Just an update --- I've found out that only 2 or 3 percent of babies get sick from being born to an untreated GBS positive mother, a large portion of those are with respiratory problems which become apparent really quickly (and is cleared up with IV antibiotics)
Babies are often infected with GBS but since the mother has passed on antibodies to it through the placenta and continues to do so with her colostrum, a healthy full term breast-fed baby without any other risk factors has a really good chance of fighting off the infection without any issues.
The risk is so low that they don't even test pregnant women for it in the UK (like they do here and the US).. and the UK does not have a higher incidence of babies being sick with GBS infections, the statistics are the same.
There are different strains of GBS, and at least one of these is already resistant to the antibiotic they use to treat it, so it wont work anyway.
i'm not trying to push my views upon anyone here, as its a highly personal thing to decide to decline standard medical tests and treatments, and a hard decision at that!
I just want all pregnant women to be more aware and EDUCATED about the truth of these things! Do your own research and decide :-)
Just a foot note : with my first pregnancy I tested negative for GBS. I had premature rupture of membranes (36 weeks) for an extended time (3 days) and I got a temperature and had IV antibiotics on a drip in labour, and my son had respiratory distress and was in special care unit for 3 days on IV antibiotics. They could never confirm that it was because of GBS because we'd already started antibiotics before they could do blood cultures, but it could have been GBS. So i know somewhat of the trauma it can create. everything turned out okay and my boy is perfectly healthy.
Last edited by bluetree07; February 21st, 2011 at 12:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks