There have been rumblings from farmers dealing with the damage caused by herbicide dicamba for quite some time now, and (legal) shots have now been fired. On Monday, a complaint against Monsanto, BASF, and DuPont was filed in Southern Illinois on behalf of Brian Warren, owner of Warren Farms in Broughton, IL. Filed by an attorney from Classaction.com, Rene Rocha, the lawsuit alleges that dicamba was deceptively marketed as “low-volatility”, a claim that the 2,242 farmers currently dealing with crops ruined by the herbicide would dispute.

Related: Monsanto’s Glyphosate, Fatty Liver Disease Link Proven – Published, Peer-reviewed, Scrutinized Study

Dicamba has been touted as a replacement for glyphosate, whose effectiveness is dwindling as glyphosate-resistant, “super weeds” like Palmer amaranth become more common. For a new product launch, companies commission their own tests and share them with regulatory agencies. Conversations with scientists responsible for initial safety tests run by Monsanto have revealed that the company specifically did not allow them to test their new version of dicamba for volatility. The Environmental Protection Agency allowed to company to release the herbicide anyway.

Currently, more than 3 million acres of crops have been damaged by dicamba drift. States with substantial acreage devoted to growing soybeans, like Iowa, are experiencing record numbers of complaints from farmers. According to Scott Partridge, Monsanto’s vice-president of global strategy, as much as three-fourths of the problems occurring with dicamba application are caused by operator error. This actually makes sense.  The insert that accompanies XtendiMax seems more suited for a meteorologist, with instructions like “If fog is not present, inversions can also be identified by the movement of smoke from a ground source or an aircraft smoke generator…” and a chart designed to inform farmers of the ideal wind speed to apply the product during (3 and 10 miles an hour).

Related: Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods

Where is the Recourse?

If your neighbors have applied the product incorrectly (and they likely have: check out these instructions!), you don’t have much recourse. Insurance companies are unlikely to find in your favor, and Monsanto has made it clear where they feel the blame lies. In fact, the damage caused by dicamba is likely to be a good thing for Monsanto. Farmers hoping to avoid a repeat of this year’s devastated crops could end up purchasing dicamba-resistant crops.

So we arrive back at the newly filed lawsuit. Farmers like Brian Warren who sue frequently lose, or spend so much money and time in court with biotech companies that a win ends up costing more than the initial loss. At this point, many farmers will have to write off this year’s crops and make a big decision about next year. They can purchase dicamba-resistant seeds and grow the demand for a product that isn’t safe and doesn’t behave as promised or they can potentially lose their livelihood. What kind of choice is that?

Sources:

• Monsanto Sued for Allegedly Killing Farmers’ Crops – ClassAction.com
• Iowa Farmers Make Record Number of Pesticide Misuse Claims – Des Moines Register
• Farmers Say It’s Nearly Impossible to Follow Monsanto’s Dicamba Directions – Modern Farmer
• PCBs, Roundup, and Dicamba – Monsanto’s Current Problems – Organic Lifestyle Magazine
• Monsanto Prevented Key Independent Testing of Herbicide – St. Louis Post-Dispatch

For the first time in human history, genetically modified (GM) fish has been sold for human consumption.

The seller? AquaBounty Technologies – a company that produces GM AquAdvantage Atlantic salmon.

In their most recent quarterly report, AquaBounty stated that they sold approximately 5 tons of their GM Atlantic salmon fillets. The worst part is that only AquaBounty knows where their genetically modified fish are going. All we know is that the GM fish are in Canada.

“No one except AquaBounty knows where the GM salmon are,” said Lucy Sharratt of the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (CBAN). “The company did not disclose where the GM salmon fillets were sold or for what purpose…”

Related: Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases

Lucy has been trying to get answers from AquaBounty for years. In 2013, she went straight to AquaBounty’s facility in Prince Edward Island, Canada to investigate.

Unfortunately, Lucy and her colleagues were treated like criminals. The only information they could find is that AquaBounty is polluting their local environment.

Organizations like CBAN are essential in keeping the Canadian public informed on genetically modified food because members of the Canadian Parliament voted against mandatory GM food labeling in May.

Related: Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods

But what does this have to do with the United States?

In the United States, GM salmon is approved for human consumption. The only thing that is keeping it from being sold to the US is an import ban that has been put on GM fish until labeling guidelines are published.

At first, this sounds like great news, but what this really means is that GM fish will not be imported into the United States… yet.

Recommended Reading:

• Total Nutrition – Make your own Homemade Multivitamin and Mineral Formula
• How to Detoxify From Antibiotics and Other Chemical Antimicrobials
• What Causes Chronic Inflammation, and How To Stop It For Good

Sources:

• Canadians Are Unknowingly Eating GM Salmon — Natural Blaze
• First genetically engineered salmon sold in Canada — Nature

On March 31, 2017, Del Bigtree was briefly interviewed at the Revolution for Truth Rally in Washington D.C by British Channel 4 News correspondent Cathy Newman.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QHqt8Cz2nLk

Throughout the course of the short clip, Del is questioned about his stance on the measles vaccine, and he quickly inundates his correspondent with facts from the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). According to Bigtree, modern medicine has it completely backward in regards to the measles vaccine. Before the invention of the measles vaccine in 1964, Bigtree states,

According to Bigtree, modern medicine has it completely backward in regards to the measles vaccine. Before the invention of the measles vaccine in 1964, Bigtree states,

…the death rate from measles was .036 per 100,000 people that got measles. No one has died from the measles, and nearly a hundred children have died from the vaccine. The measles vaccine does kill. And measles was not killing anybody based on scientific evidence before the vaccine ever arrived.”

We looked it up, and according to this page on the CDC, it’s even lower, at 0.016% using the highest possible estimate with the numbers given (500 deaths out of three million). She does not understand his data at first, then decides his science is junk, and then as he states again where he’s getting his numbers, she seems to think that he is not understanding his own statistics. He has to state repeatedly that he is quoting the CDC.

In other words, the death rate from measles was less than one person in 300,000 infected, which is a number so small that it’s statistically insignificant. On the other hand, in the past ten years, close to one hundred children have died from complications from the measles vaccine. Del is stating that  this proves the measles vaccine is more deadly than measles ever was.

Related: The MMR Vaccine: A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness

About Del Bigtree

For those that know Del’s previous work, this stance is hardly surprising. As an Emmy award-winning medical journalist, Del has years of experience in producing medical TV shows, often around controversial issues. After numerous viewers contacted him to request he cover the potential dangers of vaccines and their connection to autism, Bigtree decided to dive into the topic and he hasn’t stopped since.

In 2014, the release of audio recordings of conversations between vaccine researchers Dr. Brian Hooker and Dr. William Thompson revealed potential fraud in the CDC’s research about the correlation between vaccines and autism in children. While the revelations from these audio clips were largely ignored by mainstream media, Del used them as the backbone of his recently released documentary on the risks of vaccines, titled Vaxxed: From Cover-Up to Catastrophe.

About Vaxxed

Working with Dr. Andrew Wakefield, Del was haunted by the evidence he found connecting autistic children and vaccinations. Rather than making a stand against vaccines in general, Vaxxed explores the problems with the MMR vaccine that is formulated to vaccinate children against measles, mumps and rubella all in one. By vaccinating children with the MMR vaccine instead of three individual vaccines, the documentary claims, parents inadvertently increase their children’s risk of developing autism.

Related: Vaccines, Retroviruses, DNA, and the Discovery That Destroyed Judy Mikovits’ Career

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_KrpK0rbl9w

History has long prosecuted the people who first make controversial discoveries, and in Bigtree’s view, the widespread disregard for anyone who challenges the safety of vaccines is a modern example. Looking at the epidemic of autism that is sweeping through the country and affecting 1 in 45 children, Bigtree believes that the diagnostic rate will only increase unless something is done to reduce children’s exposure to unsafe vaccinations.

By continuing to question widely-accepted evidence about vaccine safety and dig deeply into the troubling medical questions about vaccines today, there’s little doubt that Del Bigtree will continue to make a stand against the MMR vaccine and seek out ways to educate people about its dangers, no matter what mainstream media chooses to report.

Must Read:

• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Nurses Against Vaccines
• Celebrities Who Have Spoken Out Against Vaccines
• Statesmen Against Mandatory Vaccines
• Scientists Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Influenza Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness of the Flu Shot

Sources:

• Filmmaker Biographies – Vaxxed: From Coverup to Catastrophe
• Producer’s Statements – Vaxxed: From Coverup to Catastrophe
• Vaxxed – Wikipedia
• Vaxxed: The powerful new documentary the CDC wishes would just go away – The Autism File
• The MMR Vaccine: A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness

Monsanto is currently embroiled in a lawsuit from farmers claiming that glyphosate caused their non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, contradicting the EPA’s finding that the chemical is “…not likely to be carcinogenic to humans.” On Tuesday, documents from the case were unsealed, including an internal email exchange at Monsanto that implies they wrote portions of EPA studies on the herbicide. According to one email, “…we would be keeping the cost down by us doing the writing and they would just edit & sign their names so to speak…” Another email specifically mentions portions of studies that would be ghostwritten by Monsanto employees, as opposed to regulatory agencies.

Suspect Everyone

Federal judge Vince Chhabria, who is based in Northern California and is overseeing the litigation against the company, has indicated that, “My reaction is when you consider the relevance of the EPA’s reports, and you consider their relevance to this litigation, it seems appropriate to take Jess Rowland’s deposition…” Previous documents released in the case included a letter from a long-time EPA employee, alleging that Rowland and other colleagues played “political, conniving games with the science to favor the registrants.” Other emails directly from Rowland indicated that he would quash another assessment of glyphosate from the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, among other things. Rowland’s testimony will be key for the plaintiff, as his time as the chair of the Cancer Assessment Review Committee coincides with the release of the EPA memo that disputes the World Health Organization’s classification of glyphosate as probably carcinogenic. A subpoena will likely be necessary to interview Rowland, as he has declined a previous, voluntary request.

The EPA is also concerned about their standing in this lawsuit. Raven M. Norris, the attorney representing them this case,  stated, “The agency has legitimate concerns about being pulled into private litigation…They want to be able to maintain their impartiality.” If the already released documents are any indication, impartiality is already off the table. They are left fighting for plausible deniability.

Monsanto has maintained its defense of glyphosate, and Bill Heydens, one of the alleged ghostwriters, has given sworn testimony about his original emails, claiming, “It was things like editing relatively minor things, editing for formatting, just for clarity, really just for overall readability to make it easier for people to read in a more organized fashion…”. Rowland will hopefully provide the other side of that conversation, but it is likely his testimony will protect the company.

A Vulnerable Position for the Agricultural Giant

Complaints and studies against Monsanto and glyphosate have been piling up for quite some time now. While the WHO has reclassified the chemical after extensive research, the U.S. regulators have lagged behind with a different script. The EPA may be able to claim that they were unaware of this manipulation, though plaintiff attorneys have suggested that the EPA “may be unaware of Monsanto’s deceptive authorship practices.” But there really isn’t a good position here. If Rowland implicates Monsanto and saves the EPA, Monsanto’s $66 million dollar merger with Bayer might be in jeopardy. If Rowland follows the money (history indicates probably) or martyrs himself, the EPA looks incompetent. For the rest of us, we’ll get a better picture of who is pulling the strings when this case is decided.

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Gluten, Candida, Leaky Gut Syndrome, and Autoimmune Diseases
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Why Anti-Vaxxers Don’t Vaccinate
• Vaccines, Retroviruses, DNA, and the Discovery That Destroyed Judy Mikovits’ Career
• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Sources:

• Monsanto Cancer Suits Turn to EPA Deputy’s ‘Suspicious’ Role – Bloomberg Business
• EPA Official Accused of Helping Monsanto `Kill’ Cancer Study – Bloomberg Business
• Monsanto Accused of Ghostwriting Papers on Roundup Cancer Risk – Yahoo! Finance
• Lawsuit Alleges That Monsanto Influenced the EPA’s Classification of Glyphosate – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

Google has wiped NaturalNews.com and its published articles off its proverbial map. If you google Natural News the website does not come up in a search and neither do an estimated 140,000 articles published by the organization (as of 2/27/2017).

NaturalNews.com is not a small, inconsequential site. It is a website visited by an average of 7 million individuals a month. Yes, 7 million unique readers visit the website each month and 2 million have “liked” Natural News on Facebook.

Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, is a well-known proponent and purveyor of “alternative” news. His site, NaturalNews.com, promotes alternative health care, nutrition, natural healing, and supplementation. He has taken a clear stand against vaccines, GMOs, fluoride in drinking water, environmental toxins, and the chemicals we put in our food.

Adams also freely shares his views on politics and daily life. He is a staunch conservative who denies manmade climate change and supports President Trump, the right to bear arms, and a prepper lifestyle. Recently, he has also been warning his readers about fake news and impending censorship of sites such as his.

On February 16^th, he reported the following:

FULL DISCLOSURE: I am being threatened with the complete destruction’of my reputation, my brand and my character by left-wing media operatives who have issued a new threat this week: ‘Destroy Alex Jones or we will destroy YOU.’

Alex Jones, of course, is the founder of InfoWars.com, one of the most popular multi-media publishers of pro-America news, videos and radio broadcasts in the world.

The warning implies that a barrage of left-wing media stories will target me personally — obviously spreading “fake news” lies — unless I agree to go public with “opposition research” targeting Jones that was previously delivered to me on a physical thumb drive.”

Adams also believes his support of President Trump has made him a target.

Malicious effort now under way to take out prominent Trump supporters and silence their support of our President.”

Google Wipes Out Natural News Content

On February 22, Natural News was “blacklisted” with no prior warning. All of its content is gone from the search engine. Adams states:

Some of the news now being censored by Google includes our laboratory testing of the U.S. water supply, where we conducted laboratory testing to discover that 6.7% of municipal water is contaminated with toxic metals. Google has also blacklisted our announcement of free laboratory testing services for Native American water supplies impacted by oil pipeline leaks. Also blacklisted is our exclusive coverage of the GlaxoSmithKline criminal indictment by the U.S. Justice Dept. and our interview with the whistleblower who helped achieved a record $3 billion settlement with the criminal drug company.”

No Response From Google

We emailed Google through the proper channels (the contact email reserved for media) on February 23rd.  They did not respond to our inquiry.

The question is, why did Google do this? Was it because Adams supports Trump? Denies climate change? Exposes vaccines? Highlights fake mainstream news?

Two days after the event, Google sent an email to Mike Adams. Mike Adams told us,

Google is now citing a bullshit technical reason that was only concerning a dozen blog pages posted in 2013 – 2014.”

In an article, he wrote the following explanation about the email he received:

…a Google techie found an obscure third party advertising script running on a tiny number of articles published 3+ years ago under the blogs.naturalnews.com subdomain, where content is posted by outside bloggers. (Many websites host similar blogs, including the NY Times.) Google has so far provided us with ONE URL that they claim is a violation. (Yet they banned 140,000+.)”

This action by Google not only shuts down traffic driven to the Natural News website through web searches for specific words or information, it also will result in a loss of income. Mike Adams told us,

They shut this down without any warning, it silenced about 1.8 million clicks a month, at least.”

Search Engine Land Reported:

Google has confirmed the site was not removed for its political views but rather because of a webmaster guidelines violation. A Google spokesperson told Search Engine Land…” and they qouted Google:

We don’t comment on individual sites, but if we find that a site violates one or more of our Webmaster Guidelines we may take manual action against it. For webmasters who have questions about their own sites, our Webmaster team provides support through platforms such as the Webmaster Forums. Once a site has remedied the problem, the webmaster can submit the site for reconsideration.”

Mike is determined to win this fight. He says, “We will prevail!”

We, at OLM, do not always agree with Mike Adams. Most of us as the office today identify as progressive, not conservative or liberal. We supported Bernie Sanders, not Donald Trump. We do believe in manmade climate change and we aren’t so convinced that there is a shadow government planning a coup.  On the other hand, we don’t know who really killed President Kennedy or the full story on 9/11. The mainstream media doesn’t show us what’s actually going on. We need alternative media. We need people like Mike Adams on both sides.

FYI: While they disagree politically, Michael Edwards considers Mike Adams a friend. This is not a title he bestows on many.

What we do know for sure is that censorship is dangerous. And while Mike Adams is very happy with the current administration, we grow increasingly concerned over censorship. And not only by government, but as we can see, big business has the ability to do massive damage to an organization like Natural News.

Recommended Reading:

• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Nurses Against Vaccines
• Statesmen Against Mandatory Vaccines
• Scientists Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• The MMR Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness
• Influenza Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness of the Flu Shot

Every four years, the Center for Disease Control analyzes blood lead levels of children. Children under six whose blood levels test above 5 milligrams of lead per deciliter have enough lead in their body for the CDC to recommend a public health response.  Before 2012, the level causing concern was twice as high as today’s. The level change expanded the potential number of children needing treatment from 150,000 to 535,000. With a new National Health and Nutritional Examination Survey from 2016, there are rumors that the CDC will again lower the reference blood lead levels from 5 mg of lead per deciliter to 3.5 mg.

How Does the Lead Get There?

Lead exposure is declining in the U.S. Levels of lead in children’s bloodstream have fallen over 90% since the use of lead in paint and gasoline was banned almost forty years ago. So where is the lead coming from? The majority of the children above the reference levels of lead are primarily exposed to lead in their homes. In addition to older homes with lead-based paints and toxic soil, contaminated water is becoming common (Flint, MI is only the most publicized case).

Lead does not belong in the body. The fact that the reference level for lead in children’s blood may be lowered again is a good thing, as raising awareness and preventing lead exposure whenever possible is incredibly important. Awareness is good, but for this potential level change, local government follow-through will be likely be limited. The CDC doesn’t actually have any regulatory power with this issue, and local labs and lead testing devices are rarely accurate around the new proposed levels, 3.5 mg.

There is also the issue of cost. Lead safety programs around the country last year were allocated a 17 million dollar budget, which resulted in understaffing and an inability to handle the cases already present. The last time the lead references levels were lowered, the number of children affected by that change almost tripled. If another shift like that occurs without a corresponding budget change, it’s likely communities will be unable to rise to the challenge set by the CDC.

What Can You Do at Home?

The average blood lead level in children 1-5 years old is from 1 to 1.3 mg. Even if you or your children aren’t exposed to lead-based paint on a regular basis, the likelihood of lead being in the body is very high (if only at low levels). While the CDC is raising awareness among medical health and government officials, they are less clear on how you can help yourself.

There are ways to remove lead and other heavy metals from the body (called chelation) by adding common, healthy foods like garlic and cilantro to the diet. The higher the blood lead levels, the more likely a medical professional needs to intervene. You can address your lead level every day before it becomes a toxic overload by doing something as simple as sprinkling raw garlic on your salad or dinner.

Recommended Reading:

Sources:

• Exclusive: CDC considers lowering threshold level for lead exposure – Reuters
• Lead exposure in children: a guide to U.S. standards – Reuters
• What Do Parents Need to Know to Protect Their Children – CDC.gov
• Top 5 Foods That Detox Heavy Metal and Toxins – With Protocol – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

Recently, a new article about hospital charges has been making the rounds on social media. A family received their bill for the birth of their child. Included in the itemized statement was a $39.35 fee for the mother to hold her baby immediately after his birth with skin-to-skin contact.

The official explanation that is given for charging a mother to hold her child is the need for an extra person to stand beside her to ensure the baby is not dropped (think C-Section cases, drugged up moms, etc.) While this may initially sound reasonable, when the high of finally meeting your little one wears off, that forty dollar charge can take on a different persona.

Skin-to-skin contact is incredibly beneficial for both the mother and baby. It helps baby regulate temperature, increases the odds for a healthy breastfeeding relationship, and reduces postpartum depression. It’s a simple act that could set up a successful mother and baby relationship, but not all hospitals are willing to offer it, even with a charge. That forty dollars is now a symbol of a standard of care that places money and legal liability before patient needs.

So often we are unable to choose whether or not to go to the hospital. Hospitals provide a necessary and important service. For trauma care, there is no better place to be. But is this the case for childbirth?

Yes, hospital deliveries may be the best choice for a woman with a high-risk pregnancy, but home births are a viable option for women who are considered low-risk. Since statistics show the same or better outcomes for home births, what are the benefits from choosing a home birth? What is the downside?

The Upside

When women give birth at home with a trained midwife, they are less likely to experience birth interventions like episiotomies and fetal electronic monitoring. Mothers are less likely to suffer from postpartum hemorrhages, severe perineal tears, and infections. Comparison studies between planned home births and hospital births in countries like Canada, the United Kingdom, the United States, and the Netherlands (the industrialized country with the highest percentage of recorded home births) have found that home births compare positively to the hospital outcomes. Fewer births result in C-sections, and the mother’s health is often better.

A home birth also gives the mother more control and comfort in her surroundings. Being in your home where you are able to play the music you want, enjoy food and water at leisure, and chose whatever position is most comfortable and makes the most sense to you during birth can have an enormous impact psychologically and hormonally. Stress hormones can stop or impede a labor. In the hospital that opens the door to increasing amounts of obstetric intervention. Pain and stress that could be gently eased with a hot bath at home can be interpreted as a need for pitocin and increased fetal monitoring, which in turn increases the chances of complications.

Know Your Risks

Yes, home birth can be amazing, but it isn’t all sunshine and roses. Anyone interested in or considering a home birth needs to do their research.

Look at the risks frequently associated with home births and plan scenarios for how you would handle them. Frank discussions with your midwife are a necessity. There is the possibility that things will go wrong, and knowing the fastest route to the hospital can make a big difference in your birth outcome.

But Then That’s Me

I’ve always heard my mother say her her hips were too small, messed up, or weird whenever we talked about her birth experience. She even claims her doctors agreed. I even remember her making a comment (looking back, a wildly inappropriate one) about how my youngest sister had good hips for having kids, but I had inherited hers.

When I told her I was looking into homebirth, she seemed all for it. But then she started making comments about how she wished she could have given birth naturally but her babies were too big. After one discussion with a nurse friend who spends her time “praying for all the dead babies”, my mother spent the rest of my pregnancy frantically trying to talk me out of having a home birth. All I heard from her was a litany of ways my home birth was going to go wrong and how irresponsible my decision was when all that mattered was a healthy baby. Though I’m sure most women experience doubts and fears about home birth, my doubts and fears had taken physical form.

Here’s the kicker. After two healthy home births, I have to admit she was right about one thing – I had inherited her hips. Both of my labors were long and included painful back labor in spite of positioning exercises and various other attempts to avoid it. I had to contort into weird positions to coax the little ones out of the tunnel. I’m left to conclude that it’s just me and my weird ass pelvis. If I were an obstetrician in the hospital, I’d C-section someone like me if only for taking so damn long and refusing to let anyone touch me.

But that’s the problem with the way we currently treat birth in a modern medical setting. We’re no longer doing everything in our power to ensure the best possible emotional and physical outcome for baby and mother. We’re seeing a beautiful moment that has the potential to leave a woman feeling better about her bond with her baby, an act that can help combat post-partum depression, and reducing it to another extra charge on the hospital bill.

I keep thinking back on my children’s births, imagining how badly things could have gone in the hospital, and how glad I am that I chose to give birth at home. My children are perfect. I’m here, happy, healthy and above all empowered. I never participated in a standard of care that would have labeled me as flawed. Unlike my mother, I will not spend the rest of my life apologizing to my kids for my weird hips. As far as I’m concerned, they worked just fine.

Recommended Reading:

• SIDS and SUID
• Circumcision, the Primal Cut – A Human Rights Violation
• Galactagogues Foods, Herbs, and other Ways to Increase Breast Milk Production
• Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore

Sources:

• Dad Shocked That He Was Charged $40 to Hold His Newborn in the Delivery Room – New York Daily News
• Outcomes of Planned Home Birth With Registered Midwife Versus Planned Hospital Birth With Midwife or Physician  – Canadian Medical Association Journal
• Wary of Home Birth’s Risk Factor – Surprising New Study May Change Your Mind – parenting.com
• Home Birth Safety – Science Based Medicine
• A Home Birth Story