Saffron

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/reverse-the-bbc-s-decision-to-cancel-ripper-street

Does anyone know if Midivydale might be interested in coming? I think she has written very eloquently on difficult birth issues in the past. xx

Yes, deffo coming, but probably running a bit late. xx

Have you put a note up on any of the other Family Room groups, eg winter/spring babies groups? I might be able to make Friday, depending on time. I'm not pregnant, but I'm happy to share my experiences of pregnancy and beyond. How are people hoping a positive birth group might differ from for example NCT? I found NCT was very good for basic information, although I know there is some variation in what is presented depending on your course leader. However, I didn't necessarily come away from NCT classes feeling empowered, which is one thing I think is missing in a lot of birth experiences where families come out with a negative experience. Women don't feel like their voices were heard. What can you do if you have concerns about your own health or that of the foetus late in pregnancy? What can you do if you keep getting turned away from hospital in labour, but you feel that you need to be there? What interventions can you request if your birth is not preceding well? How do you get a second opinion during labour? What's the minimum monitoring any foetus should receive during labour, eg intermittent auscultations? How do you refuse/request an emergency procedure? How do you get the correct diagnosis and treatment for postpartum complications? There's no single certain answer to any of these. But one thing is for sure, if you're feeling small and scared and bereft of any 'Voice', it's much harder to have a positive experience no matter how well your birth proceeds. How can we help women and their partners have a 'Voice' in labour and beyond? xx

Lochie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Any tips would be appreciated. I have gotten > around this before by using supposotories up the > bum for paracetamol rather than Calpol. But I > don't think this is an option for antibiotics... Yes antibiotics can be given by suppositories, but their absorption is different in the bowel compared to the stomach. This means they have to be formulated differently. This might mean that there is less choice available, and these drugs could be more expensive. But it's worth mentioning to your GP that you've had more success with suppositories in the past. That might be a better option for your LO if a suitable antibiotic is available as suppository.

Check with the GP and/or pharmacist, to see if there is a different formulation that she could be given. If the infection isn't properly knocked down, it can relapse. If there isn't a different oral formulation, check if she could have an injection instead. xx

I think this is a great idea, but would like to see a group with more focus on the postpartum experience as well. Many women who went into their birth experiences feeling quite positive come out feeling deeply traumatised, sometimes by the very necessary medical interventions which have saved their lives and the lives of their babies. Whereas other women with quite straightforward births still find postpartum recovery difficult due to a variety of issues including feeding problems, illness (parent or child, including depression), lack of general peer support, or very sadly neonatal death. We not only 'safe' supportive groups for discussing positive births, but also for how to discuss postpartum outcomes of all types. xx

Dr Bronner's soaps are lovely. I used to use them when camping, for washing in rivers etc safer for aquatic life. Hadn't realised they do baby soaps too!

buggie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > > I wouldn't be tempted to suck on any sanitary > protection I used ...> > > Actually come to think of it, I've heard of women who regularly taste their own vaginal secretions particularly if they're prone to thrush or vaginitis, eg a change in taste being an early sign of disrupted vaginal ecology before full blown symptoms develop. The taste and general appearance can also be a good guide to best fertile days for some women. So although it may not appeal personally, it's certainly not unheard of.

buggie Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Sorry Saffron but don't think any of those > analogies quite match up to something which is for > 9mths an internal organ! > > No, that wasn't really the point. I'll elaborate. What we see as gross can often be cultural, and even differ widely within the same society and among different age groups. We don't even give a second thought to 'acceptable' modes of interacting with our bodies and their various exudations. Our bodies are not disgusting. They're just our bodies.

Otta Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I'm male, but I'm pretty sure if I was a woman I'd > still need to see some pretty solid proof of MAJOR > benefits before I'd eat something that came from > inside me. You've never eaten a bogey? Not even when you were a kid??? Hmmm. You don't have to answer that of course. ;-) Point being that almost everyone has at some point eaten something that once came from inside them, whether or not they admit it... And yes, some people think eating bogies is 'healthy'! A few more examples? Ever chewed a bit of earwax to find what it tasted like? Ever licked a teardrop, or nibbled that bit of crust from your eye in the morning? Ever chewed a fingernail, or that bit of dried skin your lips? I think children do these things fairly naturally, instinctively. Until we tell them that 'society' thinks it's 'gross'. We even spread our bodily fluids all around us. Ever burnt your finger or scraped a knuckle, and put it in your mouth to soothe it? Ever lick your finger to rub something out of your eye? Ever lick your finger and use it to rub something out of your child's eye? Or the near ubiquitous 'spit on a hankie' and rub it on your kid's face? Probably not everyone does all of these. But I'm willing to bet that at some point in their lives, everyone will have done at least one of these!

malumbu Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > This may be the most controversial thread I have > started. I am ambivalent towards poppy day and > the like. Not remembrance I hasten to add, I am > old enough that the last World War was still a > strong memory to the adult population when I was > growing up. How can you be ambivalent towards poppy day, but not remembrance? I don't understand your rhetoric. Poppy Day = Remembrance Day, and as such it officially commemorates the end of hostilities. I understand that some people have objected to Poppy Day because they say it 'glorifies' war. But I think that is an essential misunderstanding of what Poppy Day is. It does not glorify war. It shows recall and respect for the ending of war(s).

In the Huffpost editorial, Kristal is quoted as saying, "chacun ? son gout". And I don't disagree. He also writes from the perspective of someone with a fair amount of scepticism, and I don't disagree with that either. However, a healthy heaping of scepticism is not the same thing as a closed mind. xx

Mark B. Kristal, Jean M. DiPirro & Alexis C. Thompson (2012) Placentophagia in Humans and Nonhuman Mammals: Causes and Consequences. Ecology of Food and Nutrition 51(3) 177-197.

Yuuna Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Yes, there are animals that eat their placenta - > that doesn't mean we should. Actually, if you take the time to read the Kristal et al article, they discuss this issue very eloquently from multiple points of view, and both as scientific and cultural discussions. > > I simply find the practice unnessary. It has > become a trend in the West it seems. There is no > cultural basis for it here. People are setting up > businesses to cater for this 'new market'. No > research is going to convince me that eating > placenta is 'healthy'. Well that says it all, I guess. If your mind is made up, and no independent evidence-based research is going to sway you, then don't waste your time reading any scientific journal articles. However, for anyone else who might be interested, I strongly encourage you read the Kristal et al article, which is an excellent, non-biased review of the available scientific research and current anthropological understanding of the practice of placentophagy in mammals including humans. Yuuna, I don't disagree with you that there is a marketing strategy now behind the sale of placenta capsules, and that many of the claims for its benefits are unsupported/overstated. However, we'll have to part ways when it comes to any discussion of the evidence, no? Because as you yourself say, no research will convince you that this practice might have health benefits. Whereas, judging by the paucity of available high-quality publications available on this topic, I think this is an area of research that is under-investigated and poorly understood in humans. If any health benefits could be conclusively demonstrated from the consumption of placenta by postpartum mothers, then I think that government health officials should further investigate this topic. Improving postpartum health would alleviate a significant burden on healthcare systems. Placentophagy might be cheap effective way to achieve this.

The more specific term is 'placentophagy', and it is observed in most placental mammals. Indeed animal models have demonstrated that ingesting the placenta by the mother leads to changes associated with maternal pain reduction, and this may also be true of the birth fluids which are exuded prior to the birth itself. From the available scientific literature, it seems the jury is still out as to whether or not similar benefits can be measured in humans. Kristal et al (2012) have a very comprehensive article on placentophagy, covering both biological and anthropological aspects. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/03670244.2012.661325#.UnoPaaNFDIU I will try to post some excerpts later, or PM if you don't have access. I have a copy of the PDF for personal use.

Omg, lucky you! At 7 weeks postpartum, I had such a bad chest infection that all I could manage was sofa or bed!! However do recall those early months as being relatively easy to travel, compared to say with a toddler. We visit Kent and stay with friends sometimes. I've noticed that there seem to be a lot of child friendly places round those parts. xx

Great result! Go Forum!! :-)

Does anyone know if eating the placenta would be contraindicated if you've had synthetic oxytocin to reduce postpartum haemorrhage and hasten placental delivery? (Or any other hormone-induced delivery?) The body's own natural oxytocin binds to oxytocin receptors in the placenta, as does synthetic oxytocin. However, synthetic oxytocin interacts a little differently with the receptors, and is known to have side effects not associated with the natural release of the body's own oxytocin. These side effects are rare but can actually be the opposite of those associated with the action of natural oxytocin. Whereas natural oxytocin is associated with bonding and the initiation of breastfeeding, side effects of synthetic oxytocin can include feeling disconnected and difficulty establishing early feeds, as well as precipitating postpartum depression. So if you've had a bad reaction to hormone-induced or hormone-managed labour, maybe it's best to avoid eating the placenta in order not to ingest another 'dose' of the synthetic hormones? Not sure. Just food for thought - no pun intended!

Religion is not the same as faith or belief. People without religion can hold any of a variety of beliefs, including believing in god(s), agnosticism (classic or modern), or atheism. Religion is generally used to refer to the organised collection of beliefs and behaviours, adherence to which defines that religious group. You can hold spiritual beliefs without being religious, and you can be religious and still be agnostic.

L15ecr Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I have to say I don't think the point of trick or > treating is to "pick a street". It shouts rude to > me...who has the best sweets, gives money etc. Why > not just get in the car and drive to Chelsea and > go round there? The idea is you go round to your > neighbours...who you are meant to know and do some > form of entertainment in return for a treat! If it > is about having the Halloween experience then > create your own. Don't rely on others, that you > don't know, to do it for you! I take your point, but some people may live in areas where few or no houses are participating, or they may live in a neighbourhood where they don't feel so safe after dark. Going to an area where you know there will be other families and children would be nice, and you could always make new friends along the way. This being London, it's not uncommon to find very different neighbourhoods just a couple of streets apart. Halloween could be a nice way to meet and greet with neighbours from surrounding streets. Particularly if you have very small children, you don't want to walk up and down a whole street only to find a single house participating!

For experimental work, the law is very clear about licensing of in vivo workers. For veterinary work, correct certification is also needed. Causing harm or suffering to animals outside this context is clearly illegal, and is classed as animals cruelty. However, taking blood samples at home does not fall under either experimental work or intentional animal cruelty. I'd say it's something more like 'home health monitoring'. Therefore if a vet trains you to do this and offers periodic supervision, then I can't see what the problem is. The vet should be able to designate you as an individual able to perform this procedure under supervision. It may be that your vet isn't personally comfortable with remote supervision, or that his/her insurance doesn't cover it? Vets can make different interpretations of the law, in order to make the best decisions for animal welfare on a case-by-case basis. However, your vet would ultimately be legally responsible if there were a problem. That could make some vets feel uneasy. It might be more than their practice is worth to lose a legal challenge.

titch juicy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > matryx Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I would also offer a pregnant man a seat, but I > > have yet to meet one. > > > > Facetiousness aside, when on public transport I > > always offer my seat to anyone who looks like > they > > would be better off sat down. Anyone who looks > > overburdened with shopping / is pregnant / > looks > > uneasy on their feet. That's not sexism (or > > ablism/ageism), it's just polite. I don't > assume > > they need it, or insist they take it - I just > > offer. Always quite happy for them to refuse :) > > > What about a very fat person? Serious question Or a very skinny person? Serious question. Just gotta use your own judgement, no?

Is it possible that your summary and charges weren't even written-up by the solicitor, but simply by a secretary who is billing you max as a default? Pay what you think you owe (half of ?235), including a letter noting shoddy work (inaccuracies in summary, etc), and tell them that your business relationship is now concluded. I agree with flOwer. It would cost them more to pursue this than just to let it go. And it doesn't sound like it would hold up in small claims court anyway. They're taking the p1ss. Be upfront and unapologetic. How was the advice you did receive? Do you still need legal advice? I think there are a few Forumites who are solicitors. Maybe you can get a recommendation from someone here? Good luck. xx

Would seem so...