“no evidence for any benefit” certainly depends upon what one considers to be a “benefit”. Regardless of whatever other benefits one might imagine, I am sure that each one has the nutritional components of one placenta. It doesn’t seem likely that they would be devoid of normal nutritional value.
I’ll take their observations/experimentation as evidence it doesn’t help w/post partum depression or pain relief any more than a sugar pill. I’ll accept that it does not promote lactation.
But if I were a hungry mama wolf who just gave birth in a cloistered den, it’s a snack ain’t it?
Someone wants to plant a tree with it, okay, whatever floats yo boat, but to me it’s medical waste.
35 years ago I was among a circle of mid-wives in Southern California. I don’t know about now, but back then it was risky business.
Most of these Earth mommas were vegans. Their trip with placentas was to plant them under trees. I like that idea.
Too, I hope people do keep in mind that mortal scientists always have the luxury of revising their knowledge with new discoveries.
Also, in my earlier years I assumed that placentophagy was more frequent due to an unfortunate confusion with the word “polenta”. I don’t remember when I got the confusion sorted, but it was probably a funny conversation.
I didn’t even know that placentophagy was a thing. To learn about it before my second coffee of the day is… unsettling. I think I’m going to need a chaser.
As for this idea that “women choosing placentophagy, who may otherwise be very careful about what they are putting into their bodies” would avoid anything not supported by science, I would say the opposite is probably true; seems like just the sort of fringe medicine that goes with so many other questionable, unverified practices.
Well who are you going to trust, a bunch of pointy-headed scientists or a Kardashian?
I can’t imagine it would be bad for you, and at the end of the day, it’s free calories and you have just given birth.
I’m not entirely comfortable with the research presented here. There’s a lot of claims that previous research had the biology of placentophagy wrong, but the study here’s not really data-driven to support that claim, and Dr. Paul’s background is actually psychology, which may leave her a little under-prepared with dosage and epidemiological analysis. All in all, I’m not 100% confident that all the conclusions reached herein are actually her scope of practice.
I’ll be sitting back and waiting on some of the other research responses to it.
As for the potential counterpoints and existance or non-existance of evidence: http://placentabenefits.info/research.asp
I’ve been told by vegans that placentas are one of the few meats they’ll indulge in, as it involves no death or the suffering of an animal.
Childbirth doesn’t involve suffering?
Sorry. A non-human animal.
So cannibalism is okay?
[ducks and covers]
Any placenta or just placentas that they personally provided? I sense a market opportunity!
I thought that the whole point was to absorb and control the spirit of the child.
Edit: this is why benefits are not seen immediately – the true benefits are realized during the teen years.
Isn’t it obvious that the Wholistic and Alternative benefits of placenta devouring would be hard to detect in studies; because ‘studies’ come from a perspective of explicitly privileging the hegemonic epistemic imperialism of so called ‘empiricism’; and its chemical death-cult of allopathic ‘medicine’?
Only a modality that promotes healing, not masking ‘symptoms’, and honors the body’s wisdom can advance our understanding of the benefits.
(Did I remember to check all the boxes?)
I’m going to pretend you’re all talking about polenta, and get on with my day.
It would be crude to assume that one would heal thusly by eating the physical placenta. I will stick to eating the placenta of my astral body, thank you!