This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor:
—The finding of Moss and his associates (JAMA184:48 [April 6] 1963) that "late clamping" of the umbilical cord is perhaps more salubrious for the newborn than "early clamping" illustrates the conflict between nature and artifice. There is an old law of biology that may be germane: ontogeny recapitulates phylogeny. Or, to attempt to apply the law to modern obstetrical practice, perhaps the interval between delivery of an infant and clamping the cord should be the same as it was in primitive evolutionary times. But how can this time interval be determined? I have observed enough home deliveries to realize that the factor determining the crucial interval in primitive accouchments is the availability of a bit of twine to tie the cord.For some reason, no one ever seems to remember to have this essential item on hand, and the cord remains throbbing and untied while
Cutter RD. Umbilical Cord Clamping. JAMA. 1963;186(2):166. doi:10.1001/jama.1963.03710020086030