Induction At Birth, Pitocin and Autism: The Wrong Question Again Revealed
Posted Aug 01 2013 12:00am
By Teresa Conrick
It's in the news again. Yet another study that shows a supposed cause to a future diagnosis of autism. This time -- Induction and Augmentation -- I actually looked them both up to clarify what that meant ".... When labor does not naturally start on its own and vaginal delivery needs to happen soon, labor may be started artificially (induced).....
Even though inducing labor is a fairly common practice, childbirth educators encourage women to learn about it and about the medicine for stimulating a stalled labor (augmentation) so that the women can help decide what is right for them.....
Oxytocin (Pitocin) can be given through a vein (intravenously) in small amounts to ripen the cervix. But it usually is given after the cervix softens, to cause the uterus to contract. Labor that is induced by oxytocin usually starts off harder and progresses faster than labor that starts on its own, especially in first-time mothers. If oxytocin does not induce labor or if the baby's heart rate indicates distress, a cesarean delivery (C-section) may be needed."
"Having labor that is induced or augmented may lead to a greater chance of having a child with autism, new research reveals.....Researchers looked at data from the North Carolina Detailed Birth Record and Education Research databases, which included 625,042 live births linked with school records. Of the group, 5,500 children had been diagnosed with autism.....Overall, the researchers estimated two out of every 1,000 autism cases in boys could potentially be prevented by not inducing or augmenting labor....C-sections did not affect the rate of autism. "
"One in 88 children in the United States is diagnosed as having autism spectrum disorder. Significant interest centers on understanding the environmental factors that may contribute to autism risk.....Compared with children born to mothers who received neither labor induction nor augmentation, children born to mothers who were induced and augmented, induced only, or augmented only experienced increased odds of autism....Our work suggests that induction/augmentation during childbirth is associated with increased odds of autism diagnosis in childhood. While these results are interesting, further investigation is needed to differentiate among potential explanations....."
Potential explanations is an important point. Let's actually look at 3 points that need to be addressed 1. Wash, Rinse, Repeat, Regurgitate, Repeat, Regurgitate
We are continuously told in revolving and rerun studies so many conflicting things. From the new above study - "C-sections did not affect the rate of autism,"
Season of birth actually has had loads of wrong way turns - "Children conceived in December (OR = 1.09 [95% CI = 1.02 – 1.17]), January (1.08 [1.00 –1.17]), February (1.12 [1.04– 1.20]), or March (1.16 [1.08 – 1.24]) had higher risk of developing autism compared with those conceived in July. Conception in the winter season (December, January, and February) was associated with a 6% (OR = 1.06, 95% CI = 1.02 – 1.10) increased risk compared with summer."..
Really? But right above it says ..."NO ASSOCIATION."
No association with head circumference ? " Head circumference appears normal at birth, with a significantly increased rate of HC growth appearing to begin around 12 months of age... Generalized enlargement of gray and white matter cerebral volumes, but not cerebellar volumes, are present at 2 years of age in autism. Indirect evidence suggests that this increased rate of brain growth in autism may have its onset postnatally in the latter part of the first year of life."
And the list keeps getting longer and longer - "The obstetrical complications that have emerged as significant risk factors for autism in the current meta-analysis suggest a possible role of fetal and neonatal hypoxia. In particular, growth retardation, fetal distress, umbilical-cord wrapping around the neck, low Apgar score, respiratory distress, resuscitation, meconium aspiration, and Cesarean delivery"
Ten years ago, this study came out. Same idea - look at Pitocin and inducing pregnancy as a cause to autism. NO association was found yet how many more studies will be done and for what purpose? Are we to keep believing these conflicting reports or instead realize that these can often be detours from true research?
Brief report : pitocin induction in autistic and nonautistic individuals.
"It has been proposed that exposure to high levels of exogenous oxytocin at birth, via pitocin induction of delivery, might increase susceptibility to autism by causing a downregulation of oxytocin receptors in the developing brain. This study examined the rates of labor induction using pitocin in children with autism and matched controls with either typical development or mental retardation.....There were no differences in pitocin induction rates as a function of either diagnostic group (autism vs. control) or IQ level (average vs. subaverage range), failing to support an association between exogenous exposure to oxytocin and neurodevelopmental abnormalities."
3) Deny, Ignore, and Never Mention the BIGGEST Toxic Exposure
How is it possible that this question has never been asked in any of these studies - Did mother receive a flu shot in pregnancy and/or vaccines for the child post-natally? Study after study, looking at pre-natal and post-natal risk factors but not once has anyone added that question as " potential confounders ," such as -- "socioeconomic status, maternal health, pregnancy-related events and conditions, and birth year."
Why not develop a study looking at births in the years, 2002 - 2012, same as this current Pitocin study, looking at "625 042 live births linked with school records, including more than 5500 children with a documented exceptionality designation for autism " but instead of looking at induction at birth, ask about flu vaccines -- pre-natal and/or infant/toddler. It needs to be asked.