contains bovine bile.
I did find this : Glyocholic acid, sodium salt is manufactured from the steroid, cholic acid. It is a nature equivalent compound, chemically identical to the natural steroid produced in the liver of many animal species
I think Sirrhoko that glyocholic acid can be chemically reproduced and this is what is contained in this Vit K. I feel quite confident that if the manufacturer states to 3 separate people that there is no bovine content then it would be correct.
But, perhaps Yael's mum has come up with something more.
Deb, i forgot to ask my MIL, but DH is going over there now to pick up something, and is going to ask her
As for the healthy newborn which doesn't need it - what constitutes a traumatic birth?
My DD was born after a less-than-4-hour "true" labour (14 hours since my waters broke), at home, to an undrugged mother. I didn't even push until her ears were already born! Yet she was so shocked, after hours on my perineum, to be suddenly in the world, that her APGAR, which was 9 at birth, went to 7 at 5 minutes and she needed oxygen. Luckily the oxygen (given to her while she rested skin-to-skin on my belly) perked her up, and her Apgar at ten minutes was 10. Nevertheless she STILL has lots (a patch 10cm by 6cm) of stork marks on the back of her head from sitting under my pubic arch for so long, and was obviously shocked at delivery. The midwives told me in hospital she'd have been in SCBU overnight "just to be safe".
So did she need Vit K or not? In terms of circumstance it was probably the least traumatic birth i could have offered her, and yet she wasn't so hot after it. The studies which reveal the (miniscule) childhood leukemia link once again take NO other factors into consideration, such as diet, lifestyle, local pollution, etc. etc. Until controlled studies can be carried out which take these factors into account (and i don't see how they can) the findings will be, at best, unreliable (not wrong, unreliable). I opted to give DD Vit K for the same reason i took the sintocin injection to speed the 3rd stage (after waiting 10 minutes to see if it'd come on it's own) - i did not believe it could harm me, and thus any good it could do was a bonus. I was more concerned with my slightly-blue baby, and would rather the midwives gave me the sintocin, and concentrated on watching how DD was doing than worried about me when a simple injection could alleviate their concerns.
I don't think Vit K should be forced on people, any more than the sintocin for 3rd stage, or any other of the interventions which exist as options, but equally if people don't choose them it shouldn't be because they're frightened of them. Saying there is hydrochloric acid in something is obviously aimed at scaring, but it means little when so many IV suspensions use it to make the drugs more comfortable to recieve (as i understand it the body is a fairly acidic place, injecting alkaline solutions messes with the pH balance and hurts!). I agree that people should be aware of the full picture but "it's made of cow bile" and "it also contains hydrochloric acid" isn't the full picture at all!
Bec
Yes Lisa, this is true.:
It's about weighing up advantages over disadvantages and being aware of everything not just part of the story.
I am not sure what the standard practice is with all birthing arenas, or if there even IS a standard practice, but from my experience, I was given full information from my 2 different OB's, and I was ALSO given full information from the maternity wards (2 separate hospitals in different states) with regard to the Vitamin K for newborns. This was in the form of an information pack and a consent form. This was sent out to me at around 20 weeks pg.
So personally I DO feel I was able to weight up advantages versus disadvantages based on the full picture.
Sadly your posts over the issue do not, to my mind, constitute the full picture. Just my opinion, obviously, but scare mongering, to my mind, is not helpful to other women?
It it not scaremongering to give information.
It's scare mongering to say, your baby will die if it doesn't get this. Your putting your baby's life at risk if you decline.
In a life or death situation we will do whatever we need to for a good outcome. However if everything is normal we should consider carefully what we are putting into our newborn baby's system.
I realise for lots of people this is confronting. It's not just my own opinion it is the honest truth with plenty of back up literature. I don't think vit K is wrong at all. I myself gave 2 of my 4 children vit K due a a severe clotting disorder I have and the loss of 7 other babies from my life. I don't come from a place of prejudice against the drug, and your criticism of me just shows your defensive natures. How unfortunate for you that personal attacks are the only way you feel you can over ride anything that you don't think is acceptable.
here is an excerpt from a site I am unable to post a link. Censorship isn't becoming.
Vitamin K is given at birth to nearly all babies. Nitin Metha (the Network Contact for Young Indian Vegetarians) has heard that there may no longer be any vegan option for vitamin K at birth in the UK. This has been confirmed. Nitin is aiming to lobby for change on this.
The Vegan Society has written to Roche (the manufacturers) registering our disappointment. You can too, get in touch with Roche UK and be polite, understanding but firm that this situation must change for the benefit of both vegetarians and the religious community.
The Konakion Neonatal Ampoules which are animal-free in content are being withdrawn from 31st March 2006. The only Vitamin K option at birth will then be Konakion MM Paediatric, which has a carrier made from bovine bile.
Lisa Barrett
That is great advice.:
You can too, get in touch... and be polite, understanding but firm that this situation must change
Lisa, as you can see from the ongoing nature of this post, we have been recieving information from both angles as to whether the Vitamin K formualtion contains cow bile. Some say it does, some say it doesn't.
I have no doubt that it used to, and it is unclear at the current time as to whether it does or whether it doesn't.
I am not being defensive at all: if you read through my posts, you will see that I answered your initial question thoroughly: that I WAS informed of the contents of the formulation. (Please note I have not then actually ever stated whether I gave my consent for this to be administered to my babies.)
For some reason you seem to think I am defending the use of the formulation? Nope. I am not debating that at all. I was simply answering your original question, and then stating that, in my personal opinion, your original post was not the full picture.
I hope that makes sense Lisa.
Taking mod hat off here....
What I don't understand is does it matter?? Really, does it matter that is has cow bile in it. If a family chooses to give this to their newborn baby (one of mine had it orally the other did not have it), does it matter to them if cow bile is in it?
For instance I give my daughter chinese herbs prepared by our acupuncturist for her reflux/digestion issues. I know that there is animal products in there that we wouldn't normally chose to consume, but I also know that they do her the world of good. I have chosen to use them, regardless of the fact that they are not vegan products.
So why, if I had been one of the ones to chose to give vitamin K, would it matter if it had cow bile?? Do we eat sausages?? (personally no, but that again is a personal choice).
Anyway, my little tid bit...
No I don't think it matters as long as you know what you are doing and why. It's about raising awareness of thinking about what you are putting into your childs body and what are the legitimate reasons for doing it. I think it does matter if you do it without the full information and then try and defend that choice instead of learning and thinking differently next time.( not a personal comment to anyone in particular)
Many people out there do it because they are told it's the right thing to do. I have yet to see literature given out by Obs or hospitals that give a totally unbiased and clear picture of vitamin K.
I think that the reasons given to people pro vitamin K aren't valid or real for most of the population and I think very little information is given to women to show a clear picture of the of vit K.
blanket vaccination of this kind is pretty thoughtless. Why would you stress your newborn baby's liver out of all proportion if you hadn't clearly thought through your reasons.
Lisa Barrett
I did say that I wasn't informed of what was in it and that it didn't matter to me either way ;) But I wasn't defending my choice by any means - I just stated that it wasn't important to me. I think this thread has been very interesting and I have been following the new information and it is handy to know.
The thing is, I am against a lot of the extra vaccinations for Meningococcal etc that aren't on the schedule as I do weigh up the risk of exposure to my children from those illnesses and we have made our decision from that. But the possible risks of my children not having the vitamin K are very real to me - we don't have any history of blood disorders but you don't know that until it appears do you? To find out if your baby is deficent still means they have to have a test to prove it - this could also be classed as an 'assult' on a baby's system kwim? Also I was never terribly successful at BF either - so there was no way of knowing how much immunity was gotten from me.
I certainly did not intend my objections to your post to come over as a personal attack and i do apologise if that's how it seemed.
I was not told my baby would die if she did not have Vit K. No-one stated or implied that i was putting my baby's life at risk if i didn't take the Vit K. I was told that some newborns have a clotting disorder which often only comes to light fairly catastrophically, that it is very very rare and breastfeeding can prevent it in many cases and that a drug available orally or by injection was available to completely remove the risk. I then went away and researched to see what was in Vit K and what risks were associated with having the vaccine (none - the studies are flawed and their findings are insignificant enough to be anomalies). From that my baby and her father decided we would accept Vitamin K for Esme at birth and that the injection would work for us best as we felt the benefits of the immediacy of the cover offered by it outweighed the pain of the needle. Because she was born at home this was the only needle-stick she had for the first week. The heelp rick test was done on day 8 and her hearing test, another (IMO) mini-ordeal, was done at 4 weeks (by which time it was patently obvious to me that she could hear).
I believe i was given a clear picture of both the risks and the benefits. I am in the UK where the NHS is both over-stretched and very accountable. Our health system simply cannot afford to have unnecessary drugs handed out to all. People die in this country because their NHS trust cannot afford the newest cancer drugs. People have been awarded 6 and more figure sums in compensation due to mistakes made by the NHS. I do not believe a health system in this state is vaccinating children to the detriment of their health, spending money to cause problems it would have to pay for many times over in compensation.:
I think that the reasons given to people pro vitamin K aren't valid or real for most of the population and I think very little information is given to women to show a clear picture of the of vit K.
blanket vaccination of this kind is pretty thoughtless. Why would you stress your newborn baby's liver out of all proportion if you hadn't clearly thought through your reasons.
Blanket vaccinations of diseases such as smallpox and polio have saved thousands upon thousands of lives.
I would like to see reputable studies which provide medical evidence for the assertion that Vit K vaccinations stress newborns livers "out of all proportion". And also what "all proportion" means to you (since that is subjective).
I know many people who choose not to vacinate their children. That is their decision. I also know that in many countries people lose many of their children to death before they're out of infancy to illnesses for which vaccines exist. Esme had her MMR last week. I read, i researched, i agonised. In the end i decided that the evidence leaned heavily in favour of vaccinating against these illnesses. The risks of the illnesses are small, the risks of the vaccine are miniscule. I suppose if nothing else, my DD's immunity makes it less likely that the unvaccinated children will contract these illnesses in the first place and that, for me, is a form of social responsibility i am happy to accept.
Bec
Mmmm Sirrokko I read your post with interest and curiosity. I haven't seen any evidence of defensiveness in here. Just that many people disagree with your opinion. Or conversley are quite unconcerned about weather or not there is an animal content to the drug.
It's a wonderful thing that all of these wonderful women can debate, inform and discuss with spirit and confidence. I think personally that this discussion has been very balanced and unabraisive from most posters...
Like Lucy I have seen no evidence that there is a bovine content to this vaccination - and like Christy I have used many wierd and wonderful Chinese herbs on my children (and we eat sausages! - organic ones but sausages none the less!!!!) so I would be an absolute hypocrite to be concerned about this.
I have yet to find definitive evidence that your claims about the content of this drug are accurate. That's not a defense - just an observation. I have since contacted Roche personally and they stated and were prepared to do so in writing that there is no animal content... So, again, I am not convinced - but as I always try to be open to there being more info I certainly would not be arrogant or defensive about this.
I have a clotting disorder and I am on anticoagulants. This baby in my belly will have the Vit K injection for this reason... He/she will be the first of my children to have it but I believe it's very necessary due to my condition and my meds...
Like some of the other posters I was given very balanced information from obs and hospitals about Vit K. I was never once told I would risk my baby nor was I made to feel unusual for choosing not to vaccinate. So, I think it's a reasonable assumption to make that not all care providers are going to bully their clients into vaccination. Some of course will but there are many who won't...
I think that I was the person who raised the issue of syntocin derived from pigs in another thread long ago. They stopped using pig semen and replced it with synthetic stuff so it's kind of irrelevant now but.... in Islam it's forbidden to consume pigs or pig by-products however there is also a principle of the lesser evil so if it's going to save a life or is medically indicated then the impermissability is over-ridden.
As for cow bile, we eat cheese with rennet in it and all sorts of other animal products so even if the vitamin K injection had cow bile in it that wouldn't be a reason that I would refuse it.
On a side note - censorship is the banning of information not the banning of links. All our members are free to share any information they like and also to question any information they recieve.