Parenting / incarnation process

Mrs.Tigersoap said:
- Why do many women who have breastfed for a long time report that their babies have strong immune systems when they 'should' have transmitted mercury and other chemicals to their child in larger amounts because than mothers who haven't?
Just a thought, but could it not be both? I mean maybe breast milk has a good formula to enhance immune system while simultaneously adding toxins to the body? The immune system by itself may not be enough to detoxify the body, so you could perhaps end up with a person with a strong immune system but also with all kinds of toxins, fwiw.
 
Just a thought, but could it not be both? I mean maybe breast milk has a good formula to enhance immune system while simultaneously adding toxins to the body? The immune system by itself may not be enough to detoxify the body, so you could perhaps end up with a person with a strong immune system but also with all kinds of toxins, fwiw.

That is my current theory. And again, there is a wide spectrum here. Certainly, some breast milk could actually be 'poison' as is the case with Inuit women in the high arctic in certain locales. That might be the far end of the spectrum, but it doesn't appear to be generally the case. There are quite a few studies that have measured toxins in breast milk and what was generally found was that they didn't exceed overall levels that we allow in the food supply at large. So in most cases the added benefits of immune system stimulation and maturation largely offset the added toxins. And the reality is that even if we limit the toxins in breast milk by early weaning we live in a toxic environment, so now baby still gets the toxins to a large extent but without the added offsetting factors in the breast milk. That's my current working hypothesis. That said, some women's milk may have critical toxin loads and that is largely dependent on diet. Which will also have an effect in utero, obviously. So then it becomes hard to tease apart where exactly the potential damage arose. For instance, what about amalgam fillings, what is the effect in utero? Some women shouldn't be breeding at all. At least not before their own health is in order.

Which brings me to a few more questions for the C's,

How reliable is the work done by Dr. Weston Price on maternal and infant nutrition?

Does facial deformity, maloclusion, and general narrowing of the sinus cavities also effect brain development as he postulated?

Are the fat soluble vitamins particularly important for brain development as well as immune function? Is an obvious sign of their deficiency facial bone deformation?

Has there been a concerted effort by the PTB to reduce the availability of nutrients that increase brain development and thereby make leaps in consciousness more difficult and retard evolution of our species?

Since domesticated plants have far less vitamins and minerals than their wild cousins was agriculture created by design to assist in the degeneration of the human species?

Since consumption of grains blocks uptake of many trace minerals and some vitamins was this also engineered to induce very specific deficiencies leading to decreased cognitive function?

Is our diet being manipulated to further domesticate us?

Since we have been able learn that nutritional status in utero has epigenetic consequences what is the result in terms of consciousness of these rampant deficiencies? Is it as Price suggests the degeneration of our species physically but even more importantly mentally?

If these fat soluble vitamins, which are found almost exclusively in animal fat, are essential to fetal development what is the result of our Western Diet on fetal development?

Since the infant's one true source of said nutrients is primarily breast milk, what is the result of early weaning?
 
We'll probably be doing this session soon so I would appreciate a doc with all the data and questions sent to me. Thanks.
 
SAO said:
Just a thought, but could it not be both? I mean maybe breast milk has a good formula to enhance immune system while simultaneously adding toxins to the body? The immune system by itself may not be enough to detoxify the body, so you could perhaps end up with a person with a strong immune system but also with all kinds of toxins, fwiw.

I agree, I just don't understand the dynamics involved: since a child's growing tissue is much more sensitive to toxins and their system is less able to break them down and repair damages made by them, surely it would quickly show in a toddler that his system is overflowed with toxins? Can this delicate balance (strong immune system/high toxin levels) really be maintained for years? At the slightest drop in immunity level (which must happen often with the environment we live in), wouldn't toxins 'take over', making the child quite sick quite often? And yet it is the opposite we generally observe.
 
This is all very interesting to me and the wife and we are observing very closely with Storm. Change in our diets etc is very important more so for the mother as Storm is being breastfed.

He was born into a birthing pool , which all in all after mother going into labour took about three hours , and had nothing entered into his body on birth , no vitamin K . nothing.

At 8 weeks the only problem we are observing is that he finds it very irritating / painful to excrete , so we are looking into ways to make this better for him. Any suggestions on this would be much appreciated.
 
Greetings,
My mother was a nutritionist and when I was born, but it wasn't "fashionable" to breastfeed, so I wasn't. Interestingly enough, I developed allergies to seafood, especially conch & lobster which my culture eats a lot of. My Mother's theory was I didn't receive the protections given by breast milk. Subsequently, my 2 younger brothers were and are physically healthier than myself.

She brought us up on diets made up of the majority of local fruits and vegetables, mutton, rabbit, seafood. She also thought that because my immune system didn't receive certain chemicals due to the lack of breast milk made me susceptible to autoimmune dis-ease, in my case a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis.
 
1peacelover said:
She also thought that because my immune system didn't receive certain chemicals due to the lack of breast milk made me susceptible to autoimmune dis-ease, in my case a diagnosis of rheumatoid arthritis.

I have severe rheumatoid arthritis and I was breastfed for a year.
 
Thanks for sharing. That's a thought. I never considered that angle. She felt it made me susceptible to it. Plus my system was out of balance due to food and environmental allergies. Things like bananas, citrus, pineapple, nuts, fish, tomatoes, asparagus, etc. So she felt that many of those combinations contributed to the diagnosis and also at the time not being able to find substitutes for those items that I couldn't consume.

Living most of my adult life in and out of hospitals and rehab centers and being involved in many types of experiments over the years, I have come to believe that everyone has triggers for autoimmune issues, however our bodies react differently based on what is/was going on at the time.

However, what triggered my attack on myself was psychological trauma and abuse my father and trying to protect others from him. The other thing is we all react differently to stress, however back then as a child all one could do is survive by your wits not realizing that internal damage was being done.
 
From what I have read about autoimmune diseases, stress, particularly emotional stress, has a profound effect on the immune system and autoimmune diseases are often precipitated by some sort of trauma. Also, breastfeeding for a year while offering quite a bit of in the way of protection from bacterial and viral agents that is long lasting, such as the the studies on ear infections, the maturation of the thalamus etc, extended breastfeeding may have more to do with preventing autoimmune responses, such as allergies, asthma, rheumatoid arthritis, certain types of hypothyroidism, fibromyalgia ect. Of course, auto immune disease is a very complex issue to be sure and there are many factors to consider. Just curious..how long were your brothers breastfed?

anyway a few more questions

What is the cause of SIDS?

Do human infants progress in their perception of reality a long the same lines as I understand the levels of density to represent, until they mature and perceive at a 3rd density level?

If someone can help me with this question to phrase it better that would be great? I'll try to get a better handle on it too.
 
Another factor that has a significant role in autoimmune diseases is heavy metal toxicity. Stephen Edelson, in "What your Doctor May Not Tell You About Autoimmune Disorders" says that up to 40 million Americans suffer from autoimmune disease. Of that number, about 75% are women, making it the fourth largest cause of disability in women. Other stats say that autoimmune disease is one of the top 10 leading causes of death in female children and women in all age groups up to 64 years of age. Researchers have identified 80-100 different autoimmune diseases and suspect at least 40 additional diseases of having an autoimmune basis. It is quite scary to see how autoimmune diseases are on the rise.
 
Of that number, about 75% are women, making it the fourth largest cause of disability in women. Other stats say that autoimmune disease is one of the top 10 leading causes of death in female children and women in all age groups up to 64 years of age.

I have often wondered about that. Why women do you think? Something else is obviously going on here.
 
another couple of questions..


Does sleeping with young children offer any sort of psychic protection?

What is the cause of night terrors? We are told they are developmental and they do seem to start at about 2 years of age and have
distinctive flavor that is different than regular nightmares, often accompanied by dissociation, confusion and paranoia even once awake. They also
frequently contain monsters of various forms, are these purely psychological dramas? What causes this?

Also what is the effect of EMF? How careful should we be about this?

What is the effect of cell phone use during pregnancy? Early childhood?


Since we are at it, Why are so many women and female children affected with autoimmune disorders?

Here's one that is slightly off topic but..

Is the surge in cancer rates we have seen in the last 100 years primarily related to EMF? Or is it dietary? Or is it due to other environmental toxins?
 
These are interesting questions we could add to the document for the session, but there is also some research available. I can recall some info of cell phone effects in pregnancy. FWIW:

http://www.health-matrix.net/blog/health-education/87-cell-phone-hazards

A study published in the May 7 issue 2008 of Epidemiology, revealed that children who were exposed prenatally and postnatally to cell phone use were 80 percent more likely to have behavioral problems. The researchers also found children whose mothers used cell phones during pregnancy were 25 percent more likely to have emotional problems, 34 percent more likely to have difficulties relating to their peers, 35 percent more likely to be hyperactive and 49 percent more likely to have conduct problems. The risk of developing behavioral and emotional problems was higher if children themselves used cell phones before the age of seven. The study of more than 13,000 children showed that using the handsets just two or three times a day was enough to raise the risk of hyperactivity and difficulties with conduct, emotions and relationship in the children by the time they reached school age.

More info here:

http://foodconsumer.org/7777/8888/M_edicare_54/052111352008_Cell_phone_use_during_pregnancy_may_cause_behavioral_problems_in_children.shtml

Prenatal and postnatal use of cell phones may affect children’s brain causing behavioral problems in the children, according to a new study published in the May 7 issue of Epidemiology.

The study found women who used cell phone while pregnant were more likely to give birth to children with behavioral problems. The risk of developing behavioral and emotional problems is higher if children themselves used cell phones before the age of seven.

The study of more than 13,000 children showed that using the handsets just two or three times a day was enough to raise the risk of hyperactivity and difficulties with conduct, emotions and relationship in the children by the time they researched school age.

Media reports that the official Russian radiation watchdog body known as The Russian National Committee on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection warned against both pregnant women and children using cell phone and claimed that the risk cell phones poses is not much lower than the risk to children's health from tobacco or alcohol.

The study was conducted by researchers from UCLA School of Public Health and Institute of Public Health University of Aarhus in Aarhus, Denmark.

But what makes the study particularly significant, according to a UK newspaper Independent, is that one of the authors has been skeptical that cell phones pose a risk to health.

Dr. Leeka Kheifets, a UCLA professor, serves on a key committee of the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection, which sets the guidelines for exposure to cell phones or mobile phones, according to the Independent.

Kheifets reportedly wrote three and a half years ago that studies on cell phone users "to date give no consistent evidence of a causal relationship between exposure to radiofrequency fields and any adverse health effect" as cited by the Independent.

For the study, the researchers followed 13,000 mothers who were recruited to the Danish National Birth Cohort early in pregnancy and whose children reached 7 years of age in 2005 and 2006. The mothers were surveyed for the health and behavioral status of their children and exposure to cell phone use during and after their pregnancies.

After adjustment for potential confounders, they found those children who were exposed prenatally and postnatally to cell phone use were 80 percent more likely to have behavioral problems.

Compared to children whose mothers who did not use cell phone, the risk for children whose mothers used cell phones during pregnancy was 54 percent higher and the risk increased with the amount of potential exposure to the radiation.

The researchers also found children whose mothers used cell phones during pregnancy were 25 percent more likely to have emotional problems, 34 percent more likely to have difficulties relating to their peers, 35 percent more likely to be hyperactive and 49 percent more likely to have conduct problems, the Independent reports.

They concluded "Exposure to cell phones prenatally-and, to a lesser degree, postnatally-was associated with behavioral difficulties such as emotional and hyperactivity problems around the age of school entry. These associations may be noncausal and may be due to unmeasured confounding. If real, they would be of public health concern given the widespread use of this technology."

While this study was not meant to reveal any causal relationship between prenatal use of cell phones and increased risk of children's behavioral problems, some experts tend to believe that the effect of the cell phones on children's health is real.

Dr. Sam Milham from the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York and the University of Washington School of Public Health, one pioneer of research in this field, was cited by the Independent as saying last week that he trusted that the results were real.

According to Dr. Milham, cited again by the newspaper, recent Canadian research on pregnant rats showed exposure to similar radiation resulted in structural changes in their offspring's brains.

Source:

Epidemiology. 2008 May 7.
Prenatal and Postnatal Exposure to Cell Phone Use and Behavioral Problems in Children.
Divan HA, Kheifets L, Obel C, Olsen J.
From the a Department of Epidemiology, UCLA School of Public Health, University of California, Los Angeles, CA; and bInstitute of Public Health, Department of General Practice, University of Aarhus, Aarhus, Denmark.
 
Kila
Just curious..how long were your brothers breastfed?
My brothers were breastfeed for 8 months, however my Mother provided them with her breast milk until they were about a year old. Even though my brothers are physically healthier than myself, they were also traumatized by our father and they show signs of emotional & mental instability at times.

My brother 4 years my Junior was the subject of severe beatings from our father which I tried to intervene when I could. My brother 12 years my Junior was fought over from the time he was born. Before his birth, our father pushed our mother down a concrete driveway in order that she would miscarry. Our Mother died of cancer/a broken heart/stress when he was 10 and he was forced to live with our father for 2 years before he ran away and came to live with me. During that time he was physically, emotionally, spiritually and mentally abused, and threatened about thinking or crying for our Mother. However, by the time I was responsible for his care our father he was a different child/person. A bit off topic. Sorry.
 
My brother 4 years my Junior was the subject of severe beatings from our father which I tried to intervene when I could. My brother 12 years my Junior was fought over from the time he was born. Before his birth, our father pushed our mother down a concrete driveway in order that she would miscarry. Our Mother died of cancer/a broken heart/stress when he was 10 and he was forced to live with our father for 2 years before he ran away and came to live with me. During that time he was physically, emotionally, spiritually and mentally abused, and threatened about thinking or crying for our Mother. However, by the time I was responsible for his care our father he was a different child/person. A bit off topic. Sorry.

So tragic.. If it's possible you might try to point them to some of the stuff on Narcissism. Particularly the Narcissistic Family. I have bought that book about ten times now and sent it to friends and family. Sometimes just knowing that it wasn't your fault. That the abuse didn't occur because of some inherent weakness or wrongness helps the victim to reframe it. So often the abusive parent really makes the child feel that the abuse was their own fault, that it helps to see that really it was something inherently wrong with the parent and they were not to blame.
 

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom