Anti-Rhesus Positive Injection Given To Pregnant Women

Julia writes -

I am actually talking about the anti-D injection. I have renamed it. This quest started from my own experience, having received anti-D shots following the births of both my children.

This is what happens: If the mothers blood is Rhesus negative, and the baby’s blood is Rhesus positive, (no other combination), the mother is told she needs an anti-D injection immediately following birth, within about 30 minutes I would say. The mother is too groggy to refuse, especially as the anti-D injection is labelled as “Good for you and your next baby”. And not having it would be “risking the life of your next baby”. That was back in 1997. Somewhere between then and now, they have stepped up the dosage. Mothers are now offered two shots during pregnancy as well as the one at birth. One shot was obviously not enough to achieve whatever was required.

There is an official explanation designed to get us all to go along with it. The mother might reject her NEXT baby if she doesn’t have the injection. NOT THE CURRENT BABY. Rhesus positive blood from the current baby MAY cross over into the mother’s blood at birth. The mother will then supposedly make antibodies to reject the hostile Rhesus positive blood, and remember how to make them if it happens again. So if the next baby is again positive, the mother’s blood MAY cross into the baby’s blood and “destroy” the baby’s blood before birth. Scary stuff. The anti-D saves us by DEFINITELY “destroying any blood from the baby present in the mother’s circulation before she can make her own antibodies”.

None of this makes sense. It never did to me. Now I know why. If it is really about the NEXT baby, how does having two extra shots in pregnancy help, when the problem is not even supposed to arise until birth, and there is supposedly a risk that the mother’s blood may cross to the current baby during pregnancy? Surely that is creating a risk of harming the current baby? If the objective is to not have anti-D in the mother’s blood against the next baby, then why is it that they want to inject you with exactly that? If the mother can make antibodies at the first sign of Rhesus positive blood, then how does the anti-D prevent that happening in the next pregnancy, as it is claimed to do.

The anti-D has the capability to destroy the blood of your current Rh+ baby and subsequent ones. Why are they giving it to us?

Here is my explanation. Look at what is actually happening and ignore the cover story explanation. Things then make a lot more sense. The anti-D is actually about the CURRENT baby. That’s why they need to inject it during the CURRENT pregnancy and immediately after birth. Using their own words, it “destroys” the baby’s blood. They don’t want Rhesus positive babies to live, or they want them rejected or damaged by their own mothers. This fits with the constant interference with the mother baby bond, which I believe is essential for the survival of the human race. How does an injection AFTER birth affect the baby? Well either you breast feed from your own body which is now anti-baby, or you feed your baby artificial stuff from formula milk. Either way it contains poison. And the anti-D DURING pregnancy will obviously have a good chance of harming the CURRENT baby.

But why only positive babies and negative mothers? The Rhesus negatives seem to be sought after blood. Maybe TPTW (the powers that were) just can’t stand the thought of a negative mother loving a positive baby. Rhesus positives have the blood marker for the Rhesus monkey line of descent. Rhesus negatives don’t have this marker. TPTW want the negative babies to survive, so they are not targeted. Why don’t they inject positive mothers who carry positive babies, which would be adminstratively much more convenient? Well that would destroy the mother’s blood, possibly kill her. If it just mutated the blood to negative, noone would notice, so I am guessing it must have a much more obvious effect than that, like death. Someone might notice.

My own experience is of my first born constantly sicking up my milk, and both me and my second baby being very ill. However I persevered and we have all come through ok, very healthy, and well bonded, but only with an enormous amount of effort.

Anti-D is short for Anti-RhD, in other words, against the RhesusD blood. This is more blood eugenics at work. Watch out.

http://www.royalfree.nhs.uk/pip_admin/docs/rhd_factor_&_anti_d_931.pdf

Julia's Blog