Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
- Original Message - From: islips To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com__ NOD32 1.1525 (20060508) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Dear all, Sorry my finger can't help the double click. The US conference was referring to well controlled, non macrocosmic babies of GDM mothers. Sharon is right about getting things in perspective. Once armed with the facts that are out there and the Drs are using, it is up to the individual woman to make her choice. Katy - Original Message - From: islips To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
My second apology in as many minutes. Sorry, it was Leanne that referred to relevant risk.I will go and get my fingers fixednow. Katy - Original Message - From: islips To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com__ NOD32 1.1525
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Thanks for the positive story Zoe! Ultimately it will be the mum's decision of course but anything I can do to educate her about this can help. Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: islips To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Is there are reference a study relating to this, or conference papers? At 4:12 PM +1000 9/5/06, Katy O'Neill wrote: Dear all, Sorry my finger can't help the double click. The US conference was referring to well controlled, non macrocosmic babies of GDM mothers. Sharon is right about getting things in perspective. Once armed with the facts that are out there and the Drs are using, it is up to the individual woman to make her choice. Katy - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]islips To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]sharon To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Katy O'Neill Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the due date , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth, has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane __ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.comhttp://www.eset.com __ NOD32 1.1525 (20060508) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.comhttp://www.eset.com -- Jo Bourne Virtual Artists Pty Ltd -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Dear Jo, I must confess that the info I referred to was after discussing this with one of our registrars, so I do not have the references to assist you..Katy. - Original Message - From: Jo Bourne [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 4:44 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Is there are reference a study relating to this, or conference papers? At 4:12 PM +1000 9/5/06, Katy O'Neill wrote: Dear all, Sorry my finger can't help the double click. The US conference was referring to well controlled, non macrocosmic babies of GDM mothers. Sharon is right about getting things in perspective. Once armed with the facts that are out there and the Drs are using, it is up to the individual woman to make her choice. Katy - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]islips To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 3:47 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]sharon To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Katy O'Neill Sent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]diane To: mailto:ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the due date , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth, has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane __ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __ This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system. http://www.eset.comhttp://www.eset.com __ NOD32 1.1525 (20060508) Information
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
- Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM
Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM
i had GDM with both my pregnancies. well controlled with diet and daily monitoring. laboured spont at 38 weeks with first and arm at 41 weeks with second.i had the first at birth centre and transfered to KEMH with second. even though i had private obstetrician back up both times there was never any pressure to be treated differently. i actually chose an elective induction at 41 weeks. i guess it just depends on the individual situation. babies 3.5 kg and 4.0kg. zoe - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:22 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that Liz meant the baby died in utero, while awaiting the onset of spontaneous labour' Di - Original Message - From: sharon To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 1:56 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM insulin dependant diabetics are given a insulin infusion at the hospital i work at their off spring are taken to the nursery and bsl's done on them if they are ok then they go back to the mother to direct room in. if not they are given dextrose via a ivt until they can stabalize and then go to their mothers. it seems like your case was mis managed medically. i hope this senario does not happen to anyother unsuspecting mother. regards - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:57 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM I believe that insulin dependent GDM is a different situation. Didnt the US pick up the macosomia?? How does this very low rate of unexplained deaths in utero compare with that of the general , non diabetic population? Cheers, Di - Original Message - From: Elizabeth and Mark Bryant To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 12:39 PM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Readers, I saw this as a student, very well controlled GDM (but on insulin), the woman chose to wait for natural labour at T + 7 despite encouragement from some doctors for IOL. She had CTG's and USS all of which were perfect however lost her beautiful daughter the next day - only explanation given was macrosomia. Was a heartbreaking experience for all involved Liz -Original Message-From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]On Behalf Of Katy O'NeillSent: Tuesday, 9 May 2006 12:05 PMTo: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.auSubject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM Dear Diane, This decision comes out of the conference held annually in the US on GDM. This last one concluded that diet controlled GDM should not go beyond term due to the risk ( very low, 1% ) of sudden unexplained deaths in utero beyond this time. Apparently you can have a baby with U/S and CTG all indicating foetal well-being and within a few hours have the baby die without any explanation. Katy. - Original Message - From: diane To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Monday, May 08, 2006 12:38 PM Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM Hi wise women, I think this may have been a thread not long ago, but can anyone point me to some research on the safety of going past the "due date" , for a woman with well controlled gestational diabetes? My step daughter, in Tamworth,has been informed that although she is at no higher risk than anyone else, they wont 'LET' her go past due date!! Lucky I wasnt there at the appointment Maybe later, he he he!! I love a good debate. Thanks, Diane__ NOD32 1.1523 (20060505) Information __This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.http://www.eset.com
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
Hi Jo, As per the Cochrane Data Base, there is no evidence to support glucose testing in pregnancy, and it is not accurate at least 50%-70% of the time. Even if the test was positive, there is noevidence tosupport treating gestational diabetes. Treating gestational diabetics withinsulin reduced macrosomia (however most macrosomic babies are born to non-diabetic mothers)butthere were no improvements in other outcomes such as caesarean section, shoulder dystocia, or perinatal mortality. So my opinion would be to forget the GTT. Cheers MichelleJoFromOz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello you intelligent List-Wives...I have decided for various reasons not to have the routine GTT during my pregnancy, and now, at 33 weeks, I have had a small trace of glucose in my urine the last few weeks. Tonight I checked at work at I had a definite plus, not trace, of glucose. I did a BSL at the same time, and it was only 4.2. My question is, was my glucose higher before and my body just got rid of it for me, or is my body just good at getting rid of it via the urine instead of insulin? Or should I stop worrying? OR should I go ahead and do the GTT like my workmates insist I should have done in the first place?Thanks!Otherwise, pregnancy is wonderful apart from the sore hips trying to sleep :)Jo (RM)--This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics.Visit to s! ubscribe or unsubscribe. Find local movie times and trailers on Yahoo! Movies.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
your body is simply telling you that it is having a bit of trouble metabolising the amount of refined sugars it is receiving due to the pregnancy although this is a good indicator of the predisposition to type II diabetes if you continue your present pattern of eating. Cut out as many refined carbs (white) and sugars and eat whole grain and whole raw fruit and veg and drink water cutting out soft drinks juices and cordials including sports drinks ( unless diet ones) monitor your blood sugar and retest your urine in a few days. We have a great diabetic educator here that I refer all women to who have had a similar situation and have had great success with them all not showing any further signs for the remainder of the pregnancy. A GTT may or may not have shown anything as at the time it was done your body may not have yet reached its threshold. I would not suggest a GTT unless your blood sugars are continually high. Then I would have a full GTT not the modified one Good luck but Im sure its just a matter of doing the low GI food thing which we all should be doing anyway but the high GI ones taste so good and remember that you may have been eating a lot more chocolate than usual in the last fe weeks Andrea Q On 02/04/2005, at 10:10 PM, JoFromOz wrote: Hello you intelligent List-Wives... I have decided for various reasons not to have the routine GTT during my pregnancy, and now, at 33 weeks, I have had a small trace of glucose in my urine the last few weeks. Tonight I checked at work at I had a definite plus, not trace, of glucose. I did a BSL at the same time, and it was only 4.2. My question is, was my glucose higher before and my body just got rid of it for me, or is my body just good at getting rid of it via the urine instead of insulin? Or should I stop worrying? OR should I go ahead and do the GTT like my workmates insist I should have done in the first place? Thanks! Otherwise, pregnancy is wonderful apart from the sore hips trying to sleep :) Jo (RM) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
Hi all This thread is very interesting. The body is wonderful the way it grows and nurtures not only the developing baby but also changes every maternal internal activity to prepare her for labour, birth and breastfeeding. That amazing placenta changes the way we metabolsie glucose to make it available not only for the changes going on in a woman's body, but also for the baby and itself. The placenta uses as much oxygen and glucose as an adult brain, so it has very high requirements, and the woman needs to mobilise much more glucose into the bloodstream to deal with this. Some does spill over, and women are also prone to have some glycosuria if there is some stress in their lives as well. Regards, Lynne - Original Message - From: JoFromOz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 9:53 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question Ken WArd wrote: It is not unusual to show some glucose. The renal threshold lowers. The fact that your BSL was normal is very reassuring. Be a little careful of your diet before you test your wee again. I wouldn't be worried. Maureen ps just how many Easter eggs did you enjoy? Bleh, I don't really like chocolate that much :) I had probably 3 smaller-than-bite-sized chocolates for the whole 8 hour shift though :) Only a trace of glucose tonight ;) Thanks, Jo (RM) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
You are all so wonderful and knowledgable :) I am mindful of the GI diet, so I will endeavour to watch my intake of higher GI foods more closely from now on. It's so nice to have you guys around :) Thanks, Jo (RM) (eating porridge and banana for breakfast as I type) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
Jo, I think glycosuria is pretty common in pregnancy. Your BSL is of course excellent. Perhaps you could do some reading about glycosuria in pregnancy. I don't think there is much evidence to support routine GTT or screening. Nicole. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JoFromOz Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 10:11 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM question Hello you intelligent List-Wives... I have decided for various reasons not to have the routine GTT during my pregnancy, and now, at 33 weeks, I have had a small trace of glucose in my urine the last few weeks. Tonight I checked at work at I had a definite plus, not trace, of glucose. I did a BSL at the same time, and it was only 4.2. My question is, was my glucose higher before and my body just got rid of it for me, or is my body just good at getting rid of it via the urine instead of insulin? Or should I stop worrying? OR should I go ahead and do the GTT like my workmates insist I should have done in the first place? Thanks! Otherwise, pregnancy is wonderful apart from the sore hips trying to sleep :) Jo (RM) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
Re: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
Dear Jo I trust you know Henci Goer's book Obstetric Myths and Realities see www.hencigoer.com For an article by her re Diabetes try http://parenting.ivillage.com/pregnancy/pcomplications/0,,9z3m,00.html Denise Hynd Let us support one another, not just in philosophy but in action, for the sake of freedom for all women to choose exactly how and by whom, if by anyone, our bodies will be handled. - Linda Hes - Original Message - From: Nicole Carver [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Sent: Sunday, April 03, 2005 6:02 AM Subject: RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM question Jo, I think glycosuria is pretty common in pregnancy. Your BSL is of course excellent. Perhaps you could do some reading about glycosuria in pregnancy. I don't think there is much evidence to support routine GTT or screening. Nicole. -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JoFromOz Sent: Saturday, April 02, 2005 10:11 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM question Hello you intelligent List-Wives... I have decided for various reasons not to have the routine GTT during my pregnancy, and now, at 33 weeks, I have had a small trace of glucose in my urine the last few weeks. Tonight I checked at work at I had a definite plus, not trace, of glucose. I did a BSL at the same time, and it was only 4.2. My question is, was my glucose higher before and my body just got rid of it for me, or is my body just good at getting rid of it via the urine instead of insulin? Or should I stop worrying? OR should I go ahead and do the GTT like my workmates insist I should have done in the first place? Thanks! Otherwise, pregnancy is wonderful apart from the sore hips trying to sleep :) Jo (RM) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
RE: [ozmidwifery] GDM question
It is not unusual to show some glucose. The renal threshold lowers. The fact that your BSL was normal is very reassuring. Be a little careful of your diet before you test your wee again. I wouldn't be worried. Maureen ps just how many Easter eggs did you enjoy? -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of JoFromOz Sent: Saturday, 2 April 2005 10:11 PM To: ozmidwifery@acegraphics.com.au Subject: [ozmidwifery] GDM question Hello you intelligent List-Wives... I have decided for various reasons not to have the routine GTT during my pregnancy, and now, at 33 weeks, I have had a small trace of glucose in my urine the last few weeks. Tonight I checked at work at I had a definite plus, not trace, of glucose. I did a BSL at the same time, and it was only 4.2. My question is, was my glucose higher before and my body just got rid of it for me, or is my body just good at getting rid of it via the urine instead of insulin? Or should I stop worrying? OR should I go ahead and do the GTT like my workmates insist I should have done in the first place? Thanks! Otherwise, pregnancy is wonderful apart from the sore hips trying to sleep :) Jo (RM) -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe. -- This mailing list is sponsored by ACE Graphics. Visit http://www.acegraphics.com.au to subscribe or unsubscribe.
