Saving the cord

Anyone considering using a cord bank and saving the cord blood? I looked into it for half a minute and found out how expensive it was and haven't really thought about it since. Until....my dr on Monday asked DH and I if we were considering saving the cord blood. She said that Viacord is hosting a free dinner at the Milleridge Inn on 6/14. We're going to go to gather information (since we really do not know too much) and see how we feel afterwards.

Re: Saving the cord

nope. im just going to ask the dr to delay clamping the cord until it stops pulsating.

Re: Saving the cord

i read up on this and decided not to. i would have liked to donate to a public bank but unfortunately my hospital does not do this.

Re: Saving the cord

Yes we are definitely doing it. FYI, viacord has a $500 off coupon that I got at Babies R Us when we registered. I think it's only good through 6/30/12, but after our health scares this week I feel that much more confident in our decision to save the cord blood. Viacord, CBR and LifeLine Cryogenics are the three I'm considering (Lifeline had the pricing on their pamphlet- $1,350, you can do payment plans of $175 per month for 6 mths or $99 per month for 1 year. Annual storage fees are $115, so they seem the cheapest (I think ViaCord is around $200 per year). I requested info from all 3 and I'm hoping to make my decision before the Viacord coupon expires!

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord

We are using CBR. With all my health issues and cancer running in both our families. I feel much better having chosen to bank it. It's one of those things, where God forbid, my baby gets really sick and this could've saved him, and I chose not to. I don't know how I could live with myself. It is definitely worth the piece of mind. If someone refers you for CBR, you can save $250. My friend referred me. If you'd like, I can give you my info and you can save the $250. FM me if you have any questions.

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord

Besides these companies websites where did you guys get information on this that is unbiased?

Ive heard many conflicting things. Ive heard that if GOD forbid the baby got a disease they wouldnt use the babys own cord blood because it means the disease is already in the blood. Then I read that you can only bank it until the baby turns 15 after that it cant be used. I have no idea if this is true so please dont flame me. Im just trying to get more info before dh and I make a decision.

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord

Umbilical cord blood is a baby’s life blood until birth. It contains many wonderfully precious cells, like ‘master’ stem cells, red blood cells and white blood cells (including cancer-fighting T-cells) to help fight disease and infection.

Yet common practice is to quickly cut off this source of valuable cells at the moment of birth. Three reasons for this are:

•Carers who believe that there is little or no benefit in delayed cord clamping, despite numerous studies and recommendations
•Carers who believe that delayed cord clamping can cause complications, despite numerous studies and recommendations
•Carers being in a hurry to finish the birth… despite numerous studies and recommendations
Giving birth ‘in the system’ plays a big part if the medical carer or establishment you give birth in wants to hurry up the process and get onto the next birth.

If that doesn’t derail you from delayed cord clamping already, there is now another hurdle – more recently, businesses have been set up to store this precious cord blood for you in case of future diseases. This all sounds great in theory, but why deprive a baby of those super cells at birth and then give them back on the very small chance that a problem will appear later in life? Could there be a link to not having those super cells at birth and those illnesses? Storing cord blood is not only extremely expensive, but it is also worth finding out exactly what cord blood has been successful in helping, and how common those conditions really are.

How Likely Is It That My Baby Will Need Stored Stem Cells?
In 2010, another study on the benefits of delayed cord clamping was published, which you can read here. They stated that early clamping may interfere with nature’s first stem cell transplant.

According to Dr Sarah Buckley, in her well researched book Gentle Birth, Gentle Mothering (2005):

•The likelihood of low-risk children needing their own stored cells has been estimated at 1 in 20,000
•Cord blood donations are likely to be ineffective for the treatment of adults, because the number of stem cells is too small [The number is too small, not the stem cells are too small]
•Cord blood may contain pre-leukaemic changes and may increase the risk of relapse
•Autologous cord blood is only suitable for children who develop solid tumours, lymphomas or auto-immune disorders
•All other uses are speculative.
Then there is this from the Choice website:

“The most common reason for transplantation in childhood is for leukaemia, but a donor’s own cord blood is unlikely to be used. The most appropriate source of stem cells is another person, either a family member or an anonymous stem cell donor.”

Collection is also very lucrative for the collector (midwives get offered training in this too; some decline but some do it). Collectors get paid large amounts of money for doing the procedure. A midwife shares her thoughts about what she calls ‘stealing babies blood’ as an ex-collector of cord blood here.

It’s Not Just About Stem Cells – But a Whole Lot of Blood Too
Studies like this one have shown that infants who have delayed cord clamping end up with a whopping 32% more blood volume than infants who have immediate cord clamping – without any increased risk of problems.

“Delayed cord clamping clearly increases fetal haemoglobin, blood volume and iron stores. The evidence supports a clinical benefit of delayed clamping. There’s really no strong evidence against delaying the cord clamping. When we talk about interventions in medicine, really, the burden of evidence is on the intervention. People say, “Delayed cord clamping, you can’t prove that that’s an intervention that helps.” I’m like, “Oh, no, no, no, no! Delayed cord clamping is what we evolved to do. We evolved to get the blood that’s in the placenta. I don’t have to prove that that’s right. You need to prove to me that phlebotomizing the baby of forty percent of its blood volume is right.” — Dr. Nicholas Fogelson (You can watch his full presentation to other medical professionals at the end of this article).

Timing of cord clamping
There has been an increasing number of studies published with regards to the timing of cord clamping, including a 16-month study which was published in 2006. You can read more about that study here. It was conducted at Hospital de Gineco Obstetrica in Mexico City, where over 350 mother/baby pairs were part of the study.

This study, consistently with many others, has provided solid evidence of the benefits of delayed clamping. The main benefits being:

•Increased levels of iron
•Lower risk of anaemia
•Fewer transfusions, and
•Fewer incidences of intraventricular haemorrhage.
A two-minute delay in cord clamping increased the child’s iron reserve by 27-47 mg of iron, which is equivalent to 1-2 months of an infant’s iron requirements. This could help to prevent iron deficiency from developing before 6 months of age.

Another study has been released in 2007 from the University of Granada which has similar findings, you can read it here.

While delayed clamping is beneficial for babies across the board, the studies found that the impact of delayed clamping is particularly significant for infants who have low birth weights, are born to iron-deficient mothers, are premature, or those who do not receive baby formula or iron-fortified milk. Given that mother nature provided breastmilk for babies and not formulas, you would think she also supplied that valuable source of iron for a reason too. You may have noticed that formula companies promote iron deficiency rates to sell their products.

The studies have suggested that delayed clamping, for as little as two minutes, should be implemented as standard practice, however this is yet to happen at many hospitals. Some couples choose to leave the cord unclamped until it has stopped pulsating, which could take a few minutes or it could take around twenty – either way, the baby is able to have his or her supply of placental blood.

Delayed Cord Clamping & Donating/Storing Cord Blood
Delayed cord clamping is not usually compatible with cord blood donation. The reason being is that in order for them to collect that blood, some collectors will say that they need the cord cut so the blood can be used for storage or donation. So if you would like your baby to have it’s full supply of cord blood, you may need to reconsider you plans to donate or store cord blood. From the above recent study (2010) the following comments were made on cord collection:

“There remains no consensus among scientists and clinicians on cord clamping and proper cord blood collection,” concluded co-author and obstetrician Dr. Stephen Klasko, senior vice president of USF Health and dean of the USF College of Medicine. “The most important thing is to avoid losing valuable stems cells during and just after delivery.” So prevention is clearly better than cure – your baby will be better off keeping what is rightfully theirs.

Delayed Cord Clamping & Jaundice
You may be told that delayed clamping causes jaundice in babies by your carer or hospital. This is not true.

Babies are no more likely to become jaundiced by delaying cord clamping and there is no relation to jaundice and the time of the cord being clamped. In the studies, the bilirubin levels were within normal range no matter when the cord was clamped. (Excess bilirubin levels are what is associated with jaundice).

Here are some statements from recent studies to back this claim:

“There were no significant differences for other secondary outcome measures: plasma bilirubin levels at 24 to 48 hours, neonatal morbidity (respiratory distress, tachypnea, grunting, jaundice, seizures, sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis), mortality (none), neonatal intensive care unit admission, length of hospital stay, disease up to 1 month of age, weight or rate of breast-feeding at 1 month, maternal postpartum blood-loss volume, and maternal hematocrit level at 24 hours postpartum.”

AND

“Plasma bilirubin values as well as hyperbilirubinemia rates were similar in the 3 groups, which goes along with other authors’ observations.”

AND

from the recent study at the University of Granada

“…the clamping of the umbilical cord of newborns from full-term pregnancies, two minutes after the infant is expelled from the womb, makes no difference to hematocrit or hemoglobin levels of the umbilical cord vein compared to clamping the cord within 20 seconds. Thus, the study shows that early clamping (which is widely performed) is not justified.”

Further to this, Dr. Sarah Buckley’s well-researched article, A Natural Approach to the Third Stage of Labour’ states:

“Some studies have shown an increased risk of polycythemia (more red blood cells in the blood) and jaundice when the cord is clamped later. Polycythemia may be beneficial, in that more red cells means more oxygen being delivered to the tissues. The risk that polycythemia will cause the blood to become too thick (hyperviscosity syndrome), which is often used as an argument against delayed cord clamping, seems to be negligible in healthy babies. (Morley 1998)

Jaundice is almost certain when a baby gets his or her full quota of blood, and is caused by the breakdown of the normal excess of blood to produce bilirubin, the pigment that causes the yellow appearance of a jaundiced baby. There is, however, no evidence of adverse effects from this. (Morley 1998). One author has proposed that jaundice, which is present in almost all human infants to some extent, and which is often prolonged by breastfeeding, may actually be beneficial because of the anti-oxidant properties of bilirubin. (Gartner 1998)"

Delayed Cord Clamping & Blood Volume
You may also hear of concerns over the increase in blood volume and red blood cell volumes, overloading the heart and causing respiratory difficulties, as a result of delayed clamping. Again, this is not substantiated.

According to an article from the World Health Organisation, they state: “These effects have not, however, been demonstrated. In fact, there is probably a self-regulatory mechanism in the infant which limits the extent of placental transfusion. Moreover, there is evidence that the circulatory system of the newborn is capable of rapid adjustment to an increase in blood volume and viscosity by increased fluid extravasation and dilation of blood vessels.”

Re: Saving the cord

When we had DD we donated bc we couldn't afford to store. I alsways felt bad that we could afford it, but since then I have done a lot of research , have followed all the new studies on cord blood banking and it's benefits and how it can be used , spoke to few drs and even though we can swing it and somehow afford storing the CB this time around, we are not, we will be donating like we did with DD.
I guess if money wasn't an issue maybe we would still do it, I don't know ...

Re: Saving the cord

A friend of mine did this for her first and thought it was the biggest waste of money. You pay them to do it then there's a hefty yearly fee to store the cord blood as well. She used via cord. She didn't do with her second. I am going to look into it a bit more but I'm really leaning towards no...

Re: Saving the cord

Thanks everyone for your input and knowledge!

I spoke to LIJ about this last night and they said that we can donate the blood and if we G*d forbid need it at some point and it hasn't been used by another family then we can use our own. We're still on the fence about banking.

I had also read about clamping after the cord stops pulsating, so, at the very least, we will do this.

Re: Saving the cord

lcherian, Thank you so much for the info

Where is that article from?

Re: Saving the cord

Re: Saving the cord