Low Milk Supply Stimulated by Fear

I ADORE breastfeeding! Probably my one of my very favorite things to do.  I am consistently surprised by the amount of people who claim to have a lack in milk supply.  When I delivered my first baby, 16 1/2 years ago, I had many friends who were breastfeeding. I honestly do not remember having regular discussion with friends who struggled with milk supply. Nor did I ever feel even concerned that I wouldn't have enough breast milk.  Quite the opposite! All I knew is that's what breasts were for after you deliver......To feed your baby and produce milk.  But NOW.......I have clients who quite often complain of lack of milk production OR even better have a HUGE fear that they won't have enough.

I have 2 theories on why breast milk production can be low.  Of course, you have the usual issues of poor latch on or weak suck or all of the other many reasons for low milk supply. But.....I have my own opinions and beliefs as to why women struggle with milk supply. Not that the other reasons aren't valid as well but I think just considering my opinions might help a women who can't seem to get produce enough milk.

First theory......That the nutrition of the mother inherently effects milk supply.  We currently live in a world where we are undernourished and over fed.  Obesity is at an all time high.  Even though we may look at a women who is overweight and believe that she should be able to build volumes of breast milk,  studies have shown that obesity can be a factor for low milk supply.  Read more about it below.

 
I believe this is a perfect example of where a women is undernourished but over fed.  It's the actual NUTRITION that the mother is ingesting that can help build breast milk.  The proper diet and nutrition can stimulate the needed hormones for milk supply.  Without the building blocks of a healthy body, I do think it can greatly effect the hormonal balance which then proceeds to effect milk production.
Though I've searched the web on any info about a link between nutrition and milk production, I only have to use logical reasoning to conclude that what we put into our mouths will decide whether we produce enough breast milk or don't. You need an extra 300 to 500 calories while breastfeeding and the healthier and nutrient rich those calories are.....the healthier for you and the healthier for baby.
Second theory......We pass a belief through the energy of fear from one women to the next stimulating the idea that their bodies cannot produce enough breast milk.  I know that sounds weird but I can't be bothered by that.  I think potentially ALL women have a mild to extreme fear of not creating good amounts of breast milk. As I see it, all that has happened in the last 20 years is the fear of one women growing and growing and then discussing her fear with her friend, who already has a fear herself about it, and then she goes on to worry and become fearful that she herself will not produce enough milk either.
I believe that the more fear we create and stimulate over one particular thing......the more likely we are to create that VERY thing we are afraid of.  This is actually what is taking place with low milk supply. We are merely passing a fear that creates a thought pattern that stimulates a physical response.  I know this is hard to believe but go ahead and read what Bruce Lipton has to say on the matter or even read the book...."Molecules of Emotion"......Both excellent resources to understand more of what I'm talking about.
Below is an interesting article on fear and how we feed it and make it bigger than it actually is.  It discusses the exact idea I'm talking about.
 
I feel it's important that we really consider the power of thought when it comes to milk supply.  I think it's even MORE important that we take responsibility for our own health by only consuming foods that are ideal nutrition for you and your baby.  I think it's of the utmost importance that we STOP telling our fearful, awful stories about milk supply or even breast feeding in general and strive to stay positive and open to whatever could be causing the issues of low milk supply.
Lastly, because I do believe that low breast milk supply does happen......below is an great article about how you still provide what you need for baby while still breast feeding.  And.....a chart to give you an idea what could be potentially going on.
 
 
In peace,
Rachel

 

by Rachel Talley

39 Weeks- Is It Long Enough To Wait?

img

I saw this picture today and had to share! So often we feel comfortable making choices about the timing of the birth of our babies. We believe what we're being told that babies born before 39 weeks is really okay.  We believe that if our babies are born before 39 weeks that they, most likely, are fully developed and all is well for their birth to come.  Sad part about that last sentence is that moms are choosing to induce based solely on their personal discomfort. 

Now, I know there are LOTS of reasons to induce that are truly medically indicated.  Labor induction rates are about the same as c-section rates.  About a 3rd of all women will use pitocin to induce labor....And just like the c-section being so high for a wide variety of absolutely ridiculous reasons.  

Let me just state though that just because they are showing some of the reasons to wait until 39 weeks to deliver.  I hold true that babies will come when they are GOOD and READY!  Yeah, you read that right.  Who knew?  That babies actually KNOW when they are fully developed and it's time for them to enter the world.  

So....the down low is that babies actually produce a hormone that they excrete to let the Mom know that it's time for her hormones to kick in and initiate labor.  You can read all about it by clicking the link in the article below. 

"Now, University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center at Dallas researchers have found that it is in fact the fetal lungs themselves which provide the signal to initiate labor.

Drs. Carole Mendelson, Jennifer Condon and Pancharatnam Jeyasuria published findings that a substance secreted by the lungs of a developing fetus contains the key signal that initiates labor."

If babies really decide and know when it's time for them to be born, I'm not quite sure why we are inducing moms for labor BEFORE the initial onset of contractions has started.  Waiting for baby to come when he/she is ready, limits the likelihood, like shown above, of complications with baby after birth.  I believe induction is a MUCH greater risk your taking with babies ability to cope outside of the womb, than any risk that may take place by waiting until baby is ready to be born.  

I've seen moms wait til 42....even 43 weeks before they delivered.  GASP, you say! I foresee MUCH less risk with a mom who's babies stays in just a bit longer than a mom who wants that baby out just a bit early.  A bit early has a wide variety of consequences a bit late just doesn't have.  Now, there are complications that can and do take place from delivering a post date baby but the risks of induction seem far greater to me and induction is the bigger risk.  You can click the link below to read more.  


Patience and little understanding of the process of birth is really ALL you need to avoid an induction.  But....YOU are the one the chooses how and when for your baby to be born because you LISTEN and WAIT for that baby to tell you!

In Peace,
Rachel

by Rachel Talley

Breastfeeding ROCKS! Here's WHY!

I find it interesting that the debate of the health values of breast milk are still in full force.  It seems to me that we now have enough current data that shows the increased benefits of breast milk in comparison to formula. And in my opinion, THERE IS NO COMPARISON!!

Yes, breast milk will feed your child and even somewhat nourish them.  But, exclusive formula feedings can cause a WORLD of problems down the road for the health of your child.  There seems to be study after study on the ill effects of formula on your baby.  From common allergies to respiratory infections to ear infections.  Truth be told,  it may be that the actual formula is causing infections but you also are starting your child off with a compromised immune system because of the lack of needed colostrum that breasts offer.

Just so you know the numbers.....by the 1970's almost 75% of women were bottle feeding their babies.  I was bottle fed and so were all the brothers and sisters.  And.....when I asked other friends of mine who are around my age, if they were breast or bottle fed, almost ALL of them were bottle fed.

Click the link below and read about it for yourself.  I'm just shocked at our ignorance on the subject and, it seems, so many women's and couples refusal to learn more about breastfeeding and why it's REALLY best!

"By the latter 1970's, use of evaporated milk had stopped and was replaced by store bought brand name formula milk, which a shocking 75% of American babies were fed. This may be one of the reasons why the rate for cancers in the western world is now 1 in every 3."  

I understand that there are those rare and few women who cannot breastfeed their babies because of lack of breast milk production or other reasons.  But....as a women who has lost ALL of her breast milk before and regained it back within a month AND who has breast fed ALL 5 of my children for over a year, ( my last I nursed until she was 3 1/2 or so), AND who has helped MANY, MANY other women learn how to breast feed their own children........I believe it is very RARE to not be able to breast feed your baby.  (If you want to know more about this or are curious to find out how you can make that happen EVEN when you haven't been able to in the past, feel free to email me)

Formula can literally change the gut flora of the intestinal tract with just one bottle.  Our intestinal tracts has millions of little microflora or good bacteria that feed almost EVERY physiological function of the body.  When that AMAZING microflora is damaged in any way, it then sets the stage for each system of the body to start a potential break down process in the health of the person.  That break down process can take YEARS to manifest itself.  It doesn't have to happen over night.  Click the link below to understand more about how formula can potentially forever change the health of your child.

  • "Infant formula should not be given to a breastfed baby before gut closure occurs.
* Once dietary supplementation begins, the bacterial profile of breastfed infants resembles that of formula-fed infants in which bifidobacteria are no longer dominant and the development of obligate anaerobic bacterial populations occurs. (Mackie, Sghir, Gaskins, 1999)
* Relatively small amounts of formula supplementation of breastfed infants (one supplement per 24 hours) will result in shifts from a breastfed to a formula-fed gut flora pattern. (Bullen, Tearle, Stewart, 1977)
* The introduction of solid food to the breastfed infant causes a major perturbation in the gut ecosystem, with a rapid rise in the number of enterobacteria and enterococci, followed by a progressive colonization by bacteroides, clostridia, and anaerobic streptococci. (Stark & Lee, 1982)
* With the introduction of supplementary formula, the gut flora in a breastfed baby becomes almost indistinguishable from normal adult flora within 24 hours. (Gerstley, Howell, Nagel, 1932)
* If breast milk were again given exclusively, it would take 2-4 weeks for the intestinal environment to return again to a state favoring the grampositive flora. (Brown & Bosworth, 1922; Gerstley, Howell, Nagel, 1932)"

If you haven't read WIKIPEDIA and what they say about the breastfeeding.....YOU SHOULD! They have quite a bit of information of all kinds on the subject of breastfeeding.  Good stuff!!

Since we are on the breast feeding topic and since I breastfed my daughter for over 3 years, I thought I would share this video.  Our perspectives on breast feeding have been SEVERELY skewed, in my opinion.   All around the world, length of breastfeeding rates vary. As Americans, we tend we wean our children MUCH earlier than other countries do.  I often wonder why that is?  Here's a video on women who breast feed older children in public and some of the reactions they were getting for doing so.

And lastly, a FUNNY little article I saw today that I HAD to share because I think this women is HILARIOUS!! Enjoy!

Click on the link below to read the article.

"1. Milk boobs are awesome. Have you seen milk boobs? The new-mom, my-milk-just-came-in(!!) boobs? They’re glorious. They’re porn star glorious except they’re REAL. They’ll make even the staunchest feminist reconsider her rabid stance on breast augmentation. These fabulous tits were a fabulous surprise after my first child, and a highly anticipated perk (for both my husband and me) after my second."
There are SO many benefits to breastfeeding that I just can't see ANY reason for a mother to do her utmost to make sure that she breast feeds her child for AS LONG AS POSSIBLE!! Breastfeeding, honestly, is ONE of my FAVORITE things to do!  I quite miss it, actually and cried when my last daughter finally weaned herself.  There is FOREVER a bond and connection you make with that child that can ONLY be FORMED through those first few days and weeks interactions that breast feeding creates.  

Please educate yourself on ALL the advantages for both you and baby for breast feeding and DO YOUR BEST to make sure you give your newborn the beginning he/she deserves!

In Peace,
Rachel

by Rachel Talley

Reminder: Kale Chip Class TOMORROW NIGHT! Read Below

Just a reminder about tomorrow's class!!  Here's some preview pictures of the kale chips I've been making! This will be a FUN class.....Don't miss it! Hugs, Rachel

Come Learn How to Make DELICIOUS Raw Kale Chips
Information for the class below!

When: Tuesday, Jan. 29th
Where: 1656 North 390 East, Pleasant Grove
Time: 7 pm
Cost: $10

PLEASE RSVP if you are interested in attending.  I usually make copies for my classes and want to make sure I have enough to hand out! You can email me at rachel@livingmom.net or call  801-623-2559. :)

In this class you will learn:
  • How to make 2 different flavors of kale chips- MY cheesy kale chips (of course) & a SURPRISE flavor!
  • The benefits of raw foods and why more raw foods creates increased health and happiness in your LIFE!
  • Find out why kale is one of the BEST foods for you!
  • Learn the health benefits of ALL the other ingredients put into the kale chips 
  • Understand more about how your body responds to the AMAZING health benefits of kale chips
  • See the ease of making kale chips and learn how to incorporate them into your life
  • Of course.....you will be tasting and trying each of the kale chips
  • Lastly, I will have extras to SELL at the end of the class
Please come with ANY questions!  Below is my bio for those who may not know me.  I have been in the nutritional/herbal world for 14 years now and am always EXCITED to help others on their path to health and wholeness.

In Peace,
Rachel

*I am a homebirth midwife, an herbal practitioner, a raw foods educator, emotional healing facilitator & placenta encapsulator. I have received training in many healing modalities. In 2000, I became certified as a Nutritional Herbologist and soon thereafter began teaching classes on nutrition where I taught such subjects as whole foods, raw foods, vegetarianism, veganism, cleansing, supplementation and overall physical and emotional health and well being. I also teach an INSPIRING childbirth course called "LivingMom Childbirth Education Courses." I have since spent the last 14 years researching and educating myself in many matters relating to all forms of alternative therapies. I have worked with many people to help them facilitate their own personal healing and progression. Nine years ago, I was introduced to Native American healing & spirituality . In 2007, I studied with James “Flaming Eagle” Mooney who, soon thereafter, gifted me as a water pourer and medicine women. In 2009, I spent 18 months studying with & have been gifted as a pipe carrier by Richard “He Who Has the Foundations” Swallow, Spiritual Leader of the Eagle Clan of the Lakota Sioux . I have been married to my LOVING husband for 17 years and together we have 5 BEAUTIFUL children, all born at home. I, along with my husband, still participate regularly in Native American teachings & ceremonies.*

by Rachel Talley

Love & Nurturing Stimulates Larger Brains In Our Children

This isn't a surprise, really?  I mean....is it?  I only ask the question because it seems to make logical sense to me that when we nurture and love our children, the WAY they were meant to be loved and nurtured.....then, of course, they'd be more intelligent and grasp new ideas about the world around us in a healthier way! I believe that LOVE is truly the only healer and worker of magic when it comes to  total health and happiness.  How can it not stimulate our children's brains to grow larger so as to hold more information and build a greater curiosity of the world around them?

I wonder if the brain growth and size takes place because growth, of any kind, can be stymied by fear.  If a child enters the world feeling a sense of dread and fear of the world around them....I wonder....do their brains then restrict growth to be able to protect the infant of exploring too far the world around them?  If they can't comprehend more, then maybe the system believes they can protect themselves from treading too far into a scary, unsafe world?  I have no factual evidence to correlate with my opinion & honestly, I'm too lazy to spend the time looking....but what if????

Birth itself can be extremely traumatic on a newborn. Their nervous systems are about 150 times more sensitive than ours as adults.  That only means that their ability to view their own birth experience as traumatic is much greater.  Looking into the world of how we birth our children.....not just their treatment and care after delivery, might feed into the insights and studies that are being done on children's brains.

I have no doubt that growth restrictions can even take place in utero.  This can happen based upon the Mother's fears and negative belief patterns about herself or the world at large.  She then passes those fears and negative belief patterns onto her unborn child in an attempt to help the baby acclimate to the new world it's entering.  It's a protection, you see.  The only downfall with that protection is then the baby inability to feel safe in our world and choose to explore it.  Exploration and experience truly are the greatest teachers for our children.

Below is the first article which shows an image of 2 brains.  One where the child was nurtured and love and the other where the child was extremely neglected.  Notice that the neglected infant's brain is almost half the size of the loved child.  This is a HUGE difference!  Not just a mild one......Click the link below to read the full article.

 

"Experts say that the sizeable difference in the two brains is primarily caused by the difference in the way each child was treated by their mothers."

The article states that not only will the child's brain size be smaller but that there are also LONG term effects of the restricted growth.  

"They say that the child on the left with the larger brain will be more intelligent and will be more likely to develop the social ability to empathize with others compared to the child on the right.
On the other hand, the child with the smaller brain on the right will be more likely to become addicted to drugs, be involved in violent crimes, be unemployed and dependent on government benefits in the future."
 

The first hour or so following birth can be some of the MOST CRITICAL bonding and connecting time for you and your baby.  Think back about the birth of your own children.  Did they whisk your baby away immediately after birth or did they let you hold and cuddle your baby for as long as you wanted?  Did they poke and prod your baby with needles and hands or did they keep your baby close to you as they gently talked and soothed your baby as they did any needed testing?  These are just 2 examples of a stressful situation for you and your baby that might negatively effect your baby's ability to feel love and their brain growth patterns.  

This second article is explains more in details the REASONS for the restricted brain growth and why and how it happens.  Here's a great quote from it.....

"Myths inevitably survive long after they’ve been scientifically disproven. Such is the case with the fantasy that mental illnesses can be written off solely to genes and chemicals. Over the last decade a string of scientific discoveries has shown that the biology driving mental illness has at least as much to do with the environment as with chemicals or genetic inheritance. And it increasingly appears that the single most powerful environmental factor is the love - or its lack - that children receive from their parents. So in a very real way we parents are back on the hook for the lifelong emotional well-being of our kids."

Click link below to read the whole article....

 
So today I end with a hope for humanity.  That all of us can learn to love more and be a bit gentler with ourselves and our new little ones entering our world.  I will repeat the quote above because it cannot be said enough...."All children who are held and loved...will know how to love others. Spread these virtues in the world. Nothing more need be done." ~Meng Zi c.300 BCE
 
In Peace,
Rachel
 

 

by Rachel Talley

Know the Signs & Ways to Avoid a C-Section

img

So....I have passionate feelings about our current c-section rate which seems to be holding strong at 32%.  We all know what 32% means, right?  Let me spell it out a little bit more.....32% means that 1/3 of ALL babies in the United States are getting surgically cut out of Mom's. That's one in every 3 women.  Does that seem extreme to you?  Because it, MOST DEFINITELY, does to me.

Did you know that in some areas of the United States the c-section rate can be as high as 50-60%?  This seems ABSOLUTELY ridiculous to me but Brazil actually carries a 82% c-section rate.....82%!!!!  Can you believe it?  I read that number and honestly, my head just spins.

The most fearful part about that 82% is that we, as American's, are on the same road.  I am aghast that women will blindly walk into the operating room and say NOTHING! Or even worse, request that their baby is surgically removed.  Please don't get me wrong, I believe in every woman's right to choose whatever birth experience she wants but.....I believe that choice should only be made after proper experience, understanding and knowledge of what a c-section is and the consequences to choosing to have one.

Read more about that 82% c-section rate at "BRAZIL WOMAN REBEL AGAINST C-SECTIONS"

img

Below is some information from Wikipedia about what The World Health Organization believes are c-section rate should be.  They feel it should be cut in half at 15%.  I recommend searching this subject online to get more information about it but some studies have concluded that, in the United States, our c-section rate should be as low as 10%.

Analyzing the rise in Caesarean section rates

The World Health Organization officially withdrew its previous recommendation of a 15% C-section rates in June 2010. Their official statement read, "There is no empirical evidence for an optimum percentage. What matters most is that all women who need caesarean sections receive them."[64]
The US National Institutes of Health says rises in rates of Caesarean sections are not, in isolation, a cause for concern, but may reflect changing reproductive patterns:
The World Health Organization has determined an “ideal rate” of all cesarean deliveries (such as 15 percent) for a population. One surgeon's opinion is that there is no consistency in this ideal rate, and artificial declarations of an ideal rate should be discouraged. Goals for achieving an optimal cesarean delivery rate should be based on maximizing the best possible maternal and neonatal outcomes, taking into account available medical and health resources and maternal preferences. This opinion is based on the idea that if left unchallenged, optimal cesarean delivery rates will vary over time and across different populations according to individual and societal circumstances.[65]
The number of C-sections performed has grown rapidly, for example, a fourfold increase from 1971 to 1991 (from 4.2 per 100 births)[citation needed]. This may be accredited to the improved technology in detecting prebirth distress. Malpractice has been looked into because of the rapid increase. Some argue the higher costs of C-section births compared to regular births make physicians quicker to recommend surgery. Usually, if a doctor makes a recommendation, people are quick to take it to heart and act upon it. The effect of relative C-section price on C-section usage should be examined.
However, some commentators are concerned by the rise and have noted several evidence-based studies. Louise Silverton, deputy general-secretary of the Royal College of Midwives, says not only has society’s tolerance for pain and illness been “significantly reduced”, but also women are scared of pain and think if they have a Caesarean, there will be less, if any, pain. In the opinion of Silverton and the Royal College of Midwives, “women have lost their confidence in their ability to give birth."[66]
Silverton's analysis is controversial among some surgeons. Dr Maggie Blott, a consultant obstetrician at University College Hospital, London and then a Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) spokeswoman on Caesareans (and Vice President of the RCOG), responded: 'There isn't any evidence to support Louise Silverton's view that increasingly pain-averse women are pushing up the Caesarean rate. There's an undercurrent that Caesarean sections are a bad thing, but they can be life-saving.'[66]
A previously unexplored hypothesis for the increasing rate is the evolution of birth weight and maternal pelvis size. It is proposed that since the advent of successful Caesarean birth over the last 150 years, mothers with small pelvises and babies with large birth weights have survived and contributed to these traits, increasing in the population percentage. Such a hypothesis is based upon the idea that even without fears of malpractice, without maternal obesity and diabetes, and without other widely quoted factors, the C-section rate would continue to rise simply due to slow changes in population genetics.[67]

The question is.....why are c-section rates so HIGH?  Well, of course I believe their are a variety of reasons.  Those reasons go anywhere from a busy doctor feeling more in control of the birth environment by performing a c-section so he recommends them regularly to a intervention overload which baby cannot handle and the inevitable response is baby struggling during delivery.

But.....in my opinion (which doesn't matter much really), the reason for the HIGH c-section rates really is just lack of education on the part of the mother and the father.  I gotta be honest, I'm always a bit surprised when I meet a couple who is getting ready to deliver their first baby and their understanding of the birth process is almost non existent.

I know that birth is just a normal day in and day out process in our world......but that doesn't take away from the HUGE life change and transformation it brings with it.  I think the mundane-ness of birth has brought with it an misunderstanding that the birth process is someone else's responsibility aside from the parents.  The child exists inside a women's belly which mean SHE is the one who has to remove the child from her belly via the process of birth.  Just logic alone shows us WHO is really in charge of the birth process!!  THE MOTHER and NO ONE ELSE!!

Now, the mother in her wisdom, will hopefully make wise choices in her care provider while educating herself on the process of conception, pregnancy and birth.  This is her BEST BET to A) avoiding a c-section and B) create and stimulate a BLISSFUL pregnancy and birth for herself.  With all that being said, below are some interesting link I recommend you click on to educate yourself and be more aware of your choices and how to avoid a c-section.

I truly believe that education is KEY to knowing, finding, creating and having an AMAZING pregnancy and birth.  It just is! We may have LOTS of other answers to fixing the problem.  And I'm sure they are VERY good answers.  But....education lifts the wisdom of a women to a place where she finds her power and strength to deliver her child in peace and joy.

First: Here is an EXCELLENT article that should help you understand the "set-up" for the c-section. Click on the link below.

"TOP TEN SIGNS YOUR DOCTOR IS PLANNING TO PERFORM AN UNNECESSARY CESAREAN SECTION ON YOU"

Second: Here are 2 great article showing you how you can avoid a c-section and what actions you might take.  Click on the links below!

"TIPS AND TOOLS FOR AVOIDING A CESAREAN SECTION" -The Childbirth Connection is a very informative website and I would take the time to search their whole site. :)

"5 WAYS TO AVOID A C-SECTION"- As you read this article, educate yourself on what it means to have a "medically necessary" c-section.  So often we confuse the opinions of our doctors with what a true medical emergency is.  Find out BEFORE you deliver and then when your doctor throws out big words as to why you need a c-section, your decision will be based in your knowledge and not fear of the situation.

Lastly: It only makes sense that the Amish might have answers to help lower the c-section rate.  But....the answer almost always is.....if you want to avoid a c-section....The MORE you leave a mother ALONE during her birth process, the MORE likely her birth will be a safe, vaginal birth.  Click the link below to find out what's working for the Amish.

"AMISH OFFERS CLUES TO LOWERING US C-SECTION RATES"

Have a VERY happy Wednesday!
In Peace,
Rachel

P.S. I didn't even go into the potential birth trauma for Mom and baby during and after a c-section.  Check back for another day where I will touch on that subject.  But again....another point to look at when educating yourself about c-sections!

by Rachel Talley

Raw Kale Chips Class~ Jan. 29th @ 7 pm

I'm so EXCITED to teach how to make raw kale chips! Please pass this info along if you know others who might be interested.....:)  

 
Come Learn How to Make DELICIOUS Raw Kale Chips

Information for the class below!

When: Tuesday, Jan. 29th
Where: Pleasant Grove, Utah
Time: 7 pm
Cost: $10

PLEASE RSVP if you are interested in attending.  I usually make copies for my classes and want to make sure I have enough to hand out! You can email me at rachel@livingmom.net.  :)

In this class you will learn:
  • How to make 2 different flavors of kale chips- MY cheesy kale chips (of course) & a SURPRISE flavor!
  • The benefits of raw foods and why more raw foods creates increased health and happiness in your LIFE!
  • Find out why kale is one of the BEST foods for you!
  • Learn the health benefits of ALL the other ingredients put into the kale chips 
  • Understand more about how your body responds to the AMAZING health benefits of kale chips
  • See the ease of making kale chips and learn how to incorporate them into your life
  • Of course.....you will be tasting and trying each of the kale chips
  • Lastly, I will have extras to SELL at the end of the class
Please come with ANY questions!  Below is my bio for those who may not know me.  I have been in the nutritional/herbal world for 14 years now and am always EXCITED to help others on their path to health and wholeness.

In Peace,
Rachel

*I am a homebirth midwife, an herbal practitioner, a raw foods educator, emotional healing facilitator & placenta encapsulator. I have received training in many healing modalities. In 2000, I became certified as a Nutritional Herbologist and soon thereafter began teaching classes on nutrition where I taught such subjects as whole foods, raw foods, vegetarianism, veganism, cleansing, supplementation and overall physical and emotional health and well being. I also teach an INSPIRING childbirth course called "LivingMom Childbirth Education Courses." I have since spent the last 14 years researching and educating myself in many matters relating to all forms of alternative therapies. I have worked with many people to help them facilitate their own personal healing and progression. Nine years ago, I was introduced to Native American healing & spirituality . In 2007, I studied with James “Flaming Eagle” Mooney who, soon thereafter, gifted me as a water pourer and medicine women. In 2009, I spent 18 months studying with & have been gifted as a pipe carrier by Richard “He Who Has the Foundations” Swallow, Spiritual Leader of the Eagle Clan of the Lakota Sioux . I have been married to my LOVING husband for 17 years and together we have 5 BEAUTIFUL children, all born at home. I, along with my husband, still participate regularly in Native American teachings & ceremonies.*

by Rachel Talley

Fatness Is Predisposed In Utero

So just another article that delves into the world of pregnancy and nutrition, my 2 LOVES!  I'm excited to think we are striving harder through more research to find out what is really taking place in the womb and what effects nutrition plays to the unborn fetus.

Of course, I can only speak from my experience, but nutrition played a huge roll in my overall conception/pregnancy/labor/birth/postpartum experience.  You can read more about my experiences in my pregnancy in my post, "FAT IS NOT WHERE ITS AT-MEDICATING OUR UNBORN BABIES FOR OBESITY."

I do feel quite passionate about health BEFORE pregnancy and consistent high nutrient dense foods during pregnancy and beyond.  As stated in the article below, your baby could be predisposed for diabetes, a disease that is actually quite simple to heal.

This quote from the article below is extremely bothersome for me.....

 "If the supply of nutrients across the placenta is inadequate or unbalanced, the unborn baby has to decide whether to prioritise fat deposition or spare brain growth -- it does this by changing the amount of blood flowing to the liver and brain. A decision to increase blood flow to the liver has lasting implications for the child's body fatness.

There is an EXCELLENT documentary called "SIMPLY RAW: REVERSING DIABETES IN 30 DAYS."  You read that right.....curing diabetes in 30 days.  It actually happens, folks.  But think about it, what if we could STOP completely your baby from ever showing signs of diabetes.  Imagine if illness, in general, could totally be thwarted for your unborn child.

Well, it just so happens that I live in a world where I believe that is a reality.  I actually believe you can CURE ANYTHING.  Dr. Christopher truly said it best...."There is no such thing as an incurable disease, only incurable people."  I wholeheartedly agree with this quote.  He is RIGHT ON.

Before pregnancy, your health is completely up to you!  During pregnancy, your health and the health of your unborn child are BOTH up to you! I think there must be some kind of disconnect in our world that pregnant women don't seem to be understanding this concept.  Please know I  make that remark not out of judgement because I have been one of those disconnected women.  But rather I say  it out of concern and fear for our future generations health and well being.

At some point, in order for our world to be a healthier and happier place, women will have to really take FULL responsibility for themselves.  They will have educate themselves on foods, herbs and nutrition in general to know what is REALLY best for you and your unborn child.

Honestly, that education takes time.  It takes planning and preparation BEFORE conception to really make that happen.  I am always in AWE of the couples who attend my LivingMom Childbirth Educational Courses BEFORE they conceive.  As I've watched them during their pregnancies, they are healthier and happier than I believe they would of been without that education and understanding.  Of course, this is all my opinion but I have closely watched these women and it makes a PHENOMENAL difference later on.  It just does.

Yet again, I'm stepping down from my soap box. I believe our bodies and the bodies of our growing infants deserves the BEST quality foods to keep it running at peak performance.  My hope is that women will go the extra mile to do their very BEST for themselves and their babies.  I believe the majority of women already do so and its merely the lack of education that prevents the ideal pregnancy/birth experience.  It just takes that first step to make a lasting change.

In Peace,
Rachel
_________________________________________________________________

Children’s Body Fatness Linked to Decisions Made in the Womb

ScienceDaily (Aug. 22, 2012) — New born human infants have the largest brains among primates, but also the highest proportion of body fat. Before birth, if the supply of nutrients from the mother through the placenta is limited or unbalanced, the developing baby faces a dilemma: should resources be allocated to brain growth, or to fat deposition for use as an energy reserve during the early months after birth?
Scientists at the University of Southampton have shown that this decision could have an effect on how fat we are as children.
In new research, published in the journal PLoS ONE on August 22, 2012), scientists at the Medical Research Council (MRC) Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit at the University, performed ultrasound scans on 381 pregnant women taking part in the Southampton Women's Survey. They measured the blood flow from the placenta to the unborn baby, and the distribution of this blood to either the liver of the baby or bypassing the liver to supply the brain and heart. This was then compared with the infant's body fatness at birth and at four years old.
The findings show that greater blood flow to the baby's liver in late pregnancy was associated with greater body fatness in the infant at birth and at age four. In contrast, lower liver blood flow and a "brain-sparing" blood flow pattern (when the blood bypasses the liver and goes to the brain) occurred when the placenta was smaller and less able to meet baby's demand for essential nutrients in the womb.
These findings were independent of an association between mother's body fatness and the body fatness of her infant.
Keith Godfrey, Professor of Epidemiology and Human Development, at the University who led the study, explains: "In our evolutionary past, the demands of a big brain have led the unborn baby to develop blood flow responses which preserve nutrient delivery to the brain when the supply of essential nutrients from the mother cannot meet the baby's requirements.
"However, having a big brain has also led to evolution of a strategy to adjust blood flow through the baby's liver, which enables the liver to produce more fat -- this acts as an energy reserve, protecting brain development during periods of illness or under-nutrition in early infancy. Our data suggests that evolution of this strategy has brought with it a predisposition to obesity and later diabetes in contemporary societies with abundant nutrition in later postnatal life."
Professors Guttorm Haugen from the University of Oslo and Torvid Kiserud from the University of Bergen were part of the research team. They comment: "An interpretation of our findings is that there could be programmed effects on the liver that arise from blood flow adaptations in the womb and predispose individuals to gain excess body fat. Although further studies are needed, our findings add weight to current concerns that the current epidemic of childhood obesity and associated disorders may partly have its origins through adaptations made by the developing baby during pregnancy."
Professor Mark Hanson, Director of the University of Southampton's Human Development and Health Academic Unit, adds: "If the supply of nutrients across the placenta is inadequate or unbalanced, the unborn baby has to decide whether to prioritise fat deposition or spare brain growth -- it does this by changing the amount of blood flowing to the liver and brain. A decision to increase blood flow to the liver has lasting implications for the child's body fatness.
"Transfer processes across the placenta for some nutrients such as glucose evolved in environments less affluent than those now prevalent in developed populations, and our findings additionally suggest that in circumstances of maternal obesity and nutrient excess these processes now also lead to excessive fat deposition in the womb."
"This strengthens the case for all women of reproductive age having greater access to nutritional, education and lifestyle support to reduce the risk of obesity in their children and improve the health of the next generation."
Professor Cyrus Cooper, Director of the MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit comments: "This study is part of a wider body of work by the MRC Lifecourse Epidemiology Unit into how factors during pregnancy might have a long-term influence on childhood growth and development. This is a wonderful example of multi-disciplinary research using the unique clinical resource provided by the Southampton Women's Survey."

by Rachel Talley

Boob Jobs & Longer Labors Than 50 Years Ago

I know all of you have missed me and my AMAZING blog posts.  Just kidding....:)  Well, I'm back.  I took so long off because I decided to have surgery.  Can you believe it?  Yes, healthy living....crunchy mama....ME..... decided it was time to fix a surgical hernia, have a scar revision.....AND while we're already cutting me open.....get a BOOB JOB!  You read that right....YES, I am one week out from a breast augmentation and lift.

Now, I'll be honest, I am a woman who prides herself on being tough.  Growing up, I was a phenomenal baby in almost every way.  I avoided anything that might show the remotest sign of being in any way painful at all costs.

I still remember when I told my family we decided to have a home birth.  I can still hear the constant laughter ringing in my ears.  My family actually thought I was joking at first.  They regularly commented that there was NO WAY I was going to be able to do it.  That I couldn't handle pain like that without whining and crying every step of the way.

Well, since that time I have had 5 babies at home,  3 abdominal bowel surgeries, regular bowel obstructions for 4 years straight (that in my opinion hurt just as much if not more than having a child) and the hernia repair, scar revision and boob job.....have TOPPED them all.  I came home and for the first 4 days thought...."What the HELL have I done."

Today is the ONE week mark since the surgery.  I'm priding myself today on the fact that I actually took a shower.  I even shaved my legs.  This is a BIG deal, people!  Just 3 days ago I was still wallowing in the fact that I'd made a HORRIBLE mistake and recovering from boob job surgery is literally choosing to live in hell for about 5 days.

So I guess the jury is still out.....Am I a total WIMP or is major surgery a HUMONGOUS PAIN? I'm speaking both literally and philosophically here.  :)  I am on the UP and UP!  I actually took a shower today which is a BIG feat in and of itself for me.  I do feel a little like WONDER WOMAN!  Yes, I'm learning to deeply LOVE myself even in the lies I tell myself.  LOL!!!

So, since every post has to have some WONDERFULNESS about babies and mamas and birth, I've decided to post the article below.  It is disheartening to think that labor now takes longer than it used too.

My opinion.....LEAVE moms and babies and Dads....ALONE during the birth process, labor will be shorter and quicker and LESS painful....IF even painful at all.  Its that SIMPLE!!!  Let nature and nurture do their jobs and low and behold, relaxation and serenity step in to create a birth that feels easy and blissful and usually ends up happening quite FAST!

Have a Terrific Thursday!

In Peace,
Rachel
__________________________________________________________
Babies Take Longer To Come Out Than They Did In Grandma's Day

Fifty years ago, the typical first-time mother in the U.S. took about four hours to give birth. These days, women labor about 6 1/2 hours.

EnlargeCarsten/Three Lions/Getty Images

Fifty years ago, the typical first-time mother in the U.S. took about four hours to give birth. These days, women labor about 6 1/2 hours.
The typical first-time mother takes 6 1/2 hours to give birth these days. Her counterpart 50 years ago labored for barely four hours.
That's the striking conclusion of a new federal study that compared nearly 140,000 births from two time periods.
One big implication: Today's obstetricians may be rushing to do cesarean sections too soon because they're using an out-of-date yardstick for how long a "normal" labor should take.
"That's absolutely correct," says Dr. Ware Branch of Intermountain Healthcare in Salt Lake City, a study author. Lead author Dr. Katherine Laughon of the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development agrees.

 

The definition of a "normal" labor — the range of times when a woman in labor reaches certain milestones — was laid down in the 1950s. Contemporary obstetricians still use that "labor curve."
"The past definitions of 'normal' labor have been used to draw the line as to when it's time to intervene with a cesarean delivery," Branch said during a telephone conference with reporters. "But what we've shown is that labor is actually longer ... than it was 50 years ago. That certainly calls for a reassessment of when one should draw the line for cesarean delivery."
Last year Branch and his colleagues at Intermountain Healthcare calculated that the U.S. could save $3.5 billion by lowering the national cesarean delivery rate from 32 percent to 21 percent, which is the C-section rate in the Utah hospital system. A cesarean birth costs nearly $17,000, compared with $9,400 for a vaginal delivery.
The reasons for today's much longer labors aren't entirely clear. They may have something to do with differences in today's mothers compared with their grandmothers. For instance, first-time mothers are about four years older on average, they have higher body mass, and they're more racially diverse.
Today's babies are also bigger — for instance, first-borns are 4 ounces heavier today than the 1960s crop.
But study authors say the most important causes for longer labors are what obstetricians do, not how their patients have changed. Even after statistically adjusting for differences in maternal and newborn characteristics, modern labors are still substantially longer.
Laughon says part of the reason is a jump in the use of epidural anesthesia during labor.
"That is known to prolong labor by approximately 40 to 90 minutes," Laughon says. "Of course, it's very accepted practice to help improve pain control during labor."
Branch points out that up to 85 percent of contemporary laboring mothers get epidurals. "Once that's in place, they're in bed," he says. "In the late '50s and early '60s, how much did people get up out of bed during labor and walk around?"
Another big change is that many more women have induced labors these days. That is, they're not permitted to go into labor spontaneously. One in three women had spontaneous labor, among women giving birth between 2002 and 2008.
Women today are 19 percent more likely to get a drug called oxytocin, which increases the strength of uterine contractions. But this should shorten labors, so the study authors note that "if women were allowed to progress in natural labor without oxytocin, the stages of labor could be even longer with the same odds of achieving vaginal delivery."
Laughon and Branch acknowledge their results may be controversial among some obstetricians — those who view it as an attack on epidural anesthesia, for instance. "Some skeptics are going to say, 'Gee, you really don't know the details about these two groups 50 years apart to be able to compare them fairly,' " Branch says. "That's a legitimate criticism."
But the "plain and simple fact," they say, is that giving birth takes longer today. They say all they're suggesting is that today's routine practices "may need to be thoughtfully reconsidered."

by Rachel Talley

Your Children Are Part Of You FOREVER!

I had to share this today.    It made me cry.  I love my children in EVERY way possible and this article brought up some WONDERFUL emotions.  My oldest turns 16 tomorrow.  I can't believe how quickly the time has flown.  I didn't ever realize the rush of time that would pass without my even recognizing it.

As I think back on my pregnancy, labor, birth and life thereafter with Dean, I've been saddened as he becomes a teenager and a man.  To watch your children grow up with the eventual goal of leaving your home to form their own families, is both heart breaking and exciting at the same time.

I've shed many, many tears as I watch Dean become who he REALLY is and find himself.  Though, at times, its painful and overwhelming, I know his personal growth will only aid in him delightful new ways.

While reading this article and watching the video below, I realized, yet again, that my babies will really never leave it.  That because they were created from my egg and were grown in my belly, they would be part of me forever.  Its so exhilarating to have science now prove that our children's cells are actually forever in our bodies.  Especially in our hearts.....

I LOVE the world of science and what it is now proving.  So many things we used to believe were just weird, strange ideas and philosophies, science is now proving is actually a REALITY!

When I ponder the loss I might feel in watching my children grow up, I will stay focused on the parts of themselves I gave them and they gave me.  That we will ALWAYS be connected and NEVER apart!
I hope all mothers out there will do the same.

In Peace,
Rachel
__________________________________________________

by Rachel Talley

Why Babies Should Never Sleep Alone

I did just recently put a post together called "Co-Sleeping: The Facts And The Benefits."  But because I absolutely ADORE co-sleeping in EVERY way, I had to post the article below.  I wholly agree with this article and its ability to define even more acutely how co-sleeping IS safe.  Its when we don't understand how to keep it safe, that we then see problems.

Co-sleeping with my kids brought such JOY for us.  Chris and I were in AWE each time we had the opportunity to share the bed with our new little tiny one.  I do agree that there are biological process involved that make co-sleeping so enjoyable.  

I let you have at it and decide for yourself what you think.  Truthfully, the fact that I could SLEEP the WHOLE night even while breastfeeding was the deciding factor for me.  It just makes your world that much brighter....:)

In Peace,
Rachel

P.S. Below is a fun little video Chris took a few months ago trying to wake our kids up.  Our kids, because of co-sleeping, LOVE to all sleep in the same room together sometimes.  So Mabel, Millie, and Pratt made a bed on Golden's floor so they could all be in the same room.  For the longest time, all 5 of our kids slept in the same room together.  They really, really LOVE each other.  Its is WONDERFULLY adorable.  :) And yes, This is how long it takes to wake our kids up....


_______________________________________________________

Cosleeping and Biological Imperatives: Why Human Babies Do Not and Should Not Sleep Alone

Posted by dlende on December 21, 2008
mother-and-childBy James J. McKenna Ph.D.
Edmund P. Joyce C.S.C. Chair in Anthropology
Director, Mother-Baby Behavioral Sleep Laboratory
University of Notre Dame
Where a baby sleeps is not as simple as current medical discourse and recommendations against cosleeping in some western societies want it to be. And there is good reason why. I write here to explain why the pediatric recommendations on forms of cosleeping such as bedsharing will and should remain mixed. I will also address why the majority of new parents practice intermittent bedsharing despite governmental and medical warnings against it.
Definitions are important here. The term cosleeping refers to any situation in which a committed adult caregiver, usually the mother, sleeps within close enough proximity to her infant so that each, the mother and infant, can respond to each other’s sensory signals and cues. Room sharing is a form of cosleeping, always considered safe and always considered protective. But it is not the room itself that it is protective. It is what goes on between the mother (or father) and the infant that is. Medical authorities seem to forget this fact. This form of cosleeping is not controversial and is recommended by all.
Unfortunately, the terms cosleeping, bedsharing and a well-known dangerous form of cosleeping, couch or sofa cosleeping, are mostly used interchangeably by medical authorities, even though these terms need to be kept separate. It is absolutely wrong to say, for example, that “cosleeping is dangerous” when roomsharing is a form of cosleeping and this form of cosleeping (as at least three epidemiological studies show) reduce an infant’s chances of dying by one half.
Bedsharing is another form of cosleeping which can be made either safe or unsafe, but it is not intrinsically one nor the other. Couch or sofa cosleeping is, however, intrinsically dangerous as babies can and do all too easily get pushed against the back of the couch by the adult, or flipped face down in the pillows, to suffocate.
Often news stories talk about “another baby dying while cosleeping” but they fail to distinguish between what type of cosleeping was involved and, worse, what specific dangerous factor might have actually been responsible for the baby dying. A specific example is whether the infant was sleeping prone next to their parent, which is an independent risk factor for death regardless of where the infant was sleeping. Such reports inappropriately suggest that all types of cosleeping are the same, dangerous, and all the practices around cosleeping carry the same high risks, and that no cosleeping environment can be made safe.
Nothing can be further from the truth. This is akin to suggesting that because some parents drive drunk with their infants in their cars, unstrapped into car seats, and because some of these babies die in car accidents that nobody can drive with babies in their cars because obviously car transportation for infants is fatal. You see the point.
One of the most important reasons why bedsharing occurs, and the reason why simple declarations against it will not eradicate it, is because sleeping next to one’s baby is biologically appropriate, unlike placing infants prone to sleep or putting an infant in a room to sleep by itself. This is particularly so when bedsharing is associated with breast feeding.
When done safely, mother-infant cosleeping saves infants lives and contributes to infant and maternal health and well being. Merely having an infant sleeping in a room with a committed adult caregiver (cosleeping) reduces the chances of an infant dying from SIDS or from an accident by one half!
Research
In Japan where co-sleeping and breastfeeding (in the absence of maternal smoking) is the cultural norm, rates of the sudden infant death syndrome are the lowest in the world. For breastfeeding mothers, bedsharing makes breastfeeding much easier to manage and practically doubles the amount of breastfeeding sessions while permitting both mothers and infants to spend more time asleep. The increased exposure to mother’s antibodies which comes with more frequent nighttime breastfeeding can potentially, per any given infant, reduce infant illness. And because co-sleeping in the form of bedsharing makes breastfeeding easier for mothers, it encourages them to breastfeed for a greater number of months, according to Dr. Helen Ball’s studies at the University of Durham, therein potentially reducing the mothers chances of breast cancer. Indeed, the benefits of cosleeping helps explain why simply telling parents never to sleep with baby is like suggesting that nobody should eat fats and sugars since excessive fats and sugars lead to obesity and/or death from heart disease, diabetes or cancer. Obviously, there’s a whole lot more to the story.
As regards bedsharing, an expanded version of its function and effects on the infant’s biology helps us to understand not only why the bedsharing debate refuses to go away, but why the overwhelming majority of parents in the United States (over 50% according to the most recent national survey) now sleep in bed for part or all of the night with their babies.
That the highest rates of bedsharing worldwide occur alongside the lowest rates of infant mortality, including Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) rates, is a point worth returning to. It is an important beginning point for understanding the complexities involved in explaining why outcomes related to bedsharing (recall, one of many types of cosleeping) vary between being protective for some populations and dangerous for others. It suggests that whether or not babies should bedshare and what the outcome will be may depend on who is involved, under what condition it occurs, how it is practiced, and the quality of the relationship brought to the bed to share. This is not the answer some medical authorities are looking for, but it certainly resonates with parents, and it is substantiated by scores of studies.
Understanding Recommendations
Recently, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) SIDS Sub-Committee for whom I served (ad hoc) as an expert panel member recommended that babies should sleep close to their mothers in the same room but not in the same bed. While I celebrated this historic roomsharing recommendation, I disagreed with and worry about the ramifications of the unqualified recommendation against any and all bedsharing. Further, I worry about the message being given unfairly (if not immorally) to mothers; that is, no matter who you are, or what you do, your sleeping body is no more than an inert potential lethal weapon against which neither you nor your infant has any control. If this were true, none of us humans would be here today to have this discussion because the only reason why we survived is because our ancestral mothers slept alongside us and breastfed us through the night!
mckenna-sleeping-with-your-babyI am not alone in thinking this way. The Academy of Breast Feeding Medicine, the USA Breast Feeding Committee, the Breast Feeding section of the American Academy of Pediatrics, La Leche League International, UNICEF and WHO are all prestigious organizations who support bedsharing and which use the best and latest scientific information on what makes mothers and babies safe and healthy. Clearly, there is no scientific consensus.
What we do agree on, however, is what specific “factors” increase the chances of SIDS in a bedsharing environment, and what kinds of circumstances increase the chances of suffocation either from someone in the bed or from the bed furniture itself. For example, adults should not bedshare if inebriated or if desensitized by drugs, or overly exhausted, and other toddlers or children should never be in a bed with an infant. Moreover, since having smoked during a pregnancy diminishes the capacities of infants to arouse to protect their breathing, smoking mothers should have their infants sleep alongside them on a different surface but not in the same bed.
My own physiological studies suggest that breastfeeding mother-infant pairs exhibit increased sensitivities and responses to each other while sleeping, and those sensitivities offers the infant protection from overlay. However, if bottle feeding, infants should lie alongside the mother in a crib or bassinet, but not in the same bed. Prone or stomach sleeping especially on soft mattresses is always dangerous for infants and so is covering their heads with blankets, or laying them near or on top of pillows. Light blanketing is always best as is attention to any spaces or gaps in bed furniture which needs to be fixed as babies can slip into these spaces and quickly to become wedged and asphyxiate. My recommendation is, if routinely bedsharing, to strip the bed apart from its frame, pulling the mattress and box springs to the center of the room, therein avoiding dangerous spaces or gaps into which babies can slip to be injured or die.
But, again, disagreement remains over how best to use this information. Certain medical groups, including some members of the American Academy of Pediatrics (though not necessarily the majority), argue that bedsharing should be eliminated altogether. Others, myself included, prefer to support the practice when it can be done safely amongst breastfeeding mothers. Some professionals believe that it can never be made safe but there is no evidence that this is true.
More importantly, parents just don’t believe it! Making sure that parents are in a position to make informed choices therein reflecting their own infant’s needs, family goals, and nurturing and infant care preferences seems to me to be fundamental.
Our Biological Imperatives
My support of bedsharing when practiced safely stems from my research knowledge of how and why it occurs, what it means to mothers, and how it functions biologically. Like human taste buds which reward us for eating what’s overwhelmingly critical for survival i.e. fats and sugars, a consideration of human infant and parental biology and psychology reveal the existence of powerful physiological and social factors that promote maternal motivations to cosleep and explain parental needs to touch and sleep close to baby.
The low calorie composition of human breast milk (exquisitely adjusted for the human infants’ undeveloped gut) requires frequent nighttime feeds, and, hence, helps explain how and why a cultural shift toward increased cosleeping behavior is underway. Approximately 73% of US mothers leave the hospital breast feeding and even amongst mothers who never intended to bedshare soon discover how much easier breast feeding is and how much more satisfied they feel with baby sleeping alongside often in their bed.
But it’s not just breastfeeding that promotes bedsharing. Infants usually have something to say about it too! And for some reason they remain unimpressed with declarations as to how dangerous sleeping next to mother can be. Instead, irrepressible (ancient) neurologically-based infant responses to maternal smells, movements and touch altogether reduce infant crying while positively regulating infant breathing, body temperature, absorption of calories, stress hormone levels, immune status, and oxygenation. In short, and as mentioned above, cosleeping (whether on the same surface or not) facilitates positive clinical changes including more infant sleep and seems to make, well, babies happy. In other words, unless practiced dangerously, sleeping next to mother is good for infants. The reason why it occurs is because… it is supposed to.
Recall that despite dramatic cultural and technological changes in the industrialized west, human infants are still born the most neurologically immature primate of all, with only 25% of their brain volume. This represents a uniquely human characteristic that could only develop biologically (indeed, is only possible) alongside mother’s continuous contact and proximity—as mothers body proves still to be the only environment to which the infant is truly adapted, for which even modern western technology has yet to produce a substitute.
Even here in whatever-city-USA, nothing a baby can or cannot do makes sense except in light of the mother’s body, a biological reality apparently dismissed by those that argue against any and all bedsharing and what they call cosleeping, but which likely explains why most crib-using parents at some point feel the need to bring their babies to bed with them —findings that our mother-baby sleep laboratory here at Notre Dame has helped document scientifically. Given a choice, it seems human babies strongly prefer their mother’s body to solitary contact with inert cotton-lined mattresses. In turn, mothers seem to notice and succumb to their infant’s preferences.
There is no doubt that bedsharing should be avoided in particular circumstances and can be practiced dangerously. While each single bedsharing death is tragic, such deaths are no more indictments about any and all bedsharing than are the three hundred thousand plus deaths or more of babies in cribs an indictment that crib sleeping is deadly and should be eliminated. Just as unsafe cribs and unsafe ways to use cribs can be eliminated so, too, can parents be educated to minimize bedsharing risks.
Moving Beyond Judgments to Understanding
We still do not know what causes SIDS. But fortunately the primary factors that increase risk are now widely known i.e. placing an infant prone (face down) for sleep, using soft mattresses, maternal smoking, overwrapping babies or blocking air movement around their faces. In combination with bedsharing, where more vital normal defensive infant responses and may be more important to an infant (like the ability to arouse to bat a blanket which momentarily falls to cover the infants face when its parent moves or turns) these risks become exaggerated especially amongst unhealthy infants. When infants die in these obviously unsafe conditions, it is here where social biases and the sheer levels of ignorance associated with actually explaining the death become apparent. A death itself in a bedsharing environment does not automatically suggest, as many legal and medical authorities assert, that it was the bedsharing, or worse, suffocation that killed the infant. Infants in bedsharirng environments, like babies in cribs, can still die of SIDS.
It is a shame and certainly inappropriate that, for example, the head pathologists of the state of Indiana recommends that other pathologists assume SIDS as a likely cause of death when babies die in cribs but to assume asphyxiation if a baby dies in an adult bed or has a history of “cosleeping”. By assuming before any facts are known from the pathologist’s death scene and toxicological report that any bedsharing baby was a victim of an accidental suffocation rather than from some congenital or natural cause, including SIDS unrelated to bedsharing, medical authorities not only commit a form of scientific fraud but they victimize the doomed infant’s parents for a third time. The first occurs when their baby dies, the second occurs when health professionals interviewed for news stories (which commonly occurs) imply that when a baby dies in a bed with an adult it must be due to suffocation (or a SIDS induced by bedsharing). The third time the parents are victimized is when still without any evidence medical or police authorities suggest that their baby’s death was “preventable,” that their baby would still be alive if only the parents had not bedshared. This conclusion is based not on the facts of the tragedy but on unfair and fallacious stereotypes about bedsharing.
Indeed, no legitimate SIDS researcher nor forensic pathologist should render a judgment that a baby was suffocated without an extensive toxiological report and death scene investigation including information from the mother concerning what her thoughts are on what might or could have happened.
Whether involving cribs or adult beds, risky sleep practices leading to infant deaths are more likely to occur when parents lack access to safety information, or if they are judged to be irresponsible should they choose to follow their own and their infants’ biological predilections to bedshare, or if public health messages are held back on brochures and replaced by simplistic and inappropriate warnings saying “just never do it.” Such recommendations misrepresent the true function and biological significance of the behaviors, and the critical extent to which dangerous practices can be modified, and they dismiss the valid reasons why people engage in the behavior in the first place.
For More Information:
A Popular Parenting Book
Sleeping With Your Baby: A Parent’s Guide To Cosleeping by James J.McKenna (2007). Platypus Press.
The Scientific Perspective
McKenna, J., Ball H., Gettler L., Mother-infant Cosleeping, Breastfeeding and SIDS: What Biological Anthropologists Have Learned About Normal Infant Sleep and Pediatric Sleep Medicine. Yearbook of Physical Anthropology 50:133-161 (2007)

by Rachel Talley

World's First GM Babies: Really? What's Next?

Um....the article below is SERIOUSLY disturbing.  I think this is subject matter that should be discussed in the world of epigenetics.  I just read the article this morning and I'm still in a bit of shock.  This is truly the beginning of potential drastic change in the human species.  We are entering a world where we are no longer utilizing the gifts of natural selection but taking control over nature.

Notice the blue strawberry below.  Look at it closely....does it look or feel natural to you ?  I just reposted this on Facebook and had a few comments about it tasting delicious.  Honestly, I just really don't care how good it is or isn't.  The fact that it is cross bred with a Arctic Flounder Fish.  It just sounds WRONG!  Maybe its just me....

I have yet to believe that ANYTHING we create in regards to ANY modern technology would be greater or better than what the Divine or Grand God/Goddess can create.  I feel afraid at the outcome of these changes to our society as a whole and the individual. I see something with this large a change in human kind should have YEARS worth of studies. I don't even know what else to say at the moment.  Feel free to share your comments or opinions in the bottom.

In Peace,
Rachel

Scientists have come up with a Blue Strawberry by splicing them with Fish genes:

Scientists are genetically modifying strawberries in order to allow them to resist freezing temperatures better. They're doing it by artificial transfer of genes from a species of fish called the Arctic Flounder Fish. The Arctic Flounder Fish produces an anti-freeze that allows it to protect himself in freezing waters.

They isolated the gene that produces this anti-freeze and introduced it to the strawberry. The result is a strawberry that looks blue and doesn't turn to mush or degrade after being placed in the freezer. While they're not in production, research is ongoing. 

_________________________________________________________

___________________________________________________________
World's first GM babies born

by MICHAEL HANLON, Daily Mail
    The world's first geneticallymodified humans have been created, it was revealed last night.
    The disclosure that 30 healthy babies were born after a series of experiments in the United States provoked another furious debate about ethics.

    So far, two of the babies have been tested and have been found to contain genes from three 'parents'.
    Fifteen of the children were born in the past three years as a result of one experimental programme at the Institute for Reproductive Medicine and Science of St Barnabas in New Jersey.

    The babies were born to women who had problems conceiving. Extra genes from a female donor were inserted into their eggs before they were fertilised in an attempt to enable them to conceive.

    Genetic fingerprint tests on two one-year- old children confirm that they have inherited DNA from three adults --two women and one man.

    The fact that the children have inherited the extra genes and incorporated them into their 'germline' means that they will, in turn, be able to pass them on to their own offspring.

    Altering the human germline - in effect tinkering with the very make-up of our species - is a technique shunned by the vast majority of the world's scientists.

    Geneticists fear that one day this method could be used to create new races of humans with extra, desired characteristics such as strength or high intelligence.

    Writing in the journal Human Reproduction, the researchers, led by fertility pioneer Professor Jacques Cohen, say that this 'is the first case of human germline genetic modification resulting in normal healthy children'.

    Some experts severely criticised the experiments. Lord Winston, of the Hammersmith Hospital in West London, told the BBC yesterday: 'Regarding the treat-ment of the infertile, there is no evidence that this technique is worth doing . . . I am very surprised that it was even carried out at this stage. It would certainly not be allowed in Britain.'

    John Smeaton, national director of the Society for the Protection of Unborn Children, said: 'One has tremendous sympathy for couples who suffer infertility problems. But this seems to be a further illustration of the fact that the whole process of in vitro fertilisation as a means of conceiving babies leads to babies being regarded as objects on a production line.

    'It is a further and very worrying step down the wrong road for humanity.' Professor Cohen and his colleagues diagnosed that the women were infertile because they had defects in tiny structures in their egg cells, called mitochondria.

    They took eggs from donors and, using a fine needle, sucked some of the internal material - containing 'healthy' mitochondria - and injected it into eggs from the women wanting to conceive.

    Because mitochondria contain genes, the babies resulting from the treatment have inherited DNA from both women. These genes can now be passed down the germline along the maternal line.

    A spokesman for the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA), which regulates 'assisted reproduction' technology in Britain, said that it would not license the technique here because it involved altering the germline.

    Jacques Cohen is regarded as a brilliant but controversial scientist who has pushed the boundaries of assisted reproduction technologies.

    He developed a technique which allows infertile men to have their own children, by injecting sperm DNA straight into the egg in the lab.

    Prior to this, only infertile women were able to conceive using IVF. Last year, Professor Cohen said that his expertise would allow him to clone children --a prospect treated with horror by the mainstream scientific community.

    'It would be an afternoon's work for one of my students,' he said, adding that he had been approached by 'at least three' individuals wishing to create a cloned child, but had turned down their requests.


    by Rachel Talley

    Epigentics: The Environment Defines The Imprinting

    The article below is fascinating!  Again, more evidence that our DNA patterns can and DO shift based upon the inner uterine environment.  The idea that all our sensory experiences, thought patterns and experience are encoded in the DNA and that DNA can and does change and shift is hard for some people to digest.  As science works its magic, its proving this theory to be absolutely TRUE!  

    img
    Beliefs, perceptions and our attitudes about life imprint in our child's psyche as a preparation for the world he/she will be entering.  The more peaceful, calm, supported and relaxed a women feels during her conception/pregnancy time frame, the more peaceful, calm, supported and relaxed her newborn will be in and out of utero.  
    Michel Odent preaches that his belief is the more calm and relaxed we keep a mother during her pregnancy, the shift in epigenetics you will also see in the child.  This is very logical thinking yet so foreign to so many of us.  How can your child be ANYTHING other than what DNA patterns of the woman's egg and the man's sperm carries within its structure?
    I will leave the rest up to you to read and watch.  I see this as IMPORTANT information in shifting negative belief patterns and reshaping the ideas of future generations of their perspectives of the world around them and the safety within it.  This can only happen when Mothers and Fathers open their own psychological pandora's box and find peace in living in our world.......creating tranquility in our world for generations to come.  
    In Peace,
    Rachel

    Differences Between Human Twins at Birth Highlight Importance of Intrauterine Environment

    ScienceDaily (July 15, 2012) — Your genes determine much about you, but environment can have a strong influence on your genes even before birth, with consequences that can last a lifetime. In a study published online in Genome Research, researchers have for the first time shown that the environment experienced in the womb defines the newborn epigenetic profile, the chemical modifications to DNA we are born with, that could have implications for disease risk later in life.

    Epigenetic tagging of genes by a chemical modification called DNA methylation is known to affect gene activity, playing a role in normal development, aging, and also in diseases such as diabetes, heart disease, and cancer. Studies conducted in animals have shown that the environment shapes the epigenetic profile across the genome, called the epigenome, particularly in the womb. An understanding of how the intrauterine environment molds the human epigenome could provide critical information about disease risk to help manage health throughout life.
    Twin pairs, both monozygotic (identical) and dizygotic (fraternal), are ideal for epigenetic study because they share the same mother but have their own umbilical cord and amniotic sac, and in the case of identical twins, also share the same genetic make-up. Previous studies have shown that methylation can vary significantly at a single gene across multiple tissues of identical twins, but it is important to know what the DNA methylation landscape looks like across the genome.
    In this report, an international team of researchers has for the first time analyzed genome-scale DNA methylation profiles of umbilical cord tissue, cord blood, and placenta of newborn identical and fraternal twin pairs to estimate how genes, the shared environment that their mother provides and the potentially different intrauterine environments experienced by each twin contribute to the epigenome. The group found that even in identical twins, there are widespread differences in the epigenetic profile of twins at birth.
    "This must be due to events that happened to one twin and not the other," said Dr. Jeffrey Craig of the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute (MCRI) in Australia and a senior author of the report. Craig added that although twins share a womb, the influence of specific tissues like the placenta and umbilical cord can be different for each fetus, and likely affects the epigenetic profile.
    Interestingly, the team found that methylated genes closely associated with birth weight in their cohort are genes known to play roles in growth, metabolism, and cardiovascular disease, lending further support to a known link between low birth weight and risk for diseases such as diabetes and heart disease. The authors explained that their findings suggest the unique environmental experiences in the womb may have a more profound effect on epigenetic factors that influence health throughout life than previously thought.
    Furthermore, an understanding of the epigenetic profile at birth could be a particularly powerful tool for managing future health. "This has potential to identify and track disease risk early in life, said Dr. Richard Saffery of the MCRI and a co-senior author of the study, "or even to modify risk through specific environmental or dietary interventions."

    by Rachel Talley

    Stepping Outside The Birth Box

    I recently heard the song below and was fascinated by it.  It was written in the 60's, a time of feminism and personal exploration.  A HUGE awakening was taking place where people found a new way of thinking and being.  I believe we are making a similar transition NOW in our world.  Especially when it comes to BIRTH!  

    We are in a birth revolution and its VERY EXCITING!  Women, men and families are taking back their rights to birth how, when and where they choose.  They are standing up for freedom in pregnancy and birth and doing what they can to stimulate change and education.  Its AWESOME and INSPIRING in every way.

    Sixteen years ago, I noticed a small and subtle shift taking place.  At that point, I still talked with women who thought I was COMPLETELY crazy (which I am, btw, I'm not afraid to admit it)  that I chose homebirth and waterbirth and even just plain 'ol natural childbirth.  Just choosing to have your baby without any drugs was a concept most women scoffed at.

    It was been a wonderful ride to see the courage, strength and personal empowerment of women and men to speak UP about the abuses and violence that currently take place in birth.  The level of control and falsely held beliefs surrounding birth seemed to stymie any growth for change within the birth environment for years. That is NO LONGER!

    My experience has taught me that since the invent of the computer and the easy access to information has made, we've seen the BIGGEST differences.  Education is the key that opens the door to understanding and removal of myths and fears revolving around birth.  I know that sounds so simple but it really is.

    I watch the faces of those who attend my childbirth classes and see a sense of bewilderment at where we are as a society and nation when it comes to birth.  They feel lost.  They feel scared.  Once they learn the truth about birth, the inherent safety of it when left alone, and the intelligent capacity of their bodies to birth healthy babies,  I see a couple who can move forward making positive birth choices based on truth, understanding and trust of human kind.  Its truly enlightening to watch!

    I hope you enjoy the video below.  Its time to rip ourselves outside of the "birth box" and open new avenues for confident change in birth.  It really is time to unbind a women's hands and offer her freedom in her birth choices. Its time to be, as Malvina Reynolds herself is, A REVOLUTIONARY!

    In Peace,
    Rachel

    by Rachel Talley

    Props For All The Midwives

    Excellent video on the benefits of midwives!  Its unfortunate where we are nation wide when it comes to midwifery care and home birth.  Things seem to be looking up and changing....but very slowly!  

    I appreciate what he says about midwives at the end of the video, but truthfully....I do nothing. Other than empower women to see their own courage and strength and live their BIRTH dreams!  I ADORE what I do....
    Enjoy....
    Rachel

    by Rachel Talley