Blood & Dangers with Rhogam FM Autism the skyrocketing epidemic

Discussion in 'Fibromyalgia Main Forum' started by PatPalmer, Aug 13, 2006.

  1. PatPalmer

    PatPalmer New Member

    Hi Folks,

    It`s an age since I posted on this message board - and my apologies to any of you who may remember me for the silence... I`ve been a busy girl since my Daughters recovery from Chronic Fatigue - been researching my head off amongst other things... and want to share some must read articles...

    I have just read the brillient thread started be sandyl on blood type & FM.
    Many of your replies suspect a connection of FM symptoms between Rh neg blood and the Rhogam vaccination. I believe there is!

    I posted a thread on blood type 3 yrs ago and the results were startling... as I found more of you were Rh neg than positive...
    A- & AB- in particular were 3 to 4 times higher in numbers than per population average. At the time I couldn`t figure why, but now feel injections are a connection...

    I am VERY emotional over the danger of all vaccinations and would like for those of you interested to read these two articles I have found... They`re rather long so you may like to print. Happy reading...

    ****************************************************

    Autism–The Skyrocketing Epidemic
    Kathryn Picoulin, BSRN, N.D., Ph.D

    The incidence rate of autism has skyrocketed by 500 % in the last ten years. Between July 2001 and October 2001 California alone has had a record number of new cases of autism (705), a 54 % increase in just three months. In Ohio there was a 6,822 % increase within the last 6 years.

    Autism is a collection of disorders rather than a specific disease. It is characterized by abnormal language and social development, with social withdrawal, such as lack of attachment, avoidance of eye contact and failure to cuddle. Other symptoms include depression, poor memory, self-injurious behaviors, anorexia, tremors, seizures, poor concentration, delayed speech, increased sound and touch sensitivity, sleeping disorders, rashes and accelerated death of brain cells. It also includes motor movement disorders, impairment in hearing and vision.

    At the Second International Public Conference of the National Vaccine Information Center held two years ago, many researchers, doctors, and professors presented the links between the MMR vaccine and autism.

    The MMR vaccine was introduced in 1988. Even though the incidence of measles had dropped by 85 % by the time the MMR was introduced, it was believed that this vaccine would help to eradicate three common childhood diseases, measles, mumps and rubella. By 1994 researchers began to link the MMR vaccine to autism.

    Two studies done in 1969 and 1974 respectively showed that when measles, mumps and rubella were put into one vaccine, the viruses interfered with each other. The measles virus settled in the intestinal tract and caused a type of irritable bowel. The measles virus has also been found to create autoimmune antibodies in the brain.

    A blind study done by a Dr. Andrew Wakefield who tested 25 autistic children against 25 healthy children found that all 25 autistic children had the measles virus in their intestines. When the 25 healthy children were tested only one had the virus in the intestines.

    F. Edward Yazbak, MD, a pediatrician and school physician in Rhode Island had conducted research evaluating the impact of live virus vaccinations to women before, during or after pregnancy. He found that the infants born to 20 out of 25 women who received a MMR vaccine postnatally developed autism. He found that the live rubella virus from the vaccine would pass on to the suckling infants through the breast milk.

    A 1980 study showed that the rubella live virus persisted in the body for many years. It infected the islets of langerhans in the pancreas and severely reduced the amount of insulin secreted by the pancreas causing juvenile diabetes.

    Dr. Vijendra Singh, PhD, a research associate of immunology at Utah State University, and specialist in autistic children reported that 80 % of the autistic children are suffering from abnormal immune response in the brain from the nicks in the developing myelin sheath on brain cells caused by the viruses.

    Dr. Mary Megson, assistant professor at the Medical College of Virginia reports that the live measles vaccine depletes the child’s body of vitamin A. The current vaccination recommendation for the MMR vaccine is that the first shot be given when the infant is between 12-15 months. But, because it is felt that the first shot may not provide adequate lifetime immunity, a second MMR is recommended at 4-6 years or at 11-13 years. There are states that recommend the second MMR before the child enters kindergarten.

    The adverse effects of the MMR vaccine are the following: seizures, learning disabilities, encephalitis, neurologic disorders, muscle incoordination, autism, optic neuritis that can lead to blindness, deafness, Guillain Barre syndrome (paralysis), demyelination of the nerve sheaths, fever, joint pain, headache, blood clotting disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, ulcerative colitis, Crohn’s disease, diabetes, meningitis, anaphylactic shock (severe allergic reaction) and death.

    Many researchers believe that all the new vaccines released in the last decade, especially hepatitis B and the mandates requiring the vaccine are the main cause for this epidemic. Adding the series of Hepatitis B (12.5mcg mercury) and the HIB vaccine more than doubled the mercury intake for infants through vaccines.

    The EPA set the maximum mercury exposure limit at .1mcg/kg/day. Let’s look at some numbers. A newborn that weighs nine pounds is 4.8kg. The most mercury that he or she can receive through the vaccine system is .4mcg. Yet the hepatitis vaccine that the newborn receives before it leaves the hospital is 12.5mcg. One month later the newborn is required to receive hepatitis B for the second dose of 12.5mcg. At the two month checkup the series of shots that the infant receives totals 50mcg. By the time the infant gets the MMR at age 15 months, he or she would have received 237.5mcg of methyl mercury at a time the neurological system is developing.

    If the mother received Rhogam for Rh negative blood, or a flu shot during pregnancy the unborn fetus would be hit by the mercury from these two vaccines. Several studies have shown that mothers, who were vaccinated with the MMR and Hepatitis B vaccine even 5 months before becoming pregnant or even during the pregnancy, increased the risk of having an autistic child by 85%. Mercury easily crosses the placenta and the blood brain barrier to deposit itself into the brain tissue of the developing fetus.

    The CDC (Center for Disease Control) reported that exposure to more than 62.5 mcg of mercury in the first three months of life caused a significant increase in the incidence of autism. Next month we’ll see what is being done to make vaccines safer and what can be done to help the child.



    *********************************************************

    DANGERS with RHOGAM given DURING pregnancy

    Sheri Nakken, R.N., MA, Classical Homeopath
    Vaccination Information & Choice Network, Nevada City CA & Wales UK

    You have to research MUCH on your own and come to your own decision

    The important point about RhoGam is that the antibodies attack ALL RH positive cells. If mother's blood mixes with the baby's blood, the antibodies will neutralize the baby's blood cells before the mother can create her own antibodies against the baby. The dilemna is that if the mother's and baby's blood does actually mix it is equally likely that the RhoGam antibodies will cross over and attack the baby itself. This happens frequently but isn't discussed by most doctors.

    *******It is a big reason to only get the shot after pregancy if the baby really is RH+ ************

    The RhoGam antibodies will attach to your baby's blood cells and render them incapable of delivering oxygen. This has long term consequences on brain development. My doctor was completely ignorant of this issue.

    The RhoGam antibodies do not cross the placenta. But neither do blood cells from the baby which is exactly why the RhoGam is injected. In very rare circumstances, such as the mother becoming injured, the blood of the mother and baby can mix. It's a paradox, only when the antibodies are needed can they harm the baby.

    The RhoGam antibodies are put there to attack any baby's blood that comes across. But if there is mixing then the antibodies can go across the other way and they do exactly that. Antibodies diffuse much more readily through the bloodstream than whole cells.

    Immunology textbooks still correctly point out that RhoGam should be given after childbirth only if the baby is RH+. These are the mothers that are at high risk.

    However the company that manufactures RhoGam lobbied to have it's use expanded to all RH- mothers during and after pregnancy to 'guarantee' that all high risk mothers were protected.

    Doctors try to rationalize this by saying that even during the first pregnancy blood can mix and antibodies can be produced that will attack the baby. This almost never happens because the blood would have to mix twice, once to stimulate the production of Abs in the mother and the second time for those antibodies to diffuse to the baby. And regardless, the paradox comes into play because if the mother's antibodies can diffuse to harm the baby, then so can the injected RhoGam antibodies. They are the same exact antibodies.

    Ask your doctor how your anti-RH antibodies were more harmful than other mother's anti-RH antibodies (in Rhogam) . They will notcomprehend what you are talking about.

    RhoGam after pregnancy - childbirth is what causes the blood to mix and, when given at this time, RhoGam can prevent stimulation of the mother's immune system. There is no reason to give RhoGam during pregnancy except to
    increase profits for the manufacturer because RH- mothers with RH- babies will also get the injection even though they couldn't possibly need it.

    Each RhoGam injected contains blood serum pooled from several different persons with the antibodies. The manufacturer can not possibly screen or remove all viruses from it. But that's a separate issue.

    You would need a blood transfusion from an RH+ person to stimulate the production of antibodies against RH factor. You will not find a single case in the scientific literature of an RH- person who seroconverted after
    minimal blood contact with an RH+ person.

    The shot does work after pregnancy when it can not possibly harm the baby. It offers NO additional benefit during pregnancy. The safety concern during pregnancy is real. Does it make sense to you to inject antibodies into the mother's blood stream that are designed for the sole purpose to eliminate cells of the baby? There are numerous case reports of babies born anoxic and asphyxiated because the RHoGam antibodies crossed the placenta during the gestation period. This is not the only safety concern with the injection, just the most obvious.

    I hope this comes across clearly: the reason that it is a risk for RH- mothers to carry RH+ babies is that the mother could produce antibodies to her own child. If those antibodies are in her blood while she is pregnant there is a small chance that they will come into contact with and harm the baby. Rhogam during pregnancy guarantees those antibodies will be there. It does not matter if the mother made the antibodies or if they were injected, the baby is now at risk for attack from RH+ antibodies. The original point of saving the baby from antibody attack has been abrogated by giving rhogam during gestation.

    Rhogam antibodies against the baby and antibodies produced by the RH-mother are identical. If the whole point is to prevent these antibodies from circulating in the mother during pregnancy, why on Earth would you inject them into the mother exactly when she is pregnant.

    The antibodies are intended to protect the second pregnancy by preventing sensitization. If sensitization were to occur and the second baby were rh+ then you would have antibodies circulating in your blood against your own
    baby. This would only be a problem if the blood mixed.

    The problem is that injecting Rhogam during gestation you are getting protection for your second pregnancy at the expense of your first. If you put Rhogam antibodies into your body during your first pregnancy you are putting antibodies against your baby into your blood stream where, if blood mixing does occur, those antibodies will attack your baby. This is exactly what you are trying to avoid for the second pregnancy. So, in reality you are protecting your second pregnancy from the antibodies by injecting them into yourself during the first pregnancy. I can't state it any better than this: if you inject Rhogam durng your first pregnancy you will prevent a potentially harmful situation for your next pregnancy by causing that exact same harmful situation in your first pregnancy.

    The company that makes the injection decided that the shot should be given during gestation to increase profits. It increases profits becasue rh- mothers carrying rh- babies are also getting the injection. The company has just doubled its sales of Rhogam through a minor lobbying effort. Great business decision - poor health decision. They convinced the government agencies to support the expanded role of Rhogam who then recommended it for
    all rh- negative pregnancies. Doctors follow the government recommendations without question. Doctors do not make the decisions, they follow orders.

    Rhogam works just fine if you get it immediately after you deliver when itcan't harm the baby. You can get Rhogam without mercury.

    The Rhogam antibodies are identical to the antibodies that the Rh- mother makes against her child. The Rhogam antibodies were collected from RH- mothers who did have an immune response to their RH+ babies. The Rhogam antibodies will attack and destroy the baby's red blood cells (if they do come across the placenta) before the mother's immune response kicks in and makes her own antibodies.

    You give rhogam to a mother after delivery becasue that is when the blood mixes. The rhogam antibodies destroy the baby's cells so that the mother's immune system never sees them and therefore never becomes sensitized to make those exact same antibodies. If you give the Rhogam antibodies during pregnancy you have just created the situation you were trying to avoid. The whole point is for the pregnant mother to NOT have antibodies against her own child circulating in her system while she is pregnant.
    Any blood mixing would allow those antibodies to attack the baby. It does not matter if the mother's immune system made those antibodies or another mother's immune system (rhogam) made those antibodies. They are identical down to their molecular structure and you do not want them to contact the baby.

    In fact, we can refer to the mother's immune response against her baby as rhogam production since that's exactly what it is:
    Therefore, The rh+ cells of the baby stimulate rhogam production by the rh-mother'simmune system. We want to prevent rhogam from circulating in the mother while she is pregnant because those antibodies will harm the baby. To do this we give rhogam immediately after birth so that any rh+ cells that are still in the mother will be destroyed. This keeps the mother's immune system from seeing those cells and producing her own rhogam which would stay in her circulation where they could attack any subsequent rh+ babies.
    Doctors would like us to inject rhogam antibodies during pregnancy to prevent the formation of rhogam antibodies. The rhogam will destroy all the rh+ cells thus preventing the mother from making her own rhogam antibodies.
    But what's the point, you prevented the mother's antibodies from being there by putting someone else's antibodies in the exact same spot. This is the point which I am Rhogam is the immune response to the baby. It is the pooled serum from rh- mother's who have had an immune response to their rh+ babies. You do not want those antibodies to come into contact with your rh+ baby.

    EUROPE only administers after pregnancy! During pregnancy is a decision that was made by the manufacturer to make money.
    If a woman has a miscarriage she should have the shot immediately. If there is an amniocentesis performed it may be worth while to have the injection but there is some risk to that. It makes no sense to give the injection at 28 weeks during a healthy pregnancy. The blood does not mix in a sufficient manner to cause an immune response in the mother. If there were that much mixing then the injected antibodies (rhogam) would have access to the baby
    and kill the baby's red blood cells. It's a no win situation with rhogam at 28 weeks. The reason the manufacturer can get away with it is exactly because there is no blood mixing. The rhogam works it's way out of the
    mother's system without ever doing anything.

    Another way to look at rhogam. Rhogam kills the baby's red blood cells no matter where those cells are. If the baby's blood cells are in the mother, those cells will be destroyed. If the baby's red blood cells are circulating through the baby delivering oxygen to the baby's brain, the rhogam will still kill those cells and deprive the baby of oxygen. It is not a good idea to take any chance that would allow the rhogam access to the baby.

    The doctors are concerned only about baby's cells circulating in the mother but antibodies diffuse much more easily than whole cells so the rhogam will readily find the baby's cells where the baby is than for the
    whole cells of the baby to find their way to the rhogam.


    Again, You have to research MUCH on your own and come to your own.
    --------------------------------------------------------

    ******
    "Just look at us. Everything is backwards; everything is upside down.
    Doctors destroy health, lawyers destroy justice, universities destroy
    knowledge, governments destroy freedom, the major media destroy information
    and religions destroy spirituality" ....Michael Ellne

    [This Message was Edited on 08/13/2006]
  2. Cromwell

    Cromwell New Member

    I think you may find that Dr Wakefield has since rescinded some of his research "findings" as they were incorrect.

    Thank you for your interest though. My son has autism. I am writing a book about it,I also write articles and lecture in the subject.

    As vaccinations were being used well before the rise in autism, my own belief is twofold:

    1) That the description of autism spectrum disorder now includes far more children than in the past, when only extremely withdrawn, non verbal children were classified as such. Children who now are included on the spectrum, those with high functioning autism or Aspergers, would have been classified as MR or MBD a few years ago. This, in spite of Kanners original research which clearly indicated that over half of his research group of children eventually gained language and some social skills. When I look at the population I am studying and reclassify along 1975 guidelines for classification, there is no rise at all in the incidence, in one group, actually, there is a drop.

    2) What may be more important is the rise in ultrasound, amnio testing and the use of spinal block for delivery. Induced labor too. Processed foods. EMF's in the home.
    Hep. B injections are given to all newborns, for no particularly good reason.

    3) The use of soy protein for infant formula is a huge link for me, due to the hormones in soy. Remember that Percy isolated cortizone from soy plants. My own research shows a probable greater incidence of ADHD in children who were fed soy formula. Some of the children also have Aspergers, which may be coincidental.

    4)The use of plastics has greatly increased in medicine and in the home, also microwaves, and one wonders if there could be a link there. I am really not even talking about links with autism now, but links with any disorders.

    5)Just a mention of the Rhogam injection. It appeared a couple of years after my second child was born, so I did not use it. Maybe the RH negative link lies elsewhere?

    I agree that triple vaccine is a bad idea, I do think it affects the child adversely, but I do support the use of single vaccinations that really have saved thousands of lives. I went to school prior to vaccinations and knew children who died as a result of measles(one who went blind), babies who were born with many problems physical and mental due to their mothers getting german measles in the first trimester, people with polio in iron lungs, dying or crippled for life.


    I also know that autism was around(but often not named as such) prior to mass vaccinations. Even prior to almalgamam fillings. The very well produced studies out of Washington University have pretty well proven that the link between vaccinations and autism lacks any real substantiated evidence.

    However, please keep on plugging away, many good ideas come from people such as yourself who take an interest-look at Lorenzos Oil. I am glad to hear your daughter is doing better.

    Good luck.

    Anne Cromwell
    [This Message was Edited on 08/13/2006]
    [This Message was Edited on 08/13/2006]
  3. matthewson

    matthewson New Member

    I work in Blood bank and I can assure you that we type all babies of Rh neg mothers and if they are Rh neg, you don't get the post-natal rhogam shot.

    Pre-natal rhogam is given because there have been cases of sensitization, even in first preganancies, and rhogam can help prevent that. It is most definately not to increase profits. I have seen literature on this.

    This is pretty good info. from a med. website.

    How It Works

    Rh immune globulin contains antibodies to the Rh factor in blood. The antibodies are obtained from donors who have become sensitized to the Rh factor. Giving these Rh antibodies to an Rh-negative pregnant woman prevents her immune system from producing its own Rh antibodies, which would attack her Rh-positive fetus's red blood cells.

    When introduced into an Rh-negative mother's bloodstream, Rh immune globulin antibodies locate any Rh-positive fetal red blood cells that are present. The antibodies attach to the Rh-positive red blood cells, masking their presence from the mother's immune system. Although the Rh immune globulin antibodies destroy fetal red blood cells, not enough are destroyed to harm the fetus.

    Rh immune globulin is given by injection into a muscle (intramuscular, or IM).

    Why It Is Used

    Rh immune globulin is given to all Rh-negative women who may be carrying an Rh-positive fetus. While it prevents Rh sensitization, Rh immune globulin cannot prevent damage to an Rh-positive fetus if the mother is already sensitized to the Rh factor.

    Rh immune globulin should be given to an Rh-negative woman to prevent sensitization:

    After amniocentesis, fetal blood sampling, or chorionic villus sampling.
    When bleeding occurs in the second or third trimester of pregnancy.
    At 28 weeks of pregnancy if an unsensitized woman is carrying an Rh-positive fetus or if her fetus's blood type is unknown and the father is Rh-positive.
    After an external cephalic version of a breech fetus.
    After abdominal trauma during pregnancy.
    Within 72 hours after delivery of an Rh-positive infant.
    After a threatened or complete miscarriage, or an induced abortion.
    Before or immediately after treatment for ectopic pregnancy or a partial molar pregnancy.
    (back to top)
    How Well It Works

    Rh immune globulin is highly successful at preventing sensitization in a current pregnancy. When given at 28 weeks and within 72 hours of delivery of an Rh-positive child, it has a success rate of greater than 99%. 1


    Believe, me, you would not want to go back to a time before Rhogam, as after your first baby, if you were sensitized, your subsequent babies would be at risk for HDN (Hemolytic disease of the newborn). Much safer for mother and babies to have the Rhogam shots.

    I saw the original post by Sandy and I did reply that I was Rh positive and I have FMS. At the time I saw the post, I thought to myself that this would not be an adequate survey of blood type, because the vast majority of people do not know what type they are, and women who are Rh neg and have been pregnant would know that they are neg, because they had Rhogam, so the results would be skewed in favor of Rh neg. In the general population, Rh neg accounts for about 15 % of people. The vast majority of people are Rh positive.

    Really, in my honest opinion, I don't think Rhogam administration has anything to do with FMS/CFS.

    Take care, Sally
  4. sandyL

    sandyL New Member

    Sally you mentioned, that a lot of people dont know their blood type,

    Why isnt Rh negative , Rh imcompatiblity taught in health, biology, or sex ed in Schools in junior high, and or high school, or is it? It seems rh negative women should be educated about the risks,pros and cons, even in a perfect world, choosing an rh negative mate.
    what do you think?

    thanks Sandy
  5. Sandyz

    Sandyz New Member

    Its good to see you back. Thanks for sharing this with us. I have a son has a mild case of Asperger Autism so I found it interesting.

    I am so glad to hear your daughter has recovered. That is great news and I wish you and her all the best.

    Sandyz
  6. matthewson

    matthewson New Member

    The reason that it is really no longer a problem anymore with Rh incompatibility is because of Rhogam. There really is no reason anymore for an Rh neg. woman to marry or procreate with only an Rh neg. man. As the article I posted stated, Rhogam is 99% effective in preventing sensitization. Rhogam was really a wonderful product that was developed, as it has saved countless babies and enabled mothers to have any number of children they want.

    I have a friend that is about 12-14 years older than me, and she developed anti-D (Rh factor is routinely called D, so I am more comfortable using that term) after the birth of her second baby. She lost each preganacy after that and her Dr. finally told her not to have any more children. She was devastated as she wanted a large family. Had she started her family 5 or so years later, Rhogam would have been available to her and she most likely could have gone on to have a big family.

    The problem I see with the proliferation of websites claiming that vaccinations and rhogam are causing autism and any number of things they claim to be causing, is that a lot of the information given is just false.

    As you can see from the article I was quoting, even if the Rhogam crosses the placenta, it is not enough to do any damage to the fetus. It is given at 28 weeks which at that time the baby is quite a good size. A little bit of Rhogam is not going to do any damage.

    It is not true that only a blood transfusion will stimulate a person to develop anti-D. It is quite common to see older women who had preganacies prior to Rhogam that have Anti-D antibodies and these were most certainly from preganacy with an Rh pos. baby. ABO and Rh types have been known for a much longer time, and all negative people are given negative blood and have been for a long time. So you see that a lot of the info. quoted is not true.

    Also, babies of negative mothers are routinely typed and if they are negative, no rhogam is given. Even if it was given to the mother, it would not cause any reactions. So, if Rhogam was a ploy to make money, why do we type the babies at all? It would save the hospital a lot of money NOT typing babies, of which we only get paid cents on the dollar for the lab work required, and give all negative mothers post-natal rhogam. The amount of rhogam given would double, making the companies a lot of money and the lab would save a lot of money too. BUT, that is not what happens. It is done this way because the mother does not have a need for rhogam if the baby is negative.

    People forget after new products and vaccines come out, that a lot more lives were lost or as the case of my friend, babies not born, and they start to blame the vaccines and rhogam for problems they see in their children. I have a son who is dyslexic and has been labeled learning disabled from the 3rd grade. I would no more blame that on vaccines or anything else. Stuff happens and we don't always know why.

    I hope I have shed some light on this subject. I have a tendency to come off a little gruff, I know. I look at things technically and realistically and always have been that type of person. It bothers me when I see something posted on a website that I know for a fact is wrong. I don't wish to argue with anyone about it, it is just the way I see it. Everyone can choose what they want to believe in and they have that right. I would just like to expose this board to another side.

    Take care, Sally
  7. Mikie

    Mikie Moderator

    My children were born just before the injections were available. My blood became sensitized when I miscarried. My second child was jaundiced but didn't need a transfusion. My third child was transfused the night she was born. I was told that if I became pregnant with another Rh Pos. child, it would have to be transfused in the womb. Scary prospect, so I had a tubal ligation.

    Before I knew I was sick with FMS/CFIDS, I was in a program where my plasma was removed twice a week and I was paid for it. Once I found out I was sick, I dropped out of the program. It's possible that there is nothing significant about having Rh Neg. blood to predispose women to our illnesses. It's likely that there are sick people in the donor program who pass our illnesses on through the plasma used in the injections. I hope no one was made ill with my plasma but the possibility exists.

    I did know that I had had a mycoplasma infection but at that time, no one knew it would go stealth and chronic. I thought I had recovered from it. The lab which took my plasma never asked about mycoplasmas and didn't screen for them. Sixty to seventy percent of us with these illnesses test pos. for mycoplasma infections. The real percent is likely higher due to the prevalent false neg. results of PCR DNA testing.

    This is why I do not believe we should be donors of any kind until more is known about our illnesses.

    Love, Mikie
  8. matthewson

    matthewson New Member

    I am almost 100% sure that Rhogam has been sterilized when it is made. I will check at work and let you know for sure, but really it is a clear solution and all of our blood typing reagents are sterilized and I am positive rhogam is too.

    So, viruses would be destroyed in the sterilization process.

    It sounds like you and my friend had similar stories about Rh sensitization. I am rh pos and my husband is rh neg, and my daughter is rh pos and my son is neg. So, actually, if my son marries an Rh neg mother, she would not need any rhogam at all.

    My sister-in-law is rh neg and so is my brother, so she actually refused to have rhogam, but she had to sign a paper stating that she refused the shot and wouldn't hold the Dr responsible. The problem for the Dr. is, is the baby really the husbands. It happens and they don't want to be responsible for the mother developing anti-D because the husband is not the father.

    So, you can also see the dilemma the Dr. has if someone refuses to take the shots. They don't want to be sued if something happens.

    Take care, Sally
  9. Mikie

    Mikie Moderator

    I hope the bugs are killed. That does make sense and it also makes me feel better.

    Yes, I can see the dilemma about refusing the injections.

    The nice thing for me is that with both my daughters' being Rh Pos., they will never have to face the problem.

    Thanks again for the info.

    Love, Mikie
  10. sandyL

    sandyL New Member

    I think what mikie talked about proved that there should be some forewarning=education about even a possible problem, with anything related to an rh negative pregnancy.

    I too was told not to have but 2 children this was in 1975, and maybe enough information about rhogam wasnt accumulated at that time, as it is now but, what would be the harm in discussing options in ladies health classes or even the subject being brought up,

    Im not saying there is a Rhogam conspiracy, Im not saying that anyone should "refuse" the shot as I posted earlier in another thread, My mom had 2 stillborns prior to rhogam, so I see the need for it, But I dont see why there is no discussions in Jr High or High school,about the problems that sometimes occur with rh negative women's pregnancies.
    I saw on one of the Red cross websites that they go to high schools for donations, while they are there,why not throw a little information toward the H.S health depts, about even the history of rh incompatiblity.

    SandyL:]
  11. matthewson

    matthewson New Member

    Yes, it might be helpful to have some education about blood types. I know we did some stuff with blood typing in high school biology.

    I wasn't implying that you said there was a conspiracy about rhogam. I was just refering to the original post. Here is a copy of the part I was refering to.

    The company that makes the injection decided that the shot should be given during gestation to increase profits. It increases profits becasue rh- mothers carrying rh- babies are also getting the injection. The company has just doubled its sales of Rhogam through a minor lobbying effort. Great business decision - poor health decision. They convinced the government agencies to support the expanded role of Rhogam who then recommended it for
    all rh- negative pregnancies. Doctors follow the government recommendations without question. Doctors do not make the decisions, they follow orders.

    I don't know what it is, but I always seem to be making people mad when I post. It was not my intention to attack you, I was refering to this part of the original post.

    That's why I quit posting for awhile as I seem to upset people. I sometimes have trouble wording things, and I do not mean to attack people, I just want to provide another view on these types of subjects. My response is to the information of these types of websites, not against the people who post this info.

    I hope I made myself clear. I have a problem with some of the parts of the original post, as some of it is not exactly true.

    I don't know, maybe I really don't belong here. I am at a loss really! I don't want to upset people, but I also hate to see info. I know is not true.

    Good luck to you all.

    Sally
  12. sandyL

    sandyL New Member

    Sally
    I didnt see it as an attack I appreciate your imput,
    thanks, I didnt want anyone to think I was anti-rhogam,
    I am just pro education,,

    Hugs, SandyL

  13. matthewson

    matthewson New Member

    I'm glad we got that straightened out. I think the problem I have is with the fact that when a person responds to a post, they can only see the original post. Sometimes I have had to go back a few times and reread the posts after it to refresh in my mind what the question was. I also have trouble putting things in sequence! This has only been a problem since I developed FMS. My cognitive functions are not what they used to be!

    Thank goodness I have been at my job for 30 years, and it is ingrained in my memory! I take longer to learn new things though. But that seems to be common amongst us Fibromites!

    I have only had this DD for 3 years. I feel so sorry for the people here who have had this many years and from a young age. I wouldn't wish this on my worst enemy!

    Well, gotta go, my son and husband are due any minute for dinner. I'm glad that you aren't upset with me, I really didn't mean to upset anyone.

    Take care, Sally

    Take care, Sally



  14. Thistledown

    Thistledown New Member

    Rhogam is filtered down to a particle size of 8-12 nanometers (smaller than almost all viruses)

    Rhogam has not contained mercury in ANY form for YEARS...so it is NOT a source of methylmercury, and therefore cannot be implicated in the rising "mercury induced" autism epidemic (I am still doubtful mercury is the cause, partially or in whole).

    We have a number of women from outlying villages who did not get Rhogam prenatally or postpartum and they are now unable to have more children safely because they built the antibody against the Rh factor.

    Many doctors will offer to blood type "Dad" and let you not have the shot if he's Rh negative as well.

    Placenta previa (a misplaced placenta that hemorrhages) happens more often than people realize, and this is enough to sensitize the mother.

    Rhogam is designed to cover 15ml of baby blood (3 teaspoons) and will not deprive baby of blood. Mom however can mount a response strong enough to kill her baby in the FIRST pregnancy if there is an undetected bleed in the second trimester and another near the end of the pregnancy.

    Only YOU can decide what you wish to do...just make sure you research everything carefully. Best wishes to everyone.