Birth Time & cutting a nevel: Some Views

[Guest guest]

Hello Dr. Karekar:

 

You make a very good point. However, the physical separation from the

mother, i.e. cutting of the umblical cord appears to be the most

accurate and STANDARD definition of birth.

 

What if the child is born premature and it doesn't cry, it would be

put in an incubator and will began to cry when it feels strong enough

to cry. Would the time of birth be 10 days later when the baby cried?

NO!.

 

As to your theory about "breathing." What if the heart is beating

(which begans beating past the 6th week), but the baby is unable to

breath on its own and the doctors use an artificial lung to pump

oxygen to the baby's heart.

 

The point I'm making is that defining birth is a slippery slope, we

can come of with endless theories. However, the most accurate and the

most standard should be the cutting of the cord--I guess no one can

challege that the baby is on its own (doesn't get nutrition and

support from the mother) as soon as the cord is cut.

 

P.S. I'm not a doctor and possess very primitive knowledge of the

medical field. I'm making my argument based on common sense and not

based on the medical postulates.

 

Respectfully,

 

Mukund

 

 

 

vedic astrology, "Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar"

<karekar@s...> wrote:

> Respected all Gurus and all members & Mr. T V Rao,

>

> (Dear T V Rao, Received your email. Thanks. Giving my views on this

> issue.)

>

> As a practising surgeon (and husband of a practsing gynaecologist &

> obstetrician) I have my views in this issue as given below.

>

>

> I feel the FIRST BREATH should be taken as the birth time and not

> cutting of the umbilical cord.

>

> Doctors usually wait till cord pulsations stop before dividing the

> umbilical cord. The pulsations are felt or seen to naked eye.

> (However there is no visible crystalisation of the cord.)

>

> Now there could be two scenerios in live babies as given below.

>

> 1. Baby starts breathing while the cord is still NOT cut.:

> This is the usual scene.

> Here if you consider the pulsations which are due to the child's

> heart, they are there since last 34 Weeks as Cardiac activity

starts

> at about 6 Weeks. What NEW thing has happened to give him (the

child)

> this new LIFE in this external world, is his FIRST BREATH.

>

> 2. The other scenerio, though less frequent is that the baby does

not

> breath immediately and would require some active resuscitation.

Here

> we cut the cord (i.e. WE DO NOT WAIT TILL PULSATIONS TO DISAPPEAR)

> and give some active resuscitative measures to the child. After

> successful resuscitation the child starts breathing. When it starts

> BREATHING, we as doctors feel happy as we could save that child.

Here

> you must have noticed that the BREATH again is the main deciding

> factor determining the real life.

>

>

> Thanking,

>

> Yours,

>

> Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar

>

> Web Address:

> http://astrokundali.com/

>

> E-mail Addresses:

> karekar@a...

> karekar@v...

[Guest guest]

thanks doc,

i am not guru but with commonsense and layman

logic was strongly showing my opinion as sound of cry

or breathing is a saparate idendity of life that

moment even astrology should pick up as birth time.

i think wise will agree as you show the way by your

practicality of experience

regards

rajinder

--- "Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar" <karekar

wrote:

> Respected all Gurus and all members & Mr. T V Rao,

>

> (Dear T V Rao, Received your email. Thanks. Giving

> my views on this

> issue.)

>

> As a practising surgeon (and husband of a practsing

> gynaecologist &

> obstetrician) I have my views in this issue as given

> below.

>

>

> I feel the FIRST BREATH should be taken as the birth

> time and not

> cutting of the umbilical cord.

>

> Doctors usually wait till cord pulsations stop

> before dividing the

> umbilical cord. The pulsations are felt or seen to

> naked eye.

> (However there is no visible crystalisation of the

> cord.)

>

> Now there could be two scenerios in live babies as

> given below.

>

> 1. Baby starts breathing while the cord is still NOT

> cut.:

> This is the usual scene.

> Here if you consider the pulsations which are due to

> the child's

> heart, they are there since last 34 Weeks as Cardiac

> activity starts

> at about 6 Weeks. What NEW thing has happened to

> give him (the child)

> this new LIFE in this external world, is his FIRST

> BREATH.

>

> 2. The other scenerio, though less frequent is that

> the baby does not

> breath immediately and would require some active

> resuscitation. Here

> we cut the cord (i.e. WE DO NOT WAIT TILL PULSATIONS

> TO DISAPPEAR)

> and give some active resuscitative measures to the

> child. After

> successful resuscitation the child starts breathing.

> When it starts

> BREATHING, we as doctors feel happy as we could save

> that child. Here

> you must have noticed that the BREATH again is the

> main deciding

> factor determining the real life.

>

>

> Thanking,

>

> Yours,

>

> Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar

>

> Web Address:

> http://astrokundali.com/

>

> E-mail Addresses:

> karekar

> karekar

>

>

 

 

 

The New Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.

http://search.

[Guest guest]

Dear Mukund,

 

Regarding your 1st clause:

I have mentioned first breath and not first cry. Hence the questions

about the child not strong enough to cry does not arise.

 

Regarding your 2nd clause:

Secondly whenever a child is put is on ventilator he is put on

ventilator to support it's inadequate breathing capacity and not for

the reason that he has not taken his first breath. Hence if a child

is not taking even the first breath we do not put him on ventilator.

 

Anyway these are my views.

 

Thanks,

 

 

Dr. Rajiv Karekar

 

vedic astrology, "monmuk111" <monmuk111>

wrote:

> Hello Dr. Karekar:

>

> You make a very good point. However, the physical separation from

the

> mother, i.e. cutting of the umblical cord appears to be the most

> accurate and STANDARD definition of birth.

>

> What if the child is born premature and it doesn't cry, it would be

> put in an incubator and will began to cry when it feels strong

enough

> to cry. Would the time of birth be 10 days later when the baby

cried?

> NO!.

>

> As to your theory about "breathing." What if the heart is beating

> (which begans beating past the 6th week), but the baby is unable to

> breath on its own and the doctors use an artificial lung to pump

> oxygen to the baby's heart.

>

> The point I'm making is that defining birth is a slippery slope, we

> can come of with endless theories. However, the most accurate and

the

> most standard should be the cutting of the cord--I guess no one can

> challege that the baby is on its own (doesn't get nutrition and

> support from the mother) as soon as the cord is cut.

>

> P.S. I'm not a doctor and possess very primitive knowledge of the

> medical field. I'm making my argument based on common sense and not

> based on the medical postulates.

>

> Respectfully,

>

> Mukund

>

>

>

> vedic astrology, "Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar"

> <karekar@s...> wrote:

> > Respected all Gurus and all members & Mr. T V Rao,

> >

> > (Dear T V Rao, Received your email. Thanks. Giving my views on

this

> > issue.)

> >

> > As a practising surgeon (and husband of a practsing gynaecologist

&

> > obstetrician) I have my views in this issue as given below.

> >

> >

> > I feel the FIRST BREATH should be taken as the birth time and not

> > cutting of the umbilical cord.

> >

> > Doctors usually wait till cord pulsations stop before dividing

the

> > umbilical cord. The pulsations are felt or seen to naked eye.

> > (However there is no visible crystalisation of the cord.)

> >

> > Now there could be two scenerios in live babies as given below.

> >

> > 1. Baby starts breathing while the cord is still NOT cut.:

> > This is the usual scene.

> > Here if you consider the pulsations which are due to the child's

> > heart, they are there since last 34 Weeks as Cardiac activity

> starts

> > at about 6 Weeks. What NEW thing has happened to give him (the

> child)

> > this new LIFE in this external world, is his FIRST BREATH.

> >

> > 2. The other scenerio, though less frequent is that the baby does

> not

> > breath immediately and would require some active resuscitation.

> Here

> > we cut the cord (i.e. WE DO NOT WAIT TILL PULSATIONS TO

DISAPPEAR)

> > and give some active resuscitative measures to the child. After

> > successful resuscitation the child starts breathing. When it

starts

> > BREATHING, we as doctors feel happy as we could save that child.

> Here

> > you must have noticed that the BREATH again is the main deciding

> > factor determining the real life.

> >

> >

> > Thanking,

> >

> > Yours,

> >

> > Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar

> >

> > Web Address:

> > http://astrokundali.com/

> >

> > E-mail Addresses:

> > karekar@a...

> > karekar@v...

[Guest guest]

Dear Dr. Karekar,

Thank you for agreeing with my view point.There was a discussion on this matter

on the list. I had said that since both Ceasarean section and cutting of

umbilical could be electional, first breath which usually coincides with the

baby's first cry should be taken as the time of birth. However some had

different views and as there was some confusion about the birth process.It was

being proposed that contact between physical body of the baby and its mother

gets over on cutting of the umbilical cord. I had given the process and said

that physical contact, in a way is detached when the placenta detaches from

uterus, and if cutting of physical contact is to be taken then it would be

around time a lady breaks first water. Therefore I had pointed out that first

breath/cry should be taken as the time of birth. I had requested TV Raoji to

get your views as he told that you are also a medical practitioner.

Regards,

Chandrashekhar.

-

Dr. Rajiv C. Karekar

vedic astrology

Tuesday, May 20, 2003 11:00 PM

[vedic astrology] Birth Time & cutting a nevel: Some Views

Respected all Gurus and all members & Mr. T V Rao,(Dear T V Rao, Received your

email. Thanks. Giving my views on this issue.)As a practising surgeon (and

husband of a practsing gynaecologist & obstetrician) I have my views in this

issue as given below.I feel the FIRST BREATH should be taken as the birth time

and not cutting of the umbilical cord.Doctors usually wait till cord pulsations

stop before dividing the umbilical cord. The pulsations are felt or seen to

naked eye. (However there is no visible crystalisation of the cord.)Now there

could be two scenerios in live babies as given below.1. Baby starts breathing

while the cord is still NOT cut.:This is the usual scene. Here if you consider

the pulsations which are due to the child's heart, they are there since last 34

Weeks as Cardiac activity starts at about 6 Weeks. What NEW thing has happened

to give him (the child) this new LIFE in this external world, is his FIRST

BREATH.2. The other scenerio, though less frequent is that the baby does not

breath immediately and would require some active resuscitation. Here we cut the

cord (i.e. WE DO NOT WAIT TILL PULSATIONS TO DISAPPEAR) and give some active

resuscitative measures to the child. After successful resuscitation the child

starts breathing. When it starts BREATHING, we as doctors feel happy as we

could save that child. Here you must have noticed that the BREATH again is the

main deciding factor determining the real life.Thanking,Yours,Dr. Rajiv C.

KarekarWeb Address:http://astrokundali.com/E-mail

Addresses:karekar (AT) astrokundali (DOT) comkarekar (AT) vsnl (DOT) com

Archives: vedic astrologyGroup info:

vedic astrology/info.htmlTo UNSUBSCRIBE: Blank

mail to vedic astrology-....... May Jupiter's light

shine on us .......

 

---Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.Checked by AVG anti-virus system

(http://www.grisoft.com).Version: 6.0.483 / Virus Database: 279 - Release Date:

5/19/03

[Guest guest]

Dear Mukund and all,

 

Namaste!

 

You raised some nice points of consideration here. Indeed, now I even

changed my idea that it would be first breath that starts the life of the

baby. All these things, cutting cord, breathing, crying, even the heart

beating, are matters which may or may not function immediately after

birth. Yet, we say 'after birth', that means the baby is born already at

that time. Common sense. Now what is the difference which makes us say,

the child is born, or the child is not born yet. If the head is out, we

don't say the child is born, but the child is 'being' born, that means it

is still going on. Then, using common sense, we say the child is born when

it is out completely. What is the difference with the state inside the

womb, and the state outside the womb? As long as the child is inside the

body of the mother, the navagraha will not 'see' the child as independent,

and thus the rules of the nisheka chakra will still influence the

pregnancy. Then, the end of the pregnancy, birth, means that from that

time on the navagraha will directly influence the newborn baby. No need

for any birth events to confirm that or start the life from there.

 

See the difference: the child may not die as long as it is in the womb,

because the nisheka chakra does not indicate that. Yet, as soon as the

baby is out, it dies, why? Because of the separate influence of the

navagraha on the baby... and it may happen before the cord is cut.

When the death inflicting factors are not that strong, we see the baby may

come to life after some minutes, be put in incubator etc.

 

But maybe I may be wrong...

 

 

>The point I'm making is that defining birth is a slippery slope, we

>can come of with endless theories. However, the most accurate and the

>most standard should be the cutting of the cord--I guess no one can

>challege that the baby is on its own (doesn't get nutrition and

>support from the mother) as soon as the cord is cut.

 

Yes, but study the example charts I had attached, with a difference of

10-20 minutes for cutting the cord. Please let us know what you see as a

difference in your interpretation of the chart (this is good exercise for

others also).

 

Yours,

Dhira Krsna dasa,

Jyotisha

http://www.radhadesh.com