OPEN EYE CAMPAIGN

SAVE CHILDHOOD

Please save our toddlers ~ they need YOU.

For six years The Mother magazine has been campaigning for a return to Slow Childhood. What do I mean by that? Slow Childhood is where children are respected and allowed to meet their developmental milestones according to Nature’s Timetable, rather than some human-devised concept.

Yesterday I was one of signatories to the Open Eye campaign, officially launched in The Times. Spearheaded by no less than The Mother columnist Dr Richard House, it aims to cause a (to quote the good Doctor) “legitimation crisis around this legislation of such magnitude that the government will find it impossible to implement it.”

That’s my boy! Go get ‘em, Richard.

The government MUST be tackled on this piece of legislation as the consequences, once implemented, are absolutely dire to the well-being of our children.

My editorial in issue 26 of The Magazine urges concerned parents and professionals to join our campaign and stop the government’s proposed Early Years Foundation Stage (for 3 and 4 year olds) being implemented in September 2008.

It is, in actual fact, a curriculum for ALL children

from birth to five years of age.

It’s Big Brother gone Psycho.

These compulsory measures which include chubby-handed 3 and 4 year olds barely out of nappies being required to read and write sentences (even if they don’t understand them!) will lead to a whole host of behavioural and educational problems. The anxiety induced in these little children will crush any enthusiasm for learning, if not for life itself.

Our campaign letter states that “An overly formal, academic and/or cognitively based ‘curriculum’, however carefully camouflaged, distorts this learning experience.”

The legislation will cover all children, whether in state, private or voluntary sectors ~ it will include Steiner schools and registered childminders! It will put many experts in child development in the position of having to contradict their own understanding of child development.

Dr Richard House reckons there is a strong case for mounting a legal challenge under the human rights legislation. All I can say is watch the government come undone over this one!

The whole document is authoritarian and prescriptive with 72 early learning goals…ironically, some of them include things that many adults haven’t even achieved! (and are unlikely to achieve.) It's enough to make a girl go grey overnight.

Anyone who knows the first thing about holistic child development will see that the shabbily camouflaged curriculum is seriously flawed, though it would be more accurate to call it legally-enforced child abuse. It completely IGNORES a child’s neurological and psychological needs, treating them as nothing more than information gadgets, mini-computers, sponges to the governments' every diktat.

It’s a bureaucratic controlling

of toddlers’ lives

which is completely counter

to more than twenty solid years of research

into how children learn ~

and what most people instinctively know.

The government’s plan is to insert a POLITICAL KNIFE into the very heart of family life and destroy the close, loving family bonds which all young children need in order to grow, thrive and learn. It makes the assumption that all children are the same. As any parent knows, no two children are the same, not even within the same family.

If the government looked at other countries as an example of what works for children, they would never have come up with such an insane programme. Whatever it is they hope to achieve with our toddlers simply can not happen in the controlled environments they wish to create. They want all children from birth to five years of age to have the SAME day to day experiences. I also suspect it is being driven by a desire to get mothers out of the home and into paid employment. After all, what could a mother possibly teach her toddler?

Beverley Hughes, The Children’s Minister, claims that this plan was widely consulted on (it WASN’T ~ it was a controlled consultation) and that it has the backing of the vast majority of early years specialists. However, she has shown no evidence for this statement. I’d like to see it.

She claims it is a play-based approach to learning and children will be observed to make sure they’re developing ‘normally’, but who decides what is normal? Her claims that early years education has a positive impact on learning is a misrepresentation of information.

Her use of the term play-based is incorrect as the documentation clearly states (repeatedly) that it is of ‘structured’ or ‘adult directed play’. This sort of ‘play’ (for lack of a better word), is a way for adults to control and create the outcomes they perceive the children should be reaching for. This is counter to how children learn and is in complete ignorance of free play.

The Government’s outline is very clear in its goal to ensure that all childhood experiences are the same. Only a parent will fully understand a child’s emotional and developmental needs. This shouldn’t be judged by a ‘national performance target’.

Ed Balls, The Children’s Secretary, needs to be given a copy of the EYFS document so he can see just how hot the water is for the government.

We MUST let the children play. This is absolutely VITAL for their well-being and enjoyment of life. I can promise you, if we don’t, it won’t just be teenage ‘hoodies’ that adults are scared of.

You can download the British Government’s EYFS documentation in full at: http://www.standards.dfes.gov.uk/eyfs/site/resource/pdfs.htm

‘EYE’ standing for ‘Early Years Education’ - which, we maintain, needs to be kept open and free from overweening, infantilising government intrusion, however consciously well-intentioned it might be.

I hope to post a website for the campaign on this blog in a few days time..
In the meantime, if you want to find out more,

You can contact OPEN-EYE with your experience and views at: r.house@roehampton.ac.uk or
richardahouse@hotmail.com

BUY NOTHING DAY

During the week, I dropped my step-daughter off at the Metro Centre in Newcastle, on her way back to New Zealand. It’s a massive shopping centre with ten thousands car parks. I’d never been there before and I can swear I’ll never go there again. I felt physically ill by the shop-a-holic fever which swept through the place. I know Christmas is coming up, but there was something else in the air...almost a fear that the world would end, and if only, IF ONLY, they could buy just one more thing, it might save them.

I pointed out to my daughters that almost all the things for sale would end up in a landfill and not readily decompose ~ except things from the bookshop.

Our culture raises babies on fast food (formula) and weans them onto more consumerism. Every baby I saw in that shopping centre was stuck in a pram, and had a dummy in its mouth ~ a bit of plastic which will sit in landfills for up to 450 years. What sort of children are we raising?

Today’s a celebration for those who’d like to show a little more respect for the planet ~ it’s called BUY NOTHING DAY. Just 20% of the world’s population consume 80% of our natural resources. Where's the fairness in that?

Everything we purchase should have us questioning whether we really need it, who has produced (that is, was it made ethically, through child labour, virgin forest destruction etc), how will it impact on the environment?, etc.

Like many people, I can get quite frustrated with the cost of ‘living’ and, indeed, living in a consumerist culture. I was sharing with another mother the other day that the best things in life are free. I wouldn’t swap the love in my family for any amount of money. There are some days when I swear I could just reach my hand out and 'touch' love in the air. My daughters know we are rich beyond measure.

Buy Nothing Day is about developing a CONSUMER CONSCIENCE. Being eco-minded isn’t just about recycling. In fact, recycling is pretty much a last ditch effort. Our focus should be on ‘do I really need this?’, and if I do, then can it be reused.

I recently *needed* some more bookshelves and for years I've made do with a hard dining chair for my computer area. Within days of being on freecycle, I received a very comfortable computer chair and three next-to-new bookshelves, as well as a piano stool which I’d been seeking out for quite a while!

We need to move away from our culture’s obsession with everything we own being brand spanking new, in the latest colours, or twinned with what some celebrity owns. We need, in short, to stop being so shallow.

Of course, you COULD buy my new book (not today though, get it on Monday!!), or get your library to stock it so loads of mums and midwives, and with luck, health visitors, can read it! Let's get babes back on the breast and away from all that crap in a can. Let's save this planet from the formula milk industry and all the pollution it causes.

The Drinks Are On Me (everything your mother never told you about breastfeeding) as recommended by The Independent on November 13th...now available from www.artofchange.co.uk Enjoy!

GUNPOINT MEDICINE

Children herded like cattle into Maryland courthouse
for forced vaccinations as armed police and attack dogs stand guard

Today’s blog is a piece from NewsTarget by Mike Adams. I'm too speechless to comment.

(NewsTarget) Following the State of Maryland's threats against parents who refuse to have their children vaccinated, children were herded into a Price George County courthouse being guarded by armed personnel with attack dogs. Inside, the children were forcibly vaccinated, many against their will, under orders from the State Attorney General, various State Judges and the local School Board Director, all of whom illegally conspired to threaten parents with imprisonment if they did not submit their children to vaccinations.The State of Maryland has now turned to Gestapo tactics to force its medical will upon the People, stripping parents of any right to decide how they wish to protect their own children from infectious disease.

Health authorities there have already announced their intent to essentially kidnap parents and throw them in jail, removing them from their children for up to thirty days if they continue to refuse to have their children vaccinated. This will all be conducted at gunpoint, with armed personnel and attack dogs at the ready, making sure nobody steps out of line, and suppressing any attempt at public dissent against the Orwellian vaccination policies.The entire campaign against these parents is blatantly illegal. There is no law in Maryland requiring the vaccination of children, thus parents who refuse to do so may not be legally charged with violating any law. Instead, Maryland health and school authorities are using Gestapo-like tactics, threatening to charge the parents with child truancy violations, criminalizing them for daring to protect their children from the dangerous chemicals found in vaccines (including thimerosal, a chemical additive containing a neurotoxic form of mercury).

The desperation of organized medicine is becoming increasingly apparent
As more and more parents are becoming informed about the dangers of vaccinations and their link to autism, state health authorities are increasingly turning to "Gunpoint Medicine" to force the People to submit to the poisons of conventional medicine. Parents who attempt to save their children from deadly chemotherapy chemicals are being arrested and having their children kidnapped by Child Protective Services (see http://www.newstarget.com/Abraham_Cherrix.html ), and oncologists who used to be armed only with radiation machines and chemotherapy injectors and now arming themselves with U.S. Marshals and other local law enforcement authorities who are using loaded firearms to enforce "the will of the State" against parents who resist.

Even the American Association of Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS) announced its strong opposition to the Maryland "Gunpoint Medicine" vaccination campaign. In a press release published Nov. 16, the AAPS states:The Association of American Physicians and Surgeons today condemned the “vaccine roundup” executed in Prince George’s county Maryland this week, and promised to do everything it can to support parents who refuse to immunize their children. “This power play obliterates informed consent and parental rights,” said Kathryn Serkes, director of policy for the Association of American Physicians and Surgeons (AAPS), one of the few national physician groups that refuse corporate funding from pharmaceutical companies. In a scenario reminiscent of cattle round-ups, the state’s attorney has issued summons to more than 1600 parents of children who have not provided certificates of immunization for their children. But instead of toting a cattle prod, this state’s attorney chooses to wield a syringe to keep the “herd” in line.

Gunpoint Medicine: Why drug pushers must now rely on Gestapo tactics

Conventional (pharmaceutical) medicine is the only system of medicine in the world that is so unpopular with informed consumers that it must be administered at the barrel of a gun. There is no other system of medicine anywhere in the world that resorts to such tactics to recruit patients.At the Nov. 17th event in Maryland, activists Jim Moody and Kelly Ann Davis from SafeMinds (www.SafeMinds.org) were able to get in front of TV news cameras and voice their opposition to the coerced vaccination policy. Yet, amazingly, most parents just lined up like cattle ready to be branded, not bothering to question the sanity or legality of the very system in which they were now agreeing to participate.

A health freedom blog called Center for the Common Interest (www.CommonInterest.info) also covered the event, and it reports that a local activist named Donovan Hubbard videotaped the event and plans to make the video available online. (NewsTarget would like to contact Donovan and / or publicize his video. If you know of a way we can contact him, please call us at (520) 232-9300 to let us know...)

What's next for Gunpoint Medicine?
As the truth continues to emerge about the extreme dangers of vaccinations and pharmaceuticals, Big Pharma is becoming increasingly desperate to coerce the public into relying on its products. It is now working closely with state authorities (including Governors of several states) to mandate the use of vaccinations on young children. This results in the criminalization of parents who refuse to subject their children to these dangerous chemicals.In effect, Big Pharma is hoping to turn natural health followers into criminals.The FDA has already criminalized nutritional supplement companies who dare to tell the truth about the health benefits of their supplements. (Read the true history of armed FDA raids on vitamin companies here: http://www.newstarget.com/021791.html )

Next, parents who refuse to subject their children to the chemical pharmaceuticals proposed by Big Pharma will be criminalized, rounded up and incarcerated for "refusing to comply with public health policy."


This is all being done by the State in the name of "protecting the children" from their own natural health parents. (Insane, isn't it, to think that protecting your child from toxic chemicals is now a criminal act in the United States?)The end game of all this is to apply Gunpoint Medicine tactics to everyone: Adults and senior citizens included. Anyone suffering from high cholesterol, for example, who does not submit to Big Pharma's statin drugs could be arrested, strapped to a table and medicated against their will. People with cancer could be arrested for choosing to treat that cancer with safe and effective botanical medicines instead of patented, high-profit Big Pharma drugs.

If you think the prisons are full enough right now from all the arrests for marijuana possession and other victimless crimes, just wait until the State starts arresting all the natural health moms and dads across the country who refuse to participate in the utterly insane and extremely harmful system of medicine that now dominates U.S. health care today.

The State is very clear about medicine: If you want to remain a free citizen, you must submit to the synthetic drugs made by the very same corporations that now control government health regulators. Any person who resists such "treatments" will be branded a threat to public health -- a designation just beneath "terrorist" in the eyes of many government bureaucrats. As such, they believe there is no limit to the level of force they may use to coerce such people into submitting to Big Pharma's chemicals. Today, it's armed guards with attack dogs. Tomorrow, it might be water boarding or other torture methods. Think that's impossible? Think again: Just five years ago, nobody in their right mind would have thought that parents who did not want to get their children vaccinated would end up in prison, their children kidnapped by state authorities and forced to subject themselves to dangerous chemical injections at gunpoint. Yet that is precisely what is happening right now in the state of Maryland. It happened on Saturday, in fact.

Where is the outrage?
What's most interesting about this issue of using the threat of imprisonment to force vaccinations upon children is not necessarily who is speaking out against it, but who has chosen to remain silent.The American Medical Association, for example, has said nothing in opposition to the policy. Neither has the Food and Drug Administration. Where is the outrage from the Maryland Hospital Association? None of these organizations seem to have a problem with Gunpoint Medicine. The idea of rounding up parents and coercing their children into receiving injections of toxic chemicals does not seem to bother these organizations. And why should it? All of these organizations are closely tied to Big Pharma. They're all in favor of vaccinations for all, it seems, and I have no doubt that some individuals in these organizations (especially the AMA) are strongly in favor of the Gunpoint Medicine coerced vaccination policy being played out in Maryland right now.Organized medicine believes the People are too stupid to be allowed to make their own health decisions. Bureaucrats and physicians should be the ones making these decisions, we're told, and any person who disagrees with such decisions should be labeled a criminal, arrested and prosecuted. This is no exaggeration. It is, in fact, a shockingly accurate description of Maryland's current vaccination policy.It wasn't too long ago that Americans would have stood up and rallied against this kind of medical tyranny.

The major news networks would have denounced Maryland's vaccination policy with strong language and harsh accusations. People would have been marching in the streets, demanding their health freedom. But today, it's a different America.

The People are drugged up on pharmaceuticals and dosed on fluoride. They're too intoxicated to think straight, and they're frightened into submission by a fear-based government that invokes domestic tyranny at every opportunity to control and manipulate the People into doing whatever it wants.


The "free" America we all once knew is long gone, and it has been replaced with The United States of Corporate America, where police tactics are now used to enforce hazardous public health policies, and the people who run the State no longer think there's anything wrong with rounding up the population at gunpoint and performing large-scale medical experiments on their children. That's what modern vaccines are, after all: A grand medical experiment whose effects will only become known after a generation of mass poisoning has come and gone.

About the author: Mike Adams is a consumer health advocate with a mission to teach personal and planetary health to the public He has authored and published thousands of articles, interviews, consumers guides, and books on topics like health and the environment, impacting the lives of millions of readers around the world who are experiencing phenomenal health benefits from reading his articles. Adams is an honest, independent journalist and accepts no money or commissions on the third-party products he writes about or the companies he promotes. In 2007, Adams launched EcoLEDs, a maker of super bright LED light bulbs that are 1000% more energy efficient than incandescent lights. He's also a noted pioneer in the email marketing software industry, having been the first to launch an HTML email newsletter technology that has grown to become a standard in the industry. Adams also serves as the executive director of the Consumer Wellness Center, a non-profit consumer protection group, and enjoys outdoor activities, nature photography, Pilates and adult gymnastics. Known as the 'Health Ranger,' Adams' personal health statistics and mission statements are located at www.HealthRanger.org

Would you drink a vaccine? WHY NOT?

October 1, 2007

Ojai, CA -- On January 29, 2001, Jock Doubleday offered $20,000 to the first U.S.-licensed medical doctor or pharmaceutical company CEO to publicly drink a mixture of standard vaccine additive ingredients: http://www.mercola.com/2001/feb/10/vaccine_offer.htm The offer had no takers.

On August 1, 2006, Doubleday increased the $20,000 offer to$75,000: http://www.vaclib.org/links/jockslinks.htm#press The new $75,000 offer had no takers. THEREFORE . . . On June 1, 2007, the offer was increased to $80,000. On July 1, 2007, the offer was increased to $85,000.On August 1, 2007, the offer was increased to $90,000.On September 1, 2007, the offer was increased to $95,000.

On October 1, 2007, the offer was increased to $100,000.

The offer will increase $5,000 per month, in perpetuity, until an M.D. or pharmaceutical company CEO, or any of the 14 relevant members of the ACIP (see below), agree to drink a body-weight calibrated dose of the poisonous vaccine additives that M.D.sroutinely inject into children in the name of health.As of November 1, 2007, the offer will increase to $105,000.As of December 1, 2007, the offer will increase to $110,000.As of January 1, 2008, the offer will increase to $115,000. . . . etc.

This offer has no expiration date unless superseded by a similar offer of higher remuneration. In health, Jock DoubledayDirectorNatural Woman, Natural Man, Inc.A California 501(c)3 Nonprofit Corporation

http://gentlebirth.org/nwnm.org/nwnm_org.html

Optical Illusion

In March this year, my daughter Bethany was squinting a lot. Was it a ‘habit’ that developed from an unmet need and a way of getting some extra parental attention? Was she reading too much? Paul suggested we take her to an optometrist. Against my better judgement I went. I avoid the medical profession, and opticians come under the same category. I was horrified when he said she needed glasses for all ‘close work’, like reading, sewing, knitting, drawing, etc.

He said to come back in six months. This man, with the social skills of a dead ant, was very dismissive of any holistic approach, including pin hole glasses. I bit my tongue.

For the duration of the six months I felt uneasy. When her check-up was due, I chose another optometrist. There was panic and they said her eyes had deteriorated rapidly in six months and prescribed her ‘new glasses’… Here’s an irony, they wouldn’t even use her old frames without charging me £20 for the recycling pleasure. I didn’t find this woman’s social skills to be much better than the last optometrist's.

They said Bethany needed to see a specialist. Thank Goddess for that!

When we travelled over to Hexham hospital to meet him, I was immediately struck by how pleasant he was, his FANTASTIC eye contact, and his honesty. He was stunned that she’d been prescribed glasses in the first place. Her vision is normal. Apparently, according to him, many children are being prescribed glasses in the UK ~ no coincidence that the optometrist gets £20 from the government each time a child gets new glasses.

Until we saw him, I’d been planning to get hold of a holistic eyesight book from Findhorn Press. I’d read excerpts online about the metaphysical reasons for various eye disorders and felt this to be the path we would have pursued in remedying the situation.

If your child has been prescribed glasses, listen to your heart and consider getting an opinion from a specialist who has no ulterior motive.

Environmental implications of not breastfeeding affects EVERY plant and animal on this planet.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yau-Y7tWaPo

hello everyone...today's blog is an invitation to visit the Youtube snippets of my book The Drinks Are On Me. The wonderful Barry Durdant-Hollamby (aka Art of Change man) has created three mini films (and his home educated daughter Sophie is singing to it). This one covers the environmental costs of not breastfeeding. You can link to the other two films while you're there...And watch for more to come.

Have a fab week
Veronika

GOT MILK, WILL SHARE

Apologies to those people who check in to my blog each week. I’ve not really fallen off the edge of the Earth, despite those rumours! It’s been a hectic month or so, for various reasons, and will become apparent in my blogs over the next few weeks.



(Wet Nursing is the nursing of another woman’s baby for money. Cross Nursing involves the one-off or occasional breastfeeding of someone else’s baby while you continue to nurse her own child.)

When I was pregnant with my daughters, I had a pact with my lactating friends that if I couldn’t breastfeed for any reason, they’d breastfeed my babies. We were Milk Systers, and our vow was solid. Obviously I would do the same for their babies. I am one of *those* women who’d happily share my breast milk with another woman’s baby ~ friend or stranger. Like any aspect of breastfeeding, whether it’s breastfeeding itself, full-term breastfeeding, tandem nursing, breastfeeding in public ~ how you feel about it will depend on your frame of reference.

I have shared milk with other women’s children (with their permission) and although it is initially strange having a child who’s not your own, in your arms and connected so intimately, once the old oxytocin (love hormone) kicks in, you simply know that you could breastfeed the World’s Children. Yes, love is that big. Breast milk is liquid love and true love knows no bounds.

Some people are absolutely horrified at the thought of feeding someone else’s child, yet have no qualms about their baby sucking from a cow’s udder ~ even if the experienced is camouflaged and one step removed by being mixed with other ingredients, freeze dried and then re-hydrated into a bottle.

There’s no question that the breastfeeding relationship between a mother and her child is sacred, even holy, ground. And as an advocate of breastfeeding at the breast, rather than a mother’s own expressed milk in a bottle, it might seem odd that I’d be in support of wet nursing or shared feeding (known as cross nursing [horrible expression]). Here are my reasons:

I’m not in support of expressed milk as life-style choice because breast milk is designed to be consumed as it is made. It is age and (developmental) stage specific to the mother’s child and was never meant to see the light of day.

Breastfeeding is a complete package that involves so many aspects of the child’s being ~ physical, emotional, mental and spiritual. My preference would be for a child to be nursed at another woman’s breast (as a temporary measure, or permanently if her own mother is dead or extremely ill) than to consume ‘old’ (even hours old) milk from a bottle.

Breast milk is a *living* food and should be treated with the respect it deserves.

My main thoughts about wet-nursing/cross nursing are:

1.) It should be a gift of love, and not something measured by money, unless the lactating woman is doing it long-term as a career.

2.) I believe mothers should support each other when new babies come along, and be willing to share their milk so that asking the baby to drink from a bottle (expressed milk or formula) is not necessary. (Please note that a mother’s expressed milk is always the first choice of supplement, but where possible offer it off a finger, pipette or spoon, rather than a bottle. Allowing the baby to nurse from another mum enables the sucking reflex to develop)


A child will not breastfeed if it doesn’t want to! You can’t force a baby to breastfeed, so the concerns from some quarters of LLL that it might cause psychological harm, I believe, are unfounded.

If you want to look further into cross nursing, the Association of Breastfeeding Mothers takes a more liberal view than LLL.

I have heard someone in LLL say that if a mother cross nurses another child, it may reduce her own milk supply. This flies in the face of what I learnt during my breastfeeding counsellor training (ironically with LLL) AND from my own experience and that of other mothers world-wide. Milk is made on demand. If you’ve got two (or more) children feeding at the breast, then your body will make more milk to suit the need, not less! A woman can easily provide breast milk for about five children at any one time if she wanted to.

To be clear, though, once a baby gets to a certain age, say 4 – 6 months, it may not want to breastfeed from another woman, either because her voice is different, or her let-down is unlike what she’s been used to. As with any aspect of breastfeeding, let your baby be the guide.

The ideal person to breastfeed your child in a cross nursing situation, is a mother with a baby the same, or very similar age, who is healthy, drug free, and in a good mental and emotional state. She should not consume caffeine, alcohol, smoke, or have large amounts of sweetener. Ironically, some milk banks allow lactating mothers to have up to 7 cups of coffee a day. Seven cups? I’d have a heart attack if I had seven cups of coffee in one day. Just one cup of coffee (or a mouthful of chocolate), and I can’t sleep for about 30 hours! I do not understand this about milk banks. Why would it be acceptable for babies to have breast milk loaded with caffeine? It’s insane.

My experience of women who cross nurse is that they are more than happy with having had their baby fed by another woman, and themselves having breastfed another child. Clearly this cuts against our cultural bias of it being an ‘adulterous relationship’.

Babies must receive breast milk. When our culture finally wakes up enough to realise the significance of this, personally and collectively, then all squeamishness about wet nursing/cross nursing/full term breastfeeding etc., will fly out the window. And not before time!

Cross nursing can be used in emergencies, or to help stimulate a mother’s milk supply if her baby hasn’t been latched-on enough (eg. baby has Down’s Syndrome or is premature). Women who choose to breastfeed an adopted baby, can stimulate their milk supply by nursing an experienced breastfeeding baby.

It’s nothing short of child abuse, in my opinion, to give newborn babies anything less than breast milk, and ideally from the breast. But hey, it’ll take a while before our society wakes up to this. If ever in doubt about what a baby needs to drink, remember, HUMAN MILK FOR HUMAN BABIES.

One of the reasons people are so uncomfortable with the idea of wet nursing, is because of the use of intimate body parts (not so intimate when splashed on the covers of lad magz) and exchanging of body fluids. Funny, though, how one night stands don’t come into the same category.

I believe another difficulty we may have with cross nursing in Western culture, stems from the idea of ownership. We simply don’t know how to share. We’ve been raised to believe in my, my, my or mine, mine, mine. It’s a strong, bold and beautiful woman who transcends this patriarchal line and offers her breast up to another child, and indeed, trusts another woman to nurture her child.

Milk Banks

Milk banks have their place, but I’d rather see women sharing their milk directly from the breast to child. The process involved in making donated breast milk available to babies in NICU or elsewhere, defeats the purpose of providing the benefits of breast milk (to my mind). However, I’d certainly recommend donated milk from this source over formula. Beware though of a particular company marketing donated breast milk for babies in NICU at extortionate prices.

Each country with milk banks, have their own guidelines for donor mums. In some countries, if you’ve had a blood transfusion, are vegetarian/vegan, drink herb teas, etc., you are unlikely to be allowed to donate. Some countries have a blood transfusion deadline of about 20 years ago, some countries one year ago. There’s certainly no universal consensus on this.

Many women happily consume raspberry leaf tea or fennel tea while they’re lactating. Excluding these women from milk donation is ludicrous, and a joke given it’s ok to have seven cups of coffee a day! Excluding women like me, who abstain from flesh, is ludicrous. Our children have thrived on our fennel-laced breast milk.

My main reservation with milk banking is that the milk is pasteurised and pooled (with other mother’s milks). Any *living* food is rendered inadequate by heat treatment. Some places, like Norway, are experimenting with offering ‘raw’ breast milk for babies in need. This is a much more enlightened approach.

For many centuries in Britain, it was common for wet nurses to feed babies. Sadly the reasons used including protecting a mother’s figure (!!) or allowing wealthier women to be emotionally removed from their children. Wet nursing went out of fashion when doctors believed some infections might have been transmitted through breast milk…and lo and behold, crap in a can was invented for women who *didn’t want* to breastfeed.
I believe it is highly unlikely that a woman who is passionate about breast milk, would knowingly breastfeed another woman’s child if she had a transmittable/infectious disease.

The media has recently latched-on (no pun intended!) the idea of wet-nursing, no doubt to ignite people’s interest in something unusual, however recorded history shows wet nursing occurring as far back as 2000 BC in the Code of Hammurabi. A wet nurse was hired for Moses and written about in 1250BC (Old Testament’s Book of Exodus). Turned out that the wet nurse was actually his mother, but the employer didn’t know that!

In 600 AD, The Koran suggested wet nursing.

It’s always been controversial, and like many things, comes in and out of fashion. It was in the middle of the 19th Century that physicians sought out a substitute for breast milk. And the rest is history. Separating babies from their food source has been our undoing. Women were fooled into believing that artificial feeding was to be respected.

Ideally, a child will receive breast milk from her mother’s breast. But we don’t live in an ideal world and so we must be open to wet nursing and cross nursing.

One of my favourite cross nursing stories (although very sad) involved the mother of a three month old baby who was injured in a car crash.

The mother was unconscious, and clearly unable to breastfeed. Fortunately, the ‘aware’ father, although he was also injured, knew that the mother would not want the child to have formula, so he asked for donations of breast milk. When one of the women turned up at the hospital to express her milk, she thought it seemed a bit ridiculous to express it into a bottle, and so, with the father’s permission, breastfed the baby. For the duration that the mother was unable to breastfeed, five women took turns breastfeeding the baby. To me this is a beautiful story of sisterhood. The tragedy is that this understanding, this support and love, is so rare in our society.

Another story which warms my heart is of Judith Waterford ~ a wet nurse. On her 81st birthday (back in the 1800s) she was still producing milk for babies. During the prime of her wet nursing years, she managed to produce four pints a day.

If you have a personal experience of wet nursing/cross nursing, either breastfeeding someone else’s child, or your child having been breastfed by another mum, and might be open to taking part in a SENSITIVE documentary on the subject, please get in touch with me. If you get in touch, there is no commitment to be involved. (UK women only, please).

Petition to the government/Bringing up baby and other abusive-based parenting shows

This is a petition to Downing Street asking them to prevent tv production companies/broadcasters from allowing child abuse on their programmes.

If you were disturbed at the promotion of baby torture on Channel Four's Bringing up baby, please consider adding your name to this petition. Please click the link, it's VERY easy to fill out.

All babies deserve our love, care, respect and committment to their well-being. Please help put an end to the insanity of denying a baby it's BASIC BIOLOGICAL NEEDS. Thanks, Veronika

http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/parentingshows/

Vaccination Awareness

Today’s blog is written by a guest blogger, Joanna Karpasea-Jones.
She is a neuro-psychological immunologist and the author of Breast Milk ~ a natural immunization.

This is specifically for those readers who don’t read her columns in The Mother magazine and want answers to an earlier blog of mine on vaccination.

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, a lot of people lived in poverty without proper food, housing or sanitation. This meant that larger numbers of people died at those times from infectious diseases. The same is true in war times.

We no longer die in such great numbers because of the marvellous invention of the indoor flushing toilet, adequate food for everyone (for the first time in history), heating, decent housing and contraception. Contraception has ensured that most women only have 2 or 3 children, as opposed to 15 or 20, and so she is more able to bear a healthy child if she can take care of herself and her child, and not subject herself to numerous pregnancies. Alcohol abuse is also a causative factor in diphtheria, as is underlying disease.

It stated in ‘Medical World’, 1931, p.627, that ‘"…shows an interesting and conclusive fashion the definitive effect of school buildings, their construction and sanitation, on the spread of diphtheria. The highest incidence was observed in those schools where sanitation is most deficient and ventilation and lighting the least satisfactory. The brightest and airiest school showed the lowest incidence, and the incidence throughout all the schools placed them in exact order of sanitary virtue. Moreover, the incidence indicated the schools where malnutrition in the children is most conspicuous."

As we can see from the above, over-crowding and malnutrition played a key role.
By the time vaccinations were introduced, most of these killer infectious diseases had become more benign.

The vaccine is also known not to be effective in many cases, and may actually cause the spread of the disease.

According to Minutes of the 15th Session (November 20-21, 1975) of the Panel of Review of Bacterial Vaccines and Toxoids with Standards and Potency (data presented by the US Bureau of Biologics, and the FDA):‘For several reasons, diphtheria toxoid, fluid or absorbed, is not as effective an immunizing agent as might be anticipated. Clinical (symptomatic) diphtheria may occur . . . in immunized individuals--even those whose immunization is reported as complete by recommended regimes . . . the permanence of immunity induced by the toxoid . . . is open to question.’Medics have always known this vaccine doesn’t work and have been writing about it since it was invented. For instance, in the ‘Practitioner’, April 1896, it was written ‘that the serum did not, to any appreciable degree, prevent the extension of the disease to the larynx; all the severe cases died, and the good result in the lighter ones was attributable to the mild type of the epidemic." The doctor also states that, at the Hospital of Bligdam, Copenhagen, "the mortality from diphtheria remains the same after, as it was before.’Dr. Joseph Winters published a book, ‘Clinical Observations upon the Use of Anti-Toxin in Diphtheria’, in which he stated: ‘percentage of mortality is not only misleading, but is absolutely worthless unless accompanied by the actual number of cases reported and the actual number of deaths." He also declares that "the serum has an injurious effect, and will certainly be abandoned."Also, the famous Dr. Hadwen wrote in his booklet, ‘The Anti-Toxin Treatment of Diphtheria: In Theory and Practice’, that in 1895 in Berlin the mortality rate from diphtheria was 15.7% (before any vaccination). By 1900 (after vaccination) this figure had risen to 17.2%. According to Metropolitan Asylums Board Annual Reports, 1895-1910, the death rate from Diphtheria in 1910 was 9.80% in those who had received anti-toxin and only 2.99% in those who had not received it. In more recent years there have also been numerous studies of ‘failure’ of DPT vaccine to ‘immunize’ against the diseases it was designed to prevent. As an example, here are some studies:Journal of Infectious Diseases, vol. 179, April 1999; 915-923. "Temporal trends in the population structure of bordetella pertussis during 1949-1996 in a highly vaccinated population "Despite the introduction of large-scale pertussis vaccination in 1953 and high vaccination coverage, pertussis is still an endemic disease in The Netherlands, with epidemic outbreaks occurring every 3-5 years." One factor that might contribute to this is the ability of pertussis strains to adapt to vaccine-induced immunity, causing new strains of pertussis to re-emerge in this well-vaccinated population.Vaccination against whooping-cough. Efficacy versus risks (The Lancet, vol. 1, January 29, 1977, pp. 234-7): Calculations based on the mortality of whooping-cough before 1957 predict accurately the subsequent decline and the present low mortality… Incidence [is] unaffected either by small-scale vaccination beginning about 1948 or by nationwide vaccination beginning in 1957… No protection is demonstrable in infants."

The Lancet Volume 353, Number 9150 30 January 1999 Risk of diphtheria among schoolchildren in the Russian Federation in relation to time since last vaccination Quote:In 1993, the Russian Federation reported 15229 cases of diphtheria, a 25-fold increase over the 603 cases reported in 1989.1 The incidence rate among children 7-10 years of age (15·7 per 100000) was twice that of adults aged 18 years or over (7·9 per 100000).

81% of the affected children aged 7-10 years had been vaccinated with at least a primary series of diphtheria toxoid, and most had received the first booster recommended to be given 12 months after completion of the primary series.

Shimoni, Zvi; Dobrousin, Anatoly; Cohen, Jonathan; et al. "Tetanus in an Immunised Patient" British Medical Journal Online (10/16/99) Vol. 319, No. 7216, P. 1049;Israeli researchers present the case of a 34-year-old construction worker who was hospitalized after having a reported epileptic fit and experiencing flu-like symptoms. The patient had a low-grade fever, but was alert and coherent. Any attempts to speak or get up on the second day resulted in attacks of risus sardonicus, opisthotonus, and trismus. The patient was diagnosed with tetanus and given 2000 U of human tetanus immunoglobulin. Further treatment was provided, and after 15 days, the patient had stopped taking diazepam and ventilatory support was withdrawn. The man had been fully immunized against tetanus, and had received booster shots five and two years before being hospitalized.

Another reason for the fall in infectious disease rates is that diseases are classified according to vaccine status. For instance, tonsillitis and mild Diphtheria have identical symptoms: severe sore throat, swollen glands in the neck, bright red tonsils and a green/yellowish or grey discharge at the back of the throat.

With severe Diphtheria, this discoloured film is impossible to remove and it may block off the airway and cause respiratory problems. Essentially, in milder cases there is no difference between tonsillitis and Diphtheria and vaccinated patients would simply be recorded as tonsillitis. Also, doctors do not test for Diphtheria anymore so they wouldn’t know whether it was present or not, and most doctors do not know what symptoms to look for to diagnose it, so all of this would skew statistics.

TUBERCULOSIS

This is also a sanitation disease and can be caused by vaccination polluting the internal system.The vaccine doesn’t work and never has and the world’s only ever double-blind controlled trial on vaccination (BCG) in the early 1970s which proved it didn’t work. However, it took almost 30 years of administering useless vaccine to people before they stopped its use.The study stated: ‘The efficacy of the TB vaccine is 0%’ (Bulletin of the WHO, Tuberculosis Prevention Trial, 57 (5); 819-827, 1979).

Here are some other studies showing that TB vaccine causes the disease:Foster DR. Miliary tuberculosis following intravesical BCG treatment. Br J Radiol. 1997 Apr;70(832):429. No abstract available. PMID: 9166085 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]Foster DR. Miliary tuberculosis: a complication of intravesical BCG treatment. Australas Radiol. 1998 May;42(2):167-8. No abstract available. PMID: 9599839 [PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]Marrak H, et al.[A case of tuberculous lupus complicating BCG vaccination]. Tunis Med. 1991 Nov;69(11):651-4. French. No abstract available.PMID: 1808776; UI: 92230052.Magnon R, et al. [See Related Articles] Disseminated cutaneous granulomas from BCG therapy. Arch Dermatol. 1980 Mar;116(3):355. No abstract available.PMID: 7369757; UI: 80174030.Vittori F, et al. [Tuberculosis lupus after BCG vaccination. A rare complication of the vaccination].
Arch Pediatr. 1996 May;3(5):457-9. French. PMID: 8763716; UI: 96297887.According to Dr. Surinder Bakhshi, Consultant in Communicable Diseases:‘BCG, the most used vaccine in the world since it was introduced more than 50 years ago, has made no difference to TB in countries which rely solely on it to halt its spread. It has never been claimed to prevent TB, but even the evidence of its protectiveness is patchy and historical. And there have been no studies of its effectiveness in the past three decades.It may leave an ugly scar and, indeed, do more harm than good. Further, as TB, with rare exceptions, is largely a disease of the elderly in the Western world, vaccinating children doesn’t make sense.
TB in Britain is a legacy of its empire. As long as people from third world countries come and settle here, there cannot be a let-up in its spread.People who come from high prevalence countries will continue to harbour TB germs in their bodies until they die.
The World Health Organisation has set its face against vaccination and routine screening. It advocates effective disease management — early diagnosis and supervised treatment — to contain it and avoid its spread to the host community. Vaccination wastes resources, gives false hope and distracts attention from what needs to be done.’(Letter, the Sunday Times, 15 April 2001).

Isolation worked in the old days and its still one of the most effective means of preventing disease.

Other diseases like Scarlet Fever and Typhus disappeared to virtually zero without vaccination.

Measles is a disease which is mild in most cases. The figures the DOH use are from the third world, not of Western children. They also include children who have pre-existing conditions, those who are malnourished and those whose measles was treated with anti-pyretics (which is known to cause measles side-effects.

In 1967, Christine Miller from the National Institute for Medical Research, London, published a paper on measles, stating: ‘Measles is now the commonest infectious disease of childhood in the UK. It occurs in epidemics in which the total number of cases usually exceeds half a million...there is no doubt that most cases in England today are mild, only last for a short period, are not followed by complications and are rarely fatal.’

Also in the Practitioner, November 1967: ‘some physicians consider that measles is so mild a complaint that a major effort at prevention is not justified.’

After the measles vaccine was introduced in 1968, followed by the MMR in 1988, the disease suddenly became more serious. According to the BMA Complete Family Medical Encyclopaedia, 1995: ‘measles is a potentially dangerous viral illness...prevention of measles is important because it can have rare but serious complications...it is sometimes fatal in children with impaired immunity.’

Clearly, you can see vaccine marketing techniques at play here.

According to the DOH, in their book ‘Immunisation Against Infectious Diseases’,‘Before 1988 (when the MMR was introduced) more than half the acute measles deaths occurred in previously healthy children who had not been immunised.’ They quote the study C L MILLER. Deaths from measles in England and Wales, 1970-83. British Medical Journal, Vol 290, 9 February 1985, but if you actually read this study (which they are relying on parents not doing), you will find it actually says:
‘No attempt was made to establish further clinical details, vaccination history, or social class.’ - i.e. they didn’t know the vaccine status of the individuals. And: ‘90% of deaths in those previously normal occurred in those over the age of 15 months, when the vaccines are usually given’. These children were probably vaccinated prior to dying of measles as they were of vaccination age.

Nearly half the children who died were ‘grossly physically or mentally abnormal or both. The pre-existing conditions in the 126 previously abnormal individuals included cerebral palsy (24), mental retardation (20), Down's syndrome (19) and various congenital abnormalities (22). There were nine children with immune deficiency or immunosuppression, and 19 aged 2-8 with lymphatic leukaemia, a number of them in remission.’

In normal healthy children whose measles has not been treated with anti-pyretics, and whom are well nourished, I would say measles is a good thing.

Diseases of childhood are there for a reason. They release toxins from the body, they mature the child’s developing immune system, which is why they occur in childhood.
According to Jayne Donegan, a medical GP, “our immune system had matured and developed purely because of catching the diseases we are trying to eradicate.

In my opinion, normal childhood diseases are basically good for us. They teach our immune system what is "us" and what is foreign.

All our childhood diseases were killers when they first came along. They wiped out thousands because we had no natural immunity against them. Diseases infect us and, in turn, strengthen our immune system.

I vaccinated both my children with the MMR jab, but this was before I started my research into the problems associated with it.”

Often, when a child has had a childhood disease such as Chickenpox or Measles, they will pass more developmental milestones such as suddenly beginning to read, or learning new words, and any existing problems seem to reverse after a bout of measles (for instance, asthmatics suddenly recover).

My own daughter had measles as a toddler and was not ill again for more than a year afterwards, not even with a cold. I believe this was because measles was a strengthening milestone for her.

In the case of tetanus, unlike other childhood diseases, it isn’t possible to gain natural immunity to tetanus. If you’ve had it once, you can have it again. The body does not produce antibodies to Clostridium Tetani. Vaccination is the act of injecting a viral or bacterial substance into the body to make it produce antibodies to that disease. However, since no natural antibodies can be made, then there is no possible way that artificial antibodies could be made either. If the disease cannot give you protection, then how can a vaccine? It is likely that any raised antibody level seen after vaccination is the result of adjuvants (toxic heavy metals which are added to increase the body’s antibody response). In the case of tetanus vaccine, this substance is aluminium.

Antibodies themselves are not an indication of immunity – this is just one function, which is vastly different from whole body immunity.

According to Vieira et al: ‘This minimal protective antibody level is an arbitrary one and is not a guarantee of security for the individual patient.’ (Vieira, B.l.; Dunne, J.W.; Summers, Q.; Cephalic tetanus in an immunized patient. Med J Austr. 1986; 145: 156-7).

Herd Immunity Theory
The herd immunity theory was originally coined in 1933 by a researcher called Hedrich. He had been studying measles patterns in the US between 1900-1931 (years before any vaccine was ever invented for measles) and he observed that epidemics of the illness only occurred when less than 68% of children had developed a natural immunity to it. This was based upon the principle that children build their own immunity after suffering with or being exposed to the disease. So the herd immunity theory was, in fact, about natural disease processes and nothing to do with vaccination. If 68% of the population were allowed to build their own natural defences, there would be no raging epidemic.

Later on, vaccinologists adopted the phrase and increased the figure from 68% to 95% with no scientific justification as to why, and then stated that there had to be 95% vaccine coverage to achieve immunity. Essentially, they took Hedrich’s study and manipulated it to promote their vaccination programmes.

If vaccination really immunises, then your vaccinated child will be immunised and therefore protected against any disease an unvaccinated child gets. If he isn’t, his shots didn’t work.
It is widely known that even those antibodies caused by tetanus vaccine adjuvants will wane or disappear completely within 5 to 10 years. That is why children have a pre-school ‘booster’ at 4 years old, despite being vaccinated 3 or more times as a baby, and why it is repeated again at 15, and in some countries, at 12. It is estimated that over 50% of the adult population is not up to date on their tetanus vaccination and therefore, unvaccinated. If it was truly vaccination that was keeping tetanus rates low, then why are there not dozens more cases of tetanus with all these adults running around? It certainly isn’t in line with their herd immunity theory, where they assert 95% of people have to be ‘immunised’ or it won’t work.

Here are a number of studies of disease occurring in the vaccinated:
Bentsi-Enchill AD, et al. Estimates of the effectiveness of a whole-cell pertussis vaccine from an outbreak in an immunized population. Vaccine. 1997 Feb;15(3):301-6. PMID: 9139490; UI: 97227584.
D. C. Christie, et al., "The 1993 Epidemic of Pertussis in Cincinnati: Resurgence of Disease in a Highly Immunized Population of Children," New England Journal of Medicine (July 7, 1994), pp. 16-20.MMWR November 05, 1993 / 42(43);840-841,847 Diphtheria Outbreak -- Russian Federation, 1990-1993 Despite high levels of vaccination coverage against diphtheria, an ongoing outbreak of diphtheria has affected parts of the Russian Federation since 1990 (1); as of August 31, 1993, 12,865 cases had been reported. This report summarizes epidemiologic information about this outbreak for January 1990- August 1993, and is based on reports from public health officials in the Russian Federation.

Shimoni, Zvi; Dobrousin, Anatoly; Cohen, Jonathan; et al. "Tetanus in an Immunised Patient" British Medical Journal Online (10/16/99) Vol. 319, No. 7216, P. 1049;
Rev. Soc. Bras. Med. Trop., vol. 28, no. 4, Oct-Dec 1995, pp. 339-43 "Clinical and epidemiological findings during a measles outbreak occurring in a population with a high vaccination coverage" : "The history of previous vaccination [in very early childhood] did not diminish the number of complications of the cases studied. The results of this work show changes in age distribution of measles leading to sizeable outbreaks among teenagers and young adults."Clin. Invest. Med., vol. 11, no. 4, August 1988, pp. 304-9: "Measles serodiagnosis during an outbreak in a vaccinated community" ( from a group of 30 measles-sufferers displaying IgM antibodies during the acute phase of illness, 17 had been vaccinated for measles. All 17 experienced measles again, showing IgM antibodies indicating acute infection. "A history of prior vaccination is not always associated with immunity nor with the presence of specific antibodies."Aaby P, et al. (1990) Measles incidence, vaccine efficacy, and mortality in two urban African areas with high vaccination coverage. J Infect Dis. 1990 Nov;162(5):1043-8. PMID: 2230232; UI: 91037153.

Boulianne N, et al.(1991) [Major measles epidemic in the region of Quebec despite a 99% vaccine coverage]. Can J Public Health. 1991 May-Jun;82(3):189-90. French. PMID: 1884314; UI: 91356447.

All vaccination does is alter the expression of diseases and weaken our immune systems because we don’t have as much opportunity to experience the wild disease. Whilst we have less infectious (self-limiting) illness, we have more chronic (long-term) illness.

1 in 3 people now have cancer. This figure is INSANE. Back in the 18th century, cancer was virtually unheard of. Meningitis was extremely rare, now many more children get it. So many people are puffing on ventolin inhalers, with allergies to nuts and strawberries and everything else. Many people have weird skin conditions, and there are dozens more auto-immune diseases than there were before vaccination, like HIV, Lupus, MS.

According to Oxford University, 1 in 58 children is autistic and there are more with ADHD. These are poisoning and brain damage conditions. This amounts to 2% of the population that are now brain damaged by this!

Vaccination has turned us into a nation of weaklings that cannot cope with anything. That is why scientists are trying to invent a ‘dirt’ vaccine to strengthen children’s immune systems.
With regard to the tribes people dying of diseases, they were white man diseases and we went in, invaded their home and their way of life (that they had been living for hundreds of years quite happily) and exposed them to our diseases, which obviously they had not encountered before.

With continued exposure, the disease would become less severe and the tribes people would not die in great numbers, as is the course of all disease if we are allowed to develop natural immunity. Personally I also feel that we in western society had no right to interfere in the way of life of the tribes people and we ought to be ashamed of this aspect of our history.
My website is www.novelbookshop.com and I am in the process of making a new website for Vaccination Awareness Network UK. I can take requests for subjects that people wish me to write about on my site as it has a selection of free to view vaccination articles.

Bringing up baby

Last night I forced myself to watch a new series on Channel Four called Bringing up baby. I say ‘forced’, because I knew there’d be much of it that would be emotionally harrowing and I’d rather spend my time engaged in something more productive. However, I chose to watch it because one of the people on there is someone I know and wanted to support her bravery of going into the mainstream with a concept that is so at odds with our parenting culture.

Bringing up baby is an experiment in child rearing based on three very different ways of parenting. Six families are mentored by three ‘experienced’ women who scrutinise their first three months of parenting. Each family has agreed to follow one particular method.

Method one: mentored by a woman the voice-over described as the Cruella De Ville of the parenting styles. Personally, I’d have thought that was too mild a description. Her routine, military-based approach, was popularised the 1950s, though devised in 1913 by Frederick Truby King. This style is especially suited for people who, actually, don’t really want to be parents. They want a career, wild parties and not to have a moment of their life impacted by a little creature, even if it was conceived by them.

The mentor, Claire Verity, (now there’s an irony, Claire means Light, and Verity means truth) charges families £1000 a DAY for her ‘specialist’ advice, which goes like this:

NO EYE CONTACT WITH BABY

Why? Because babies, according to her, are manipulative creatures. They’re either attention seeking or tired. She says to ignore both reasons! She’s not a mother herself and is so detached from emotion that I can’t believe people actually find comfort in her presence or treat her ideas as gospel.

She advocates four hourly feeds. I can assure you this woman doesn’t eat or drink at four hourly intervals, yet she expects a newborn baby, with the stomach the size of a raspberry, (read: empty in 20 minutes) to go for such a huge stretch of time.

This experiment by the producers of the programme, sadly, isn’t an experiment, so much as a public viewing of TORTURE. I can only hope there’ll be a massive outcry and complaints to the official broadcasting standards authority. If it was a documentary ‘exposing’ such a practice, that would be different. This is the deliberate setting up and staging of child abuse.
The babies from two families were swaddled from head to toe, a lump of rubber (a dummy) gagging them from expression, and then left ALONE for four hours outside in the cold (in a pram). This would be considered torture, bodily and psychological harm, if inflicted on an adult. HOW IS IT ALLOWED TO A NEWBORN BABY? Where are its human rights?

This practice is a pernicious influence, like a cancer, spreading mutated cells into the world of baby/child development.

The show is following these families for 3 months to see how it goes. Where will the producers be in 3 years, 30 years, when these poor babies are in care because they weren’t loved, weren’t cuddled, weren’t given eye contact…but WERE ABANDONED??? We’ll all be paying the cost for this torture and cruelty. These babies will almost certainly be dysfunctional as adults, and not capable of healthy intimate relationships.

If a dog or a cat had been similarly treated, the whole country would be up in arms. BAN THEM FROM KEEPING AN ANIMAL FOR LIFE…but no, on this show, it’s celebrated. Yahoo, the parents can sit and have a glass of wine on baby’s first night at home!

The older sibling of one of the ‘tortured’ babies said, “I want to cuddle the baby. Why can’t I cuddle the baby?” Dad replies that they’re not allowed to. There was a moment of irony when the mother of said baby started crying as she heard it SCREAMING in desperation for her over the monitor, and Claire Verity touched her arm and offered ‘comfort’. Made me want to vomit! Why was her trauma acknowledged, and not the baby’s?

This parenting ‘style’ (torture) is a second cousin to the treatment of babies in eastern European orphanages. Studies have shown that babies who are never held actually DIE from lack of touch. It’s an essential human NEED.

Any prospective parent who feels ‘inclined’ towards this way of parenting ~ do the world a favour, don’t have children! DON’T HAVE CHILDREN. Leave the creating and raising of the next generation to those people who really want and love them, and are prepared to honour their most basic needs, which include affectional bonding, love, touch, and EYE CONTACT.

A fabulous career, double ‘must have’ income, brilliant parties, should never be more important than raising a child according to its biological needs.

There’s no place for selfishness in parenting, only surrender. Let’s be clear on something though, surrender isn’t about ‘giving in’ or giving up. In this case it is about melting into parenting. It’s about recognising that mother and child are one. Surrender does not mean sacrifice. A BONDED mother would never leave her baby in a cot, give it a bottle of formula, or leave it untouched anymore than she would dictate its feeds.

A baby isn’t something to put on your cv…it is a human being with exquisitely sensitive feelings.

One of the baby’s births was shown on the programme ~ a typical western birth where babe is handled like a lump of meat i.e., roughly, with no respect for its incredible sensitivity and the shock adjustment it has to make to the world of light, gravity and unmuffled sound. The poor little soul hit a world of violence from the word go.

My husband and I sat in stunned silence, tears rolling down my cheeks. The few words that were mentioned can’t be repeated here because of the laws of libel.

Hats off to Claire Scott, the Continuum Concept mentor. Her intelligence, passion, compassion and empathy were obvious. I admired her help in getting breastfeeding established and for saying what I’m always yelling from the rooftops: BREASTFEEDING DOESN’T HURT IF IT IS DONE PROPERLY!!
I’m so grateful that wasn’t edited out in post-production!

The Continuum Concept is at the heart of The Mother magazine’s ethos. The book’s author, Jean Leidloff, lived with the Stone Age tribe, the Yequanna, in South America. Here she saw first hand how different these children were to those in the west. They rarely cried, were actively part of (and welcomed into!!) their parent’s and community’s lives. Their bodies were relaxed and the children were happy. Just before I met my husband, I’d heard about this book through a Wellness course I was doing. I’d been trying to track it down. When I met my husband, and we were moving in together, he handed me a book and said, “You might like this.” Our parenting style was sealed before we even met. We both knew that a baby’s biological needs had to be met no matter what time in history we were living in, or what the culture presented as the norm. I’m so thankful for the book, and even more thankful for having made babies with a man who ‘understood’ and has never stood in the way with ego-based jealousy. Which brings me back to Claire Verity. How is it that a woman can be so far removed from a biological instinct? I know several men who are more suited to mothering.

I can’t recommend highly enough an article we have in our current issue of The Mother magazine, by Joseph Chilton Pearce called Birth and bonding. The information on the heart’s electromagnetic field is vital information. The Truby King method is the antithesis. Joseph’s book, Magical Child, will open your eyes to how important it is that the baby is held, has eye contact and constant exposure to her mother’s face. A Truby King raised baby has none of that.

I’m delighted to announce that the magazine’s publisher, The Art of Change, will be hosting a Jean Leidloff tour to the UK in April 2008. Contact artofchange@msn.com for more information.

It’s probably no surprise the Bringing Up Baby series is sponsored by a disposable nappy company. Treat your babies like crap, and then have their crap be responsible for dioxins in a landfill for 500 years or more.

Measles and MMR jabs

The government has enlisted the media for their annual scaremongering campaign to get ill-informed parents to vaccinate. The reports are always so biased and ONE SIDED.

I'm ever so grateful that I can't be scared, bullied or intimidated into assaulting my girls' immune systems. There is no amount of money on this planet that would ever have me putting such poison into my children's bodies.

My decision to not vaccinate has always been intuitive. Yet the research I've done in the years since has left me gobsmacked by the complete veil draped across the eyes of unsuspecting parents. I'm left stunned by the inability of doctors to think for themselves. My sister sold childhood vaccines to doctors. I witnessed, first hand, an awful lot of bribery and corruption, otherwise known as 'gift incentives'. The more vaccines a doctor gives, the more s/he earns. In Australia, they even go as far as PAYING parents to vaccinate their children! Criminal, at best.

I was unvaccinated as a child. Apparently, according to the BBC news tonight, all people aged 40 and over have had measles in childhood. Er, wrong. I only had mumps. A few years back I had chickenpox.

The sheeple (people who act like sheep and don't think for themselves) will continue to vaccinate their children in the mistaken belief that the concoction of chemicals and poisons will 'immunise' them against killer diseases.

Let's clarify a few things.

Measles is not a killer disease. Children who die from measles are those who are medically 'mismanaged' during the natural course of the disease. That is, they've had their fever suppressed. Next time you hear a doctor ranting on about "I've seen a child die from measles!!" ask him to produce their immunisation record and give details on how the child was treated. That is where the answer will lie, NOT whether or not they'd been vaccinated.

You wouldn't drink a vaccine, so why on earth inject it? The first line of defence against infectious diseases is a layer of bacteria on our skin and mucus membranes. The second line is the skin and the mucus membranes themselves. Any disease that gets past these defences is branded by Immunoglobulin A. This then sets up a chain which allows Immunoglobulin G to come along and get rid of the disease. If you are healthy, NOTHING can penetrate your body. It is WRONG to bypass the skin barrier by injection.

If you do get an infection, you'll get a fever. The medical profession have ingrained parents to be scared of fevers. This is unfortunate because fevers fight the infection. A healthy body will not create a fever high enough to cause brain damage. Vomiting is a natural response to eliminating toxins.

I grew up in Australia, where sugar cane is grown. Before the canes are harvested, the fields are burnt. This is specifically to get rid of all the 'vermin' ~ snakes, toads, etc., before harvesting. A fever is the body's way of burning off the vermin!

If your child can't protect herself from infectious diseases under normal circumstances, then she is at great risk from vaccination. Vaccination doesn't give life long immunity, catching the childhood disease NATURALLY does.

Vaccination causes the body to draw calcium from itself to attach to the invading chemicals so it can neutralise the vaccine. We absolutely NEED calcium for our nervous system and muscle function. You aren't in your child's body so you have no way of knowing, or experiencing, the impact of the vaccine. Severe calcium deficiency may not be visible to you, as a parent, for many years by which time it will be far too late to rectify.

Parents are encouraged to be reassured by the government that studies prove vaccines to be safe. If this was so, then why don't they tell parents that these studies are funded by vaccine manufacturers!!?

Vaccination is a multi-billion pound industry. Of course they want us to vaccinate! And the only way they can do it is by instilling fear. Why don't they parade the thousands upon thousands of vaccine damaged (and dead) children alongside their campaigns? Surely that would be more honest?

A parent is the only barrier between a vaccine manufacturer murdering or physically damaging their child. A parent is responsible for their child's health, NOT the government. Do you really think your child will grow and up thank you for poisoning them?

Media energy around vaccination is a major act of bullying. It's not acceptable in the playground, so why do we allow it in the area of children's health?

We're told that vaccination programmes eliminate diseases. There is NO proof of this in any country of the world. All childhood diseases are cyclical and this has nothing whatsoever to do with vaccines or their efficacy.

Many of the adverse reactions to disease fall outside the Government's allotted time frame and they refuse to record them, thereby giving inaccurate outcomes. The vast majority of vaccine-damaged children don't get reported by the doctors.

In the USA thousands and thousands of parents are sueing for vaccine damage to their children, yet vaccinations continue. Are humans stupid, or what?

It's only when you decide to explore and research vaccinations (and please don't call them immunisations, because they don't immunise) that you see how skewed the studies are; how the biggest outbreaks occur in the most heavily vaccinated areas!

If you are one of those people who believe in the theory of herd immunity, I can't recommend highly enough the article we had recently in The Mother. Common sense would tell you that if a vaccine protects from disease, then an unvaccinated child is INCAPABLE of spreading disease.

Vaccinations are a frightening area to dip your toes into for the sole reason that the sheeple have been led to believe vaccinations are sacred and life saving. When you see the truth for yourself, read the research, see the facts, all you can do is hang your head in shock, shame and anger at the deliberate misinformation. The vaccines are far more dangerous than any childhood illness.

I, for one, am happy that my children will act as 'guinea pigs' showing what excellent health really looks like.

We build up our children's immune systems primarily by raising them in a space of love. If they feel good about themselves, rather than belittled, shamed or constantly threatened, they grow like weeds ~ strong, healthy, unstoppable.

Sustained breastfeeding is a lifelong investment, one that is sadly not recognised or endorsed in western countries. It's the only TRUE immuniser. Formula is dead, static and synthetic. It does not, and can not, build your child's immune system. It can not track the environment for pathogens to protect the child like a mother's body does. Her body is constantly scanning the environment in order to provide 'immunisation' in her milk.

Children need to eat fresh, raw fruit, vegetables, seeds and nuts on a daily basis. The government's 'five a day' is only half of what the body should have. I shake my head in disgust when I see adverts for things like baked beans or fruit cordial saying, 'counts towards your five a day'. IT DOESN'T!!! Your body needs fresh, that is, uncooked, unfrozen, untinned!!!, fruit and vegetables.

Children must have plenty of rest and sleep. Our 24/7 entertainment society has insidiously crept into children's lives too, with the vast majority of western kids glued to televisual stimulus of some sort. Electromagnetic radiation from mobiles, computers, tvs, wifi…all add to the soup of ill-health. Think twice before you buy into the idea that your children need all these things to be part of society.

All humans need clean, pure, living water. Is your child drinking 6 - 8 glasses of water a day and eating plenty of water-rich food?

If you're concerned about your child getting measles, make them a fresh carrot juice every day (not shop bought juice as it is pasteurised, thereby killing the enzymes) to boost their vitamin a levels. Children who get measles have been found to have low levels of vitamin a.

If your child gets measles, don't panic if there is a fever. The body knows what it is doing. Each degree rise in temperature DOUBLES the rate and production of leucocytes. Nature knows what she is doing. Avoid antibiotics as they stop the immune system functioning optimally and strip the gut of vitamin k. Convulsions are not due to high temperature but from the rapid rise in temperature.

According to the World Health Organisation vaccinated people are FOURTEEN times more likely to contract measles that those who haven't been vaccinated.

Vaccinations are social violence against our children.


Vaccine ingredients ~ would you drink this?

Formaldehyde, mercury or #6 pheno-oxyethanol
Aluminium
Paint thinner
Coolant
Anti-freeze
Dye
Detergent
Phenols
Solvent
Borax
Disinfectant
MSG
Glycerol
Sulfite and phosphate compounds
Polysorbate 80/20
Sorbitol
Polyribosylribitol
Betapropiolactone
Amphotericin b and other chemicals
Hydrolozed gelatine
Casein
Dead animal tissue and blood (eg cow, chick, human embryo (from aborted babies), monkey, sheep, pig, dog, etc)
Mutated human viruses
Contaminant animal viruses
(eg SV40 which causes cancer in humans)
Bacteria and bacterial endotoxins
Antibiotics
Yeast and animal bacterial and viral DNA (which can be incorporated into the recipient's DNA)

For the side effects of formaldehyde and mercury, contact the poisons centre for a complete list.

No self respecting vegan or vegetarian would choose vaccination.

I know many parents feel the decision whether to vaccinate or not is a tough decision. I don’t see why that would be so. You either believe a poison is going to make you strong and healthy, or you don't. Trust your gut, not the government. The answers are within you. Don't be drawn into system out of fear.

If you're new to the idea that you actually have a choice regarding the vaccination of your children, and would like more information please contact the Vaccination Awareness Network. (contact details are on The Mother magazine website www.themothermagazine.co.uk It's run by one of The Mother magazine's columnists ~ Joanna Karpasea Jones. She writes a regular column for us on vaccination awareness. In issue 24 (posted out to subscribers next week) she shares how vaccination programmes are being used universally to 'control' population growth. It's quite something, isn't it, to think our daughters may be DELIBERATELY rendered infertile through 'every day' vaccinations!?

In issue 25, due out early November, Joanna has a column questioning MMR.

I don't know of any other natural parenting magazines that are 100% opposed to vaccinations. All the ones I come across, sit on the fence for fear of offending someone (that old chestnut!). These are our children we're talking about! There's no time or reason to be offended. The truth must come out. Parents must be fully informed.

VIOLENT TEENAGERS

Today's cuppa: Peace Tea (ingredients: love, kindness and awareness)

Another boy has been shot by a teenager… it's becoming a regular news item here in the UK.

People (especially our ever-so-wise politicians) talk about tougher gun laws, stronger education, getting male role models for fatherless boys…but this is all so much ambulance at the bottom of the cliff talk.

Why is it so impossible for people to CONNECT THE DOTS? Really, it does my head in that there is such complete ignorance, at the highest levels of psychology, neuro-biology and medicine, in relation to violence and teenagers (and adults).

We're all born with biological needs which must be met if we're to develop optimally. Many of these needs are immediately met through breastfeeding, as the rich biochemical nutrients are vital for developing the neuro-transmitters which develop our capacity towards peace or violence. FORMULA DOESN'T CONTAIN THIS.

The more technologically advanced our society becomes, the further we seem to move away from our biological needs. There is always a price for doing so. And boy are we seeing the price for the child neglect and abuse which is happening DAILY on a massive scale.

We are inflicting violence on our children from the earliest age ~ even in-utero, with invasive tests and scans (which essentially microwave the baby's cells!!).

Many babies today are born by very violent means: suction, forceps or scalpel. Many c-sections babies even get cut. Modern babies are handled roughly, like lumps of meat, rather than souls who've just arrived Earthside in exquisitely-sensitive bodies.

Further violence, and it IS A VIOLATION to this sacred babe ~ and the mother, occurs when the baby is removed from the mother for routine and other testing. And more violence occurs when the baby isn't immediately put to the breast.

Violence continues throughout childhood in various forms ~ stuck in a prison called a 'cradle'; left to stare at a ceiling, rather than held by mother; left to cry; dummy as a replacement for non-nutritive sucking at the breast; left with strangers in day care; sent to nursery at three (at 3 for goodness' sake!); given dead, lifeless, processed food and drink (especially formula); compulsory, enforced learning before the first milk teeth have fallen out…and so it goes on and on. Of course, very few people would even consider any of these to be violence because we've become so indoctrinated with this as being 'normal'.

Eventually all this violence has to find an outlet. The baby grows into the toddler into the child into the teenager… Some of these children deal with their hurts in other ways ~ various dysfunctions, such as depression, eating disorders, a tendency towards suicide; addiction to televisual technology and consumerism. Some of our violently abused children will direct this hurt at themselves, and some will turn. They'll turn with a gun, a knife or other tool. But turn, they will. At no other time in our history have adults been scared of teenagers on the streets.

We need everyone to start connecting the dots……………………….

Find me one abusive, dangerous, tormented soul who had a gentle birth and was fully breastfed by an affectionate, loving mother, who carried and slept with her baby, and I'll shut my mouth forever ~ honest ~ not one more blog, not one more magazine.

I can guarantee that all the people who are committing violence against others, and themselves, had a violent birth, little or no breastfeeding (or weaned by mother before 2.5 years), and were deprived of an active in-arms experience with their mother.

So let's stop all this bullshit about tighter gun laws...we wouldn't even desire guns or to inflict violence if we weren't shot in the heart when we left our mother's womb!

Girl Gangs

Today's cuppa: Elderberry Tea

There was talk in the media this week of a rise in girl gangs. I thought I'd share about the Girl Gang in our village.

It consists of my two daughters and a friend who lives a few houses away. They chant 'girl pack club' and make notices for the bus shelter saying "dog walkers available ~ dogs must be little and not aggressive! £1.50 per dog."

They hatch plans to do all sorts of things, but mostly they get out their rollerblades (found in the animal rescue shop for £2 a pair!), play in their club house (a space under the pine trees, covered with some corrugated iron, making it suitable even in a wet British summer!). The girls in the gang have a busy life foraging for fruit, having a sleep over, playing dolls, making decorative mud pies, riding bikes.

One of the main things I've noticed with this gang is that they laugh and laugh and laugh! Music to this mother's ears…

Captured Sunlight

Today's cuppa: Rosehip and apple tea
A 'toast' to my boyfriend...who's 59 today! (25th August) I love you, Paul ~ you've made my life. The Universe couldn't have conjured me up a better husband! And happy birthday to my lovely friend, Amy, in Panama City...breastfeeding her beautiful new (VBAC) daughter, Isabella.

Only a week until the little ladies are back at school. If I could sum up this summer in two words, apart from 'crap weather', it would be 'captured sunlight'.

There can't have been more than a day or two that's passed without the girls foraging. They've eaten their way through strawberries, gooseberries, apples, raspberries, black currants, blackberries, wild cherries ~ not to mention stripping my pea plants bare. It's all I can do to keep them off my ripening blueberry bushes!

They've always been little fruit bats, but it still gives me such a kick to see them devour man's natural foods. Both of them will literally stand at a bush of fruit for hours, nibbling away. They have no need to coat these fruits in sugar, bake them in a pie, turn them into cordial or boil into jam… My girls eat fruit raw, ripe and fresh, just as nature intended.

I've seen many mothers who have a fear of their children eating 'real fruit'. "Oh, no, she'll get a sore tummy. All that fruit's not good for you."

"WHAAAAAT??"

It's not surprising that people get sore tummies, but let's be clear here ~ it's not the fault of the fruit!

Fruit likes to be eaten on its own. Look at the average western diet and see how fruit is consumed. Many people consider it a dessert and usually eat it after a heavy carb-based meal. Fruit, on any empty tummy, takes 20 minutes to digest, like breast milk. If you eat it with steak or bread, it is going to ferment in the tummy! It's no wonder the body reacts! Give a body fresh, raw, ripe fruit on an empty tummy and it will literally dance with joy. "WOW…at last, enzymes! Unprocessed vitamins and minerals!" Can't you just hear your cells dancing?

The beauty of freshly ripened fruit is that it is, literally, captured sunlight. And it is this sunlight, these stored electrons, which gives us a zest for life.

Saturn in the 5th house ~ learning life's lessons in the house of children.

Today's cuppa: Lime and elderflower tea

I'm researching for a book I wish to write about the impact of having the planet Saturn in the 5th house.

In astrology, the 12 houses are considered to be mansions of the soul. The planet which is transiting through it at the time of your birth, brings energy or lessons with it.

Saturn is considered to be Father Time, or some say, the Lord of Karma. However you choose to look at it, this planet certainly brings *interesting* learning opportunities. The fifth house represents children, creativity and love affairs.

My focus, for the book, is specifically on children.

Having Saturn in this house can manifest in many ways. Ancient astrologers used to say that if a woman had Saturn in this house, it meant she couldn't have children. Later on they said that if she did have children, she'd be a bad mother (ouch!!). I know in my life it manifests by finding it REALLY hard to sit down and 'play dolls'!! (LOL)

I have Saturn in my 5th house ~ and am interested in how it plays out in other women's lives. My grandmother's saturn in the 5th manifested with three children dying in infancy (during the war years).

Clearly my life's work is around children, and it plays out not only in the passion I have for my own children being raised optimally, but also through creating The Mother magazine.

Saturn in the 5th house can manifest in so many ways, such as infertility (usually it has psychological, rather than physical, reasons), repeated miscarriages, stillbirth, death of a child/children in infancy....generally, 'difficulties' around children. I want to show that it isn't always like this, and can manifest in other ways too.

Lest it sound all doom and gloom, it needn't be....and that is the point I wish to make in my book... how we can take these lessons and *prune* our essential self to blossom fully, rather than be crushed and heartbroken.

I believe Saturn is our life coach....he's here to test our spiritual muscles, so to speak. Many people who dabble in astrology fear Saturn. It's a shame, and I certainly believe that the more you fear something, the more painful a hold it has on you. My goal in writing this book is to show how we can genuinely befriend Saturn and use this natal placement to our advantage and JOY.

If you have Saturn in the 5th and would be happy to contribute your experiences, please do contact me via The Mother website. If you suspect you might have it there, but are not sure, you can google Astrodienst and get a free chart done. You'll need an accurate time of birth.
Or I can look into it for you.

Please be assured all correspondence is strictly confidential, and if you do decide to be a 'case study' in the book, names will be changed to protect privacy.

Best wishes, Veronika