Childbirth Joy Prenatal Workshops

11/22/2025

Routine induction of labour results in a higher incidence of caesarean delivery.

Labor induction was associated with an increased aOR for cesarean delivery both before and after the ARRIVE trial. A decreased aOR for cesarean delivery was observed during the period of statewide efforts to safely reduce cesarean delivery both with and without labor induction.

11/20/2025

Updated CDC website.

Note that the research to determine the safety of vaccines has never been done.

In the meantime, parents have been massively gaslit when noting an advert event in a child.

"Vaccines do not cause Autism*

Pursuant to the Data Quality Act (DQA), which requires federal agencies to ensure the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information they disseminate to the public, this webpage has been updated because the statement "Vaccines do not cause autism" is not an evidence-based claim.

Scientific studies have not ruled out the possibility that infant vaccines contribute to the development of autism.

However, this statement has historically been disseminated by the CDC and other federal health agencies within HHS to prevent vaccine hesitancy."

"Approximately one in two surveyed parents of autistic children believe vaccines played a role in their child's autism, often pointing to the vaccines their child received in the first six months of life (Diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis (DTaP), Hepatitis B (HepB), Haemophilus influenzae type B (Hib), Poliovirus, inactivated (IPV), and Pneumococcal conjugate (PCV)) and one given at or after the first year of life (Measles, mumps, rubella (MMR)).

This connection has not been properly and thoroughly studied by the scientific community."

"The rise in autism prevalence since the 1980s correlates with the rise in the number of vaccines given to infants.

Though the cause of autism is likely to be multi-factorial, the scientific foundation to rule out one potential contributor entirely has not been established.

For example, one study found that aluminum adjuvants in vaccines had the highest statistical correlation with the rise in autism prevalence among numerous suspected environmental causes.

Correlation does not prove causation, but it does merit further study."

https://www.cdc.gov/vaccine-safety/about/autism.html

11/20/2025

The CDC in the US just updated their website on this topic.

When vaccines are mandated for children, the burden of proof is on the vaccine manufacturers to prove safety.

Given there has been zero legal liability for the manufacturers since 1986, they don't bother with placebo-controlled double-blind studies. There are NO safety studies.

In a stunning shift, the CDC now says its own “vaccines don’t cause autism” claim was not evidence-based.

11/20/2025

From X:

"At typical community water fluoridation levels (0.7 mg/L), a large and growing body of studies—especially the high-quality Canadian and Mexican birth-cohort studies plus the 2024–2025 U.S. National Toxicology Program review—consistently find small but statistically significant drops in children’s IQ (roughly 2–7 points) linked to prenatal and early-life fluoride exposure.

These effects appear in populations drinking fluoridated water when total intake (water + food + toothpaste) is measured via urinary fluoride, and the dose-response curves often show no clear safe threshold, with harm starting as low as 0.5–1.0 mg/L in water.

While these are observational studies and causation is not 100% proven, the consistency across dozens of papers has led respected researchers (Grandjean, Lanphear, Till, Bashash, etc.) and the NTP itself to conclude that fluoride is a plausible developmental neurotoxicant at levels once considered completely safe.

In short: the evidence is strong enough that “absolutely no risk to brain development at 0.7 mg/L” is no longer a defensible statement in 2025."

https://x.com/PowMan33/status/1991260939052806356

11/20/2025

"Many are surprised to learn that unlike the pharmaceutical grade fluoride in their toothpaste, the fluoride in their water is an untreated industrial waste product, one that contains trace elements of arsenic and lead.

Without the phosphate industry’s effluent, water fluoridation would be prohibitively expensive.

And without fluoridation, the phosphate industry would be stuck with an expensive waste disposal problem."

While Florida calls itself the Sunshine State, from a geological and economic perspective, it could just as accurately be known as the Phosphate State.The so-called Bone Valley of central Florida contains some of the largest phosphate deposits in the world, which supply global agriculture with one o...

11/19/2025

I generally stay away from terms like "catastrophic" or "non-catastrophic" uterine rupture because people use them to mean different things.

Medical research can use catastrophic rupture to describe a uterine rupture that results in a fetal demise. This is typically how physicians and midwives use the term.

But I see parents using catastrophic rupture to describe a “real" uterine rupture, in comparison to a uterine dehiscence.

But let's back up... a uterine rupture is a full thickness opening of the uterine wall. They can result in fetal demise about 6% of the time or be completely harmless.

I think of the OB I know who, during an elective cesarean, saw a 4cm uterine rupture. It wasn't bleeding, baby was completely fine, heart tones were normal. Just a 4cm opening sitting there.

So what is a uterine dehiscence? That is where the inner layer of the uterus opens, but the outer layer - the serosa - stays intact. It can also be called a "uterine window" or "incomplete uterine rupture." They are typically asymptomatic, benign, and often go undiagnosed at birth unless someone has a cesarean.

Sometimes women with dehiscences are told they had a uterine rupture... which makes it all even more confusing and frightening.

These varied definitions and overlapping language about uterine rupture makes conversations about "catastrophic" uterine rupture, or even "real" uterine rupture, difficult because people are talking about very different events and outcomes.

So call it what it is: a uterine dehiscence or uterine rupture that resulted in ________ so we are all on the same page... especially when talking to birthing people. Clear, unambiguous language is important.

If you want to learn the facts so you can maximize your VBAC odds, check out our online signature VBAC prep course, “The Truth About VBAC™ for Families:”
https://vbacfacts.com/tav

If you are a perinatal professional who wants to easily integrate the evidence into your practice so you can increase VBAC access in your community, our professional membership is for you: https://vbacfacts.com/membership.

Link in bio

11/18/2025

11/18/2025

It's very common that women are pressured heavily to start labour before the due date.

While there are medical conditions that labour induction is an excellent choice, actual informed choice discussion is rare.

11/18/2025

Another paper from Abi Wheeler's soon to be submitted PhD looking at how, amongst women scoring high for birth trauma symptoms, breastfeeding experience really matters.

For women who wanted to breastfeed, being able to helped ease their experiences of birth trauma, whereas when breastfeeding difficulties arose, this could exacerbate birth trauma.

Lots of women experienced pressure to give formula, particularly if milk supply was taking time (which can happen after a difficult birth). The study is likely weighted towards those who wanted to breastfeed, but it again highlights the importance of asking women about their breastfeeding / feeding goals and working with them to meet those, rather than always trying to solve breastfeeding complications with formula

Full paper here: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0266613825003845