RH Negative blood, fact and theory
- Thread starter Laura
- Start date
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/183317-Native-Americans-Descended-From-A-Single-Ancestral-Group-DNA-Study-Confirms
Native Americans Descended From A Single Ancestral Group, DNA Study Confirms
Science Daily
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:07 EDT
© Kari Britt Schroeder/UC Davis
For two decades, researchers have been using a growing volume of genetic data to debate whether ancestors of Native Americans emigrated to the New World in one wave or successive waves, or from one ancestral Asian population or a number of different populations.
Now, after painstakingly comparing DNA samples from people in dozens of modern-day Native American and Eurasian groups, an international team of scientists thinks it can put the matter to rest: virtually without exception, the new evidence supports the single ancestral population theory.
"Our work provides strong evidence that, in general, Native Americans are more closely related to each other than to any other existing Asian populations, except those that live at the very edge of the Bering Strait," said Kari Britt Schroeder, a lecturer at the University of California, Davis, and the first author on the paper describing the study.
"While earlier studies have already supported this conclusion, what's different about our work is that it provides the first solid data that simply cannot be reconciled with multiple ancestral populations," said Schroeder, who was a Ph.D. student in anthropology at the university when she did the research.
The study is published in the May issue of the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution.
The team's work follows up on earlier studies by several of its members who found a unique variant (an allele) of a genetic marker in the DNA of modern-day Native American people. Dubbed the "9-repeat allele," the variant (which does not have a biological function), occurred in all of the 41 populations that they sampled from Alaska to the southern tip of Chile, as well as in Inuit from Greenland and the Chukchi and Koryak people native to the Asian (western) side of the Bering Strait. Yet this allele was absent in all 54 of the Eurasian, African and Oceanian groups the team sampled.
Overall, among the 908 people who were in the 44 groups in which the allele was found, more than one out of three had the variant.
In these earlier studies, the researchers concluded that the most straightforward explanation for the distribution of the 9-repeat allele was that all modern Native Americans, Greenlanders and western Beringians descend from a common founding population. Furthermore, the fact that the allele was absent in other Asian populations most likely meant that America's ancestral founders had been isolated from the rest of Asia for thousands of years before they moved into the New World: that is, for a period of time that was long enough to allow the allele to originate in, and spread throughout, the isolated population.
As strong as this evidence was, however, it was not foolproof. There were two other plausible explanations for the widespread distribution of the allele in the Americas.
If the 9-repeat allele had arisen as a mutation multiple times, its presence throughout the Americas would not indicate shared ancestry. Alternatively, if there had been two or more different ancestral founding groups and only one of them had carried the 9-repeat allele, certain circumstances could have prompted it to cross into the other groups and become widespread. Say that there was a second allele - one situated very close to the 9-repeat allele on the DNA strand - that conferred a strong advantage to humans who carried it. Natural selection would carry this allele into new populations and because of the mechanics of inheritance, long stretches of DNA surrounding it, including the functionless 9-repeat allele, would be carried along with the beneficial allele.
To rule out these possibilities, the research team, which was headed by Noah Rosenberg at the University of Michigan, scrutinized DNA samples of people from 31 modern-day Asian populations, 19 Native American, one Greenlandic and two western Beringian populations.
They found that in each sample that contained the 9-repeat allele, short stretches of DNA on either side of it were characterized by a distinct pattern of base pairs, a pattern they seldom observed in people without the allele. "If natural selection had promoted the spread of a neighboring advantageous allele, we would expect to see longer stretches of DNA than this with a similarly distinct pattern," Schroeder said. "And we would also have expected to see the pattern in a high frequency even among people who do not carry the 9-repeat allele. So we can now consider the positive selection possibility unlikely."
The results also ruled out the multiple mutations hypothesis. If that had been the case, there would have been myriad DNA patterns surrounding the allele rather than the identical characteristic signature the team discovered.
"There are a number of really strong papers based on mitochondrial DNA - which is passed from mother to daughter - and Y-chromosome DNA - which is passed from father to son - that have also supported a single ancestral population," Schroeder said. "But this is the first definitive evidence we have that comes from DNA that is carried by both sexes."
Other authors of the study are David G. Smith, a professor of anthropology at UC Davis; Mattias Jacobsson, University of Michigan and Uppsala University in Sweden; Michael H. Crawford, University of Kansas; Theodore Schurr, University of Pennsylvania; Simina Boca, Johns Hopkins University; Donald F. Conrad and Jonathan Pritchard, University of Chicago; Raul Tito and Ripan Malhi, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Ludmilla Osipova, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk; Larissa Tarskaia, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; Sergey Zhadanov, University of Pennsylvania and Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk; and Jeffrey D. Wall, UC San Francisco.
The work was supported by NIH grants to Rosenberg and Smith and an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship to Schroeder.
Journal reference:
Schroeder et al. Haplotypic Background of a Private Allele at High Frequency in the Americas. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2009; 26 (5): 995 DOI: link
Native Americans Descended From A Single Ancestral Group, DNA Study Confirms
Science Daily
Thu, 30 Apr 2009 18:07 EDT
© Kari Britt Schroeder/UC Davis
For two decades, researchers have been using a growing volume of genetic data to debate whether ancestors of Native Americans emigrated to the New World in one wave or successive waves, or from one ancestral Asian population or a number of different populations.
Now, after painstakingly comparing DNA samples from people in dozens of modern-day Native American and Eurasian groups, an international team of scientists thinks it can put the matter to rest: virtually without exception, the new evidence supports the single ancestral population theory.
"Our work provides strong evidence that, in general, Native Americans are more closely related to each other than to any other existing Asian populations, except those that live at the very edge of the Bering Strait," said Kari Britt Schroeder, a lecturer at the University of California, Davis, and the first author on the paper describing the study.
"While earlier studies have already supported this conclusion, what's different about our work is that it provides the first solid data that simply cannot be reconciled with multiple ancestral populations," said Schroeder, who was a Ph.D. student in anthropology at the university when she did the research.
The study is published in the May issue of the journal Molecular Biology and Evolution.
The team's work follows up on earlier studies by several of its members who found a unique variant (an allele) of a genetic marker in the DNA of modern-day Native American people. Dubbed the "9-repeat allele," the variant (which does not have a biological function), occurred in all of the 41 populations that they sampled from Alaska to the southern tip of Chile, as well as in Inuit from Greenland and the Chukchi and Koryak people native to the Asian (western) side of the Bering Strait. Yet this allele was absent in all 54 of the Eurasian, African and Oceanian groups the team sampled.
Overall, among the 908 people who were in the 44 groups in which the allele was found, more than one out of three had the variant.
In these earlier studies, the researchers concluded that the most straightforward explanation for the distribution of the 9-repeat allele was that all modern Native Americans, Greenlanders and western Beringians descend from a common founding population. Furthermore, the fact that the allele was absent in other Asian populations most likely meant that America's ancestral founders had been isolated from the rest of Asia for thousands of years before they moved into the New World: that is, for a period of time that was long enough to allow the allele to originate in, and spread throughout, the isolated population.
As strong as this evidence was, however, it was not foolproof. There were two other plausible explanations for the widespread distribution of the allele in the Americas.
If the 9-repeat allele had arisen as a mutation multiple times, its presence throughout the Americas would not indicate shared ancestry. Alternatively, if there had been two or more different ancestral founding groups and only one of them had carried the 9-repeat allele, certain circumstances could have prompted it to cross into the other groups and become widespread. Say that there was a second allele - one situated very close to the 9-repeat allele on the DNA strand - that conferred a strong advantage to humans who carried it. Natural selection would carry this allele into new populations and because of the mechanics of inheritance, long stretches of DNA surrounding it, including the functionless 9-repeat allele, would be carried along with the beneficial allele.
To rule out these possibilities, the research team, which was headed by Noah Rosenberg at the University of Michigan, scrutinized DNA samples of people from 31 modern-day Asian populations, 19 Native American, one Greenlandic and two western Beringian populations.
They found that in each sample that contained the 9-repeat allele, short stretches of DNA on either side of it were characterized by a distinct pattern of base pairs, a pattern they seldom observed in people without the allele. "If natural selection had promoted the spread of a neighboring advantageous allele, we would expect to see longer stretches of DNA than this with a similarly distinct pattern," Schroeder said. "And we would also have expected to see the pattern in a high frequency even among people who do not carry the 9-repeat allele. So we can now consider the positive selection possibility unlikely."
The results also ruled out the multiple mutations hypothesis. If that had been the case, there would have been myriad DNA patterns surrounding the allele rather than the identical characteristic signature the team discovered.
"There are a number of really strong papers based on mitochondrial DNA - which is passed from mother to daughter - and Y-chromosome DNA - which is passed from father to son - that have also supported a single ancestral population," Schroeder said. "But this is the first definitive evidence we have that comes from DNA that is carried by both sexes."
Other authors of the study are David G. Smith, a professor of anthropology at UC Davis; Mattias Jacobsson, University of Michigan and Uppsala University in Sweden; Michael H. Crawford, University of Kansas; Theodore Schurr, University of Pennsylvania; Simina Boca, Johns Hopkins University; Donald F. Conrad and Jonathan Pritchard, University of Chicago; Raul Tito and Ripan Malhi, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign; Ludmilla Osipova, Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk; Larissa Tarskaia, Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow; Sergey Zhadanov, University of Pennsylvania and Russian Academy of Sciences, Novosibirsk; and Jeffrey D. Wall, UC San Francisco.
The work was supported by NIH grants to Rosenberg and Smith and an NSF Graduate Research Fellowship to Schroeder.
Journal reference:
Schroeder et al. Haplotypic Background of a Private Allele at High Frequency in the Americas. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 2009; 26 (5): 995 DOI: link
http://www.sott.net/articles/show/184742-Ancient-Gem-Studded-Teeth-Show-Skill-of-Early-Dentists
Ancient Gem-Studded Teeth Show Skill of Early Dentists
John Roach
National Geographic News
Wed, 20 May 2009 01:21 EDT
The glittering "grills" of some hip-hop stars aren't exactly unprecedented. Sophisticated dentistry allowed Native Americans to add bling to their teeth as far back as 2,500 years ago, a new study says.
Ancient peoples of southern North America went to "dentists" - among the earliest known - to beautify their chompers with notches, grooves, and semiprecious gems, according to a recent analysis of thousands of teeth examined from collections in Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology and History (such as the skull above, found in Chiapas, Mexico).
Scientists don't know the origin of most of the teeth in the collections, which belonged to people living throughout the region, called Mesoamerica, before the Spanish conquests of the 1500s.
But it's clear that people - mostly men - from nearly all walks of life opted for the look, noted José Concepción Jiménez, an anthropologist at the institute, which recently announced the findings.
"They were not marks of social class" but instead meant for pure decoration, he commented in an e-mail interview conducted in Spanish.
In fact, the royals of the day - such as the Red Queen, a Maya mummy found in a temple at Palenque in what is now Mexico - don't have teeth decorations, Jiménez said.
Other evidence of early Mesoamerican dentistry - including a person who had received a ceremonial denture - has also been found.
Knowledgeable Dentists
The early dentists used a drill-like device with a hard stone such as obsidian, which is capable of puncturing bone.
"It's possible some type of [herb based] anesthetic was applied prior to drilling to blunt any pain," Jiménez said.
The ornamental stones - including jade - were attached with an adhesive made out of natural resins, such as plant sap, which was mixed with other chemicals and crushed bones, Jiménez said.
The dentists likely had a sophisticated knowledge of tooth anatomy, Jiménez added. For example, they knew how to drill into teeth without hitting the pulp inside, he said.
"They didn't want to generate an infection or provoke the loss of a tooth or break a tooth."
Ancient Gem-Studded Teeth Show Skill of Early Dentists
John Roach
National Geographic News
Wed, 20 May 2009 01:21 EDT
The glittering "grills" of some hip-hop stars aren't exactly unprecedented. Sophisticated dentistry allowed Native Americans to add bling to their teeth as far back as 2,500 years ago, a new study says.
Ancient peoples of southern North America went to "dentists" - among the earliest known - to beautify their chompers with notches, grooves, and semiprecious gems, according to a recent analysis of thousands of teeth examined from collections in Mexico's National Institute of Anthropology and History (such as the skull above, found in Chiapas, Mexico).
Scientists don't know the origin of most of the teeth in the collections, which belonged to people living throughout the region, called Mesoamerica, before the Spanish conquests of the 1500s.
But it's clear that people - mostly men - from nearly all walks of life opted for the look, noted José Concepción Jiménez, an anthropologist at the institute, which recently announced the findings.
"They were not marks of social class" but instead meant for pure decoration, he commented in an e-mail interview conducted in Spanish.
In fact, the royals of the day - such as the Red Queen, a Maya mummy found in a temple at Palenque in what is now Mexico - don't have teeth decorations, Jiménez said.
Other evidence of early Mesoamerican dentistry - including a person who had received a ceremonial denture - has also been found.
Knowledgeable Dentists
The early dentists used a drill-like device with a hard stone such as obsidian, which is capable of puncturing bone.
"It's possible some type of [herb based] anesthetic was applied prior to drilling to blunt any pain," Jiménez said.
The ornamental stones - including jade - were attached with an adhesive made out of natural resins, such as plant sap, which was mixed with other chemicals and crushed bones, Jiménez said.
The dentists likely had a sophisticated knowledge of tooth anatomy, Jiménez added. For example, they knew how to drill into teeth without hitting the pulp inside, he said.
"They didn't want to generate an infection or provoke the loss of a tooth or break a tooth."
Skyfarmr
Jedi Master
I'm a bit confused... is the RH Negative blood factor reference related to the "9-repeat allele" found overwhelmingly among native North Americans? 
Is there another thread that might provide some intro to this material?
Your timing of providing this information is uncanny. I was just looking up me and my husbands blood type diet on Dr. D'Adamo's site http://www.dadamo.com/bloodtype_O.htm last night after reading a post on the forum; I'm A+ and he's B+ and the profile, dietary suggestions and personality profiles were remarkably accurate. Although we haven't been following the suggestions as of late, we were for the most part before marrying 8 yrs ago, and I've been craving my old good habits now that the stress of aging is creeping in. Seems we've melded(married) our "guidelines" to the detriment of our health and well-being; a quick thanks for that...it'll be fun to experiment with that.
Sorry, I digressed a bit. I'll move on.
After reading about diets for our blood types last night, I got to wondering this morning about my sweet son-in-law, Jesus, who's of Mexican descent and morbidly obese, and whether his blood type and diet may have something to do with his inability to control his weight. I've read Weston A Price's observations relating the primitive diet with more robust health; and it does seem that ever since the Spanish and Europeans have arrived and integrated their diet into North and South America there has, unfortunately been an increase in diabetes, and related health issues. There are numerous distasteful stereotypes of both North and South Native Americans which also seem to have arose as a result of these dietary changes.
I'm not sure if this blood type information is relevant to the Science Daily article, but it got my neurons firing and reminded me of Dr. D'Adamo's information of Blood type O; it seems to provide another connection to the theories, as well as providing some very important dietary suggestions for North and South American Indigenous people.
From Dr. D'Adamo site:
I'm new to these subjects and don't know whether Firestone and D'Amado share any common resource material.(?) It would seem so.
The skull in the photo shows ALL the "grills" intact! and the smile art must of been dazzling. Another artifact suggesting a healthy (blood type O?) diet.
Thanks so much for this thread, Laura.
It's great how looking back can help us look forward.
On that note, looking forward to sharing this thread with Jesus.
(Apologies if this info is overlapped from elsewhere...I neglected to do a search, I was in such hurried excitement...gotta cut back on the caffeine.)
Oh, and another question if you would, please... While I'm waiting for Eat Right to be returned to the Public Library, do you know if Rh factor has significance to the blood type diets (ie. in regards to D'Amado's work)? Thanks ;)
Is there another thread that might provide some intro to this material?
Your timing of providing this information is uncanny. I was just looking up me and my husbands blood type diet on Dr. D'Adamo's site http://www.dadamo.com/bloodtype_O.htm last night after reading a post on the forum; I'm A+ and he's B+ and the profile, dietary suggestions and personality profiles were remarkably accurate. Although we haven't been following the suggestions as of late, we were for the most part before marrying 8 yrs ago, and I've been craving my old good habits now that the stress of aging is creeping in. Seems we've melded(married) our "guidelines" to the detriment of our health and well-being; a quick thanks for that...it'll be fun to experiment with that.
Sorry, I digressed a bit. I'll move on.
After reading about diets for our blood types last night, I got to wondering this morning about my sweet son-in-law, Jesus, who's of Mexican descent and morbidly obese, and whether his blood type and diet may have something to do with his inability to control his weight. I've read Weston A Price's observations relating the primitive diet with more robust health; and it does seem that ever since the Spanish and Europeans have arrived and integrated their diet into North and South America there has, unfortunately been an increase in diabetes, and related health issues. There are numerous distasteful stereotypes of both North and South Native Americans which also seem to have arose as a result of these dietary changes.
I'm not sure if this blood type information is relevant to the Science Daily article, but it got my neurons firing and reminded me of Dr. D'Adamo's information of Blood type O; it seems to provide another connection to the theories, as well as providing some very important dietary suggestions for North and South American Indigenous people.
From Dr. D'Adamo site:
I'm new to these subjects and don't know whether Firestone and D'Amado share any common resource material.(?) It would seem so.
The skull in the photo shows ALL the "grills" intact! and the smile art must of been dazzling. Another artifact suggesting a healthy (blood type O?) diet.
Thanks so much for this thread, Laura.
It's great how looking back can help us look forward.
On that note, looking forward to sharing this thread with Jesus.
(Apologies if this info is overlapped from elsewhere...I neglected to do a search, I was in such hurried excitement...gotta cut back on the caffeine.)
Oh, and another question if you would, please... While I'm waiting for Eat Right to be returned to the Public Library, do you know if Rh factor has significance to the blood type diets (ie. in regards to D'Amado's work)? Thanks ;)
From FB group for O Negatives:
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21303229657
The goal of this group pretend to be a place to all people who share the O-negative blood type, so that any person in need can quickly find geographically closest person to be transfused with blood that is safe for him or her, in case an emergency or accident.
It is know the most common blood type is O positive (O+) and the rarest is AB negative (AB-), but just the 6.6% of the world population has O negative (O-) and 0.6% of the population has AB negative (AB-). However, AB- is compatible with O-, A-, and AB- while O- is only compatible with the same blood type.
Additionally, only 7% of the people in the world have the RH negative (-) factor. If you are a woman with RH-, you should become an active member of this group.
There are some shocking characteristics of the people with this genetic code. Nearly 85% of all human beings have RH positive blood. Their red blood cells contain a substance called the RHesus blood factor. This means the positive blood contains a protein that can be traced to the Rhesus monkey. It is acknowledged that blood factors are transmitted with more exactitude than any other human or animal characteristic. While it is known that RH negative blood - (type 'O') is the purest blood known to mankind, it is not known from where the negative factor originates, RH negative factor that makes the blood 'pure'. Pure enough to be the universal blood of the world.
Everyone on the face of the earth can receive RH negative type 'O' blood, but these very same 'O' negative people cannot receive blood from any other type except their own type. An RH negative pregnant mother's body will reject her positive blooded baby in the womb. Her body fights the RHesus factor as a foreign element. A positive mother's body does not fight the negative baby she is carrying however.
Science at this very time is attempting to make the recipe for RH negative 'O' blood, but without success. The protein in positive blood can be cloned, but not so of the negative blood - which is quite interesting. If the RH negative factor does not derive from any known earthly link - from where did it originate? Just for think...
One last recommendation, if you are RH negative (RH-), you should strongly consider becoming a blood donor. Whenever an RH negative patient needs blood, it's harder to find compatible blood for him because there are fewer RH negative donors than RH positive donors. RH negative patients can receive only RH negative blood, but RH positive patients can receive either RH positive or RH negative blood.
http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=21303229657
The goal of this group pretend to be a place to all people who share the O-negative blood type, so that any person in need can quickly find geographically closest person to be transfused with blood that is safe for him or her, in case an emergency or accident.
It is know the most common blood type is O positive (O+) and the rarest is AB negative (AB-), but just the 6.6% of the world population has O negative (O-) and 0.6% of the population has AB negative (AB-). However, AB- is compatible with O-, A-, and AB- while O- is only compatible with the same blood type.
Additionally, only 7% of the people in the world have the RH negative (-) factor. If you are a woman with RH-, you should become an active member of this group.
There are some shocking characteristics of the people with this genetic code. Nearly 85% of all human beings have RH positive blood. Their red blood cells contain a substance called the RHesus blood factor. This means the positive blood contains a protein that can be traced to the Rhesus monkey. It is acknowledged that blood factors are transmitted with more exactitude than any other human or animal characteristic. While it is known that RH negative blood - (type 'O') is the purest blood known to mankind, it is not known from where the negative factor originates, RH negative factor that makes the blood 'pure'. Pure enough to be the universal blood of the world.
Everyone on the face of the earth can receive RH negative type 'O' blood, but these very same 'O' negative people cannot receive blood from any other type except their own type. An RH negative pregnant mother's body will reject her positive blooded baby in the womb. Her body fights the RHesus factor as a foreign element. A positive mother's body does not fight the negative baby she is carrying however.
Science at this very time is attempting to make the recipe for RH negative 'O' blood, but without success. The protein in positive blood can be cloned, but not so of the negative blood - which is quite interesting. If the RH negative factor does not derive from any known earthly link - from where did it originate? Just for think...
One last recommendation, if you are RH negative (RH-), you should strongly consider becoming a blood donor. Whenever an RH negative patient needs blood, it's harder to find compatible blood for him because there are fewer RH negative donors than RH positive donors. RH negative patients can receive only RH negative blood, but RH positive patients can receive either RH positive or RH negative blood.
I'm glad this came up because it reminds what my grandmother, who is O-, told me about her offspring recently.
My father was her eldest, followed by an aunt - no physical complications. But every child born after that required 'exchanges' where, apparently, the entire blood supply of the newly-born is exchanged for... another blood type? Rhesus+ blood? I'm unsure. And she didn't seem to know herself! It sounded ludicrous hearing about it for the first time. How can a one-off transfusion just switch a person's blood type like that? Surely the body continues to produce blood according to its genetics?
Anyway, from what I've seen so far, yes, this was common practice for dealing with Rh+ children born to Rh- mothers until the 1960s and 70s.
Child number 3 developed life-long psychological problems and physical ailments, number 4 developed hydrocephalus at birth (after undergoing numerous "exchanges"), number 5 was severely mentally handicapped and number 6 died soon after birth.
My father was her eldest, followed by an aunt - no physical complications. But every child born after that required 'exchanges' where, apparently, the entire blood supply of the newly-born is exchanged for... another blood type? Rhesus+ blood? I'm unsure. And she didn't seem to know herself! It sounded ludicrous hearing about it for the first time. How can a one-off transfusion just switch a person's blood type like that? Surely the body continues to produce blood according to its genetics?
Anyway, from what I've seen so far, yes, this was common practice for dealing with Rh+ children born to Rh- mothers until the 1960s and 70s.
Child number 3 developed life-long psychological problems and physical ailments, number 4 developed hydrocephalus at birth (after undergoing numerous "exchanges"), number 5 was severely mentally handicapped and number 6 died soon after birth.
My son is O- (only found out about 18 months ago), the irony is that according to the Australian blood bank rules, we can't give blood as we were all in England for 6 months plus from 1984, and many times after that, I'm not sure if that was because of AIDS or Mad Cow disease or whatever, but we were excluded.
We never botherd to even try to donate after that, but I may just contact them and see if that has been changed in the last two years, unless any Aussie members have more recent information.
Many thanks
We never botherd to even try to donate after that, but I may just contact them and see if that has been changed in the last two years, unless any Aussie members have more recent information.
Many thanks
Guardian said:
I'm curious to know as well Guardian.
I'm O- too.
brainwave
Jedi Master
Kniall said:
RH disease is very common if the fetus is positive and the mother is negative. Usually it is not as problematic with the first child because there are no antibodies yet. The antibodies created against the RH+ fetus late in the first pregnancy becomes problematic in any subsequent pregnancy. This certainly fits the description of your grandmother and her kids.
A few studies have shown a link between RH incompatibility issues during pregnancy and bi-polar/schizophrenia spectrum disorders. This was the problem for my sister that follows me. I'm the first, but then with my sister after me who is RH positive. Out of the 5 of us children, 2 are positive. My mom was very ill throughout the pregnancy with sister after a previous miscarriage. They both had to get transfusions during delivery. My sister was born blue for lack of oxygen and I think it set the brain developmental trajectory that led to her being diagnosed with bipolar/schizo affective disorder at age 22.
Rhogam injections are supposed to take care of RH incompatibility these days. After my own miscarriage, I've had the injection back when I didn't know enough about anything to question or look deeper.
Brainwave
EmeraldHope
The Living Force
Laura said:
I may be way out in left field here, and I have thought about this a lot as I am an O Neg, but isn't it curious that that 6.6 of the population has O negative blood and 7 percent total have negative blood, and those numbers are very close to the the 6 percent for psychopaths?
I used to think maybe the negs were the anecdote, lol.
( Of course, that could just be convoluted thinking trying to assign this as the reason why psychopaths are attracted to me like a magnet, lol)
