Page 1 of 1

Hysterectomies

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2003 1:57 pm
by Tanya Marquette
This excerpt is from a lengthy 2 part report, Death by Medicine, found on John Mercola's web page.
Since we were discussing women's health and the negative aspects of allopathic gyn care, I thought people
would be interested in this.

tanya

WOMEN'S EXPERIENCE IN MEDICINE
Briefly, we will look at the medical iatrogenesis of women in particular. Dr. Martin Charcot (1825-1893) was world-renowned, the most celebrated doctor of his time. He practiced in the Paris hospital La Salpetriere. He became an expert in hysteria diagnosing an average of 10 hysterical women each day, transforming them into . "iatrogenic monsters," turning simple 'neurosis' into hysteria.96 The number of women diagnosed with hysteria and hospitalized rose from one percent in 1841 to 17 percent in 1883.
Hysteria is derived from the Latin "hystera," meaning uterus. Dr. Adriane Fugh-Berman stated very clearly in her paper that there is a tradition in U.S. medicine of excessive medical and surgical interventions on women. Only 100 years ago male doctors decided that female psychological imbalance originated in the uterus. When surgery to remove the uterus was perfected it became the "cure" for mental instability, effecting a physical and psychological castration. Dr. Fugh-Berman noted that U.S. doctors eventually disabused themselves of that notion but have continued to treat women very differently than they treat men.97 She cites the following:
a.. Thousands of prophylactic mastectomies are performed annually.
b.. One-third of U.S. women have had a hysterectomy before menopause.
c.. Women are prescribed drugs more frequently than are men.
d.. Women are given potent drugs for disease prevention, which results in disease substitution due to side effects.
e.. Fetal monitoring is unsupported by studies and not recommended by the CDC.98 It confines women to a hospital bed and may result in higher incidence of cesarean section.99
f.. Normal processes such as menopause and childbirth have been heavily medicalized.
g.. Synthetic hormone replacement therapy (HRT) does not prevent heart disease or dementia. It does increase the risk of breast cancer, heart disease, stroke, and gall bladder attack.100

We would add that as many as one-third of postmenopausal women use HRT.101,102 These numbers are important in light of the much-publicized Women's Health Initiative Study, which was forced to stop before its completion because of a higher death rate in the synthetic estrogen-progestin (HRT) group.103
Cesarean Section
In 1983, 809,000 cesarean sections (21 percent of live births) were performed, making it the most common obstetric and gynecologic (OB/GYN) surgical procedure. The second most common OB/GYN operation was hysterectomy (673,000), and diagnostic dilation and curettage of the uterus (632,000) was third. In 1983, OB/GYN operations represented 23 percent of all surgery completed in this country.104
In 2001, Cesarean section is still the most common OB/GYN surgical procedure. Approximately 4 million births occur annually, with a 24 percent C-Section rate, i.e., 960,000 operations. In the Netherlands only eight percent of babies are delivered by Cesarean section. Assuming human babies are similar in the United States and in the Netherlands, we are performing 640,000 unnecessary C-Sections in the United States with its three to four times higher mortality and 20 times greater morbidity than vaginal delivery.105
The cesarean section rate was only 4.5 percent in the United States in 1965. By 1986 it had climbed to 24.1 percent. The author states that obviously an "uncontrolled pandemic of medically unnecessary cesarean births is occurring."106 VanHam reported a cesarean section postpartum hemorrhage rate of seven percent, a hematoma formation rate of 3.5 percent, a urinary tract infection rate of three percent, and a combined postoperative morbidity rate of 35.7 percent in a high-risk population undergoing cesarean section.107
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Re: Hysterectomies

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:06 pm
by Laura Peterson
Hi Tanya,
I am not disputing that cesarean sections may be overused but...
Did Dr Mercola state what the childbirth mortality rates for the moms
were at these two separate times?
Originally it was supposed to decrease that and damage to the infant from
prolonged or traumatic delivery.
Laura Peterson

________________________________________________________________
The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit www.juno.com to sign up today!

Re: Hysterectomies

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:36 pm
by Anton Smith
Thanks Tanya, you're a star!

Anton.

Re: Hysterectomies

Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2003 9:53 pm
by Tanya Marquette
the paper i referenced was written by the following people: Gary Null PhD, Carolyn Dean MD ND, Martin Feldman MD, Debora Rasio MD, Dorothy Smith PhD.

the answer to your question is no, they did not review any benefits from cesaerian sections. the larger focus of the article was the increasingly higher number of deaths due to medical malfeasance in various forms. i just copied out this one section on women. there is no doubt that some people survive because of allopathic interference, but the evidence is high that successive health is full of problems from the treatment. there is another article i came across that focuses on death from allopathic care in england and other one that states that 1:5 people are dying from such causes.

tanya

Re: Hysterectomies

Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 1:10 am
by Patricia Hatherly
Dear Laura

A C-section is a necessary life-saving event for mother or child, or both,
in about 12% of births [WHO figures].

Unfortunately the steady increase is as much a reflection on our litiginous
society as anything else, as research still indicates that vaginal birth is
better for both mother and baby in most instances even if the labour is a
long one. Babies born vaginally have fewer respiratory problems is one of
the benefits of vaginal birth.

Harry van der Zee's book Miasm in Labour has a novel view on this from a
homoeopathic perspective.
I'm not entirely in agreement with his total perspective as I see the
process of labour (successfully encountered) as an opportunity for Psora to
be "switched on" at the top rather than the bottom end. The baby learns a
valuable lesson in "I can do it by myself; and on crawling to attach to the
breast, knows the value of...if I struggle I will succeed!"

In Australia the C-section rate is VERY high especially in Qld where I live
and part of that trend is insistance that it be a viable birth choice among
some women who don't want the experience of labour. I think it may be a
similar trend in the UK also as I read a report recently that the funding
for C-sections in the UK is under review.

So, it would appear that women, themselves, are, in some instances, part of
the problem; it's a free choice society but mostly it is driven by fear.

regards
Patricia Hatherly

Re: Hysterectomies

Posted: Sun Nov 30, 2003 7:20 am
by J.VENKATASUBRAMANIAN
The Indian Caesarian section growth rate is alarming. though I do
not have statistics, what I see and hear are enough proof.

The greed of private maternity homes are a direct cause. The parents
and husbands fall easy prey to the high sounding languages with the
implied life threat. In some cases when the gynaec has predicted it
would be caesar, the parents decide the auspicious time for the baby
to be taken out.

Surprisingly, almost few or no caesar is performed in government
hospitals where the treatment is free. Intriguing.

Venkat