- Pregnancy
- Baby & Toddler
- Parents
- Getting Pregnant
- Baby Names
- Product Reviews
-
Registry
- Community
-
More
Want a personalized experience?
Download the free app
Natural Birth
nosoup4u
member
EPO - no proof it works
nosoup4u
member
This is a really good blog post, and even though it's aimed at women planning a VBAC, a lot of what she says can apply to the women on this board:
https://vbacfacts.com/2012/11/13/evening-primrose-oil-dont-use-it-if-you-are-pregnant/
Basically, there's only one study that's ever been conducted about EPO helping with labor, and it didn't seem to do much. And! it can also work as a blood thinner, which is a pretty crappy unintended side effect.
I did take EPO orally the last few weeks of my second pregnancy, but I don't think I'd do it again.
DS1 - Feb 2008
DS2 - Oct 2010 (my VBAC baby!)
This discussion has been closed.
Re: EPO - no proof it works
The author might want to look at this study:
Karen Alessandra Ty-Torredes, "The effect of oral evening primrose oil on bishop score and cervical length among term gravidas", American Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, Volume 195, Issue 6, Supplement , Page S30, December 2006.
Which found:
Among seventy-one subjects who completed the study, there was a significant improvement in Bishop score in the EPO group with a mean difference of 3.68 ? 1.57 compared to 1.51 ? 1.58 for placebo (p=0.0001). Also, there was a significant reduction in cervical length with a mean difference of 0.89 ? 0.63 in the EPO group (n=38) compared to a mean of 0.42 ? 0.31 in the placebo group (n=33) (p=0.001). Pre and post-treatment Modified Biophysical profile and non-stress test were normal for all fetuses studied. Substratification analysis for parity and age of gestation showed greater impact on nulliparas and those >39 weeks age of gestation. There was no significant difference in the interval from onset or end of treatment to onset of labor between the two groups. The use of oxytocin was similar in both groups (50% in EPO and 49% in placebo group). Significantly more patients delivered vaginally in the EPO group (70% versus 51%). There was no significant difference in the birthweights of the neonates when comparing EPO and placebo group.
There was also a survey published that year, asking midwives about their use of EPO and other herbs to stimulate labor. It's important to note that it is not a study, but rather a survey. The two mean very different things in regard to research and methods. McFarlin BL, Gibson MH, O'Rear J, Harman P. A national survey of herbal preparation use by nurse-midwives for labor stimulation. Review of the literature and recommendations for practice. J Nurse Midwifery. 1999;44(3):205?216.
NorCalMOMS bio* NorCalBOTB* babywearingBIO
Harmony Doula
DS2 - Oct 2010 (my VBAC baby!)
Look, a lot of the low intervention community is all about how the medical community isn't practicing evidence based practices during LD. So shouldn't we be holding ourselves to the same standard? As far as I can tell, the recommendation to use EPO is just folklore and a lot of woo. Not especially compelling, in all honesty.
DS2 - Oct 2010 (my VBAC baby!)
Eh, here's the thing about herbal/traditional medicine: other than students, no one is ever going to do loads of studies that shows the stuff works. Why? There is no money in cheap, readily available herbs to fund these studies. "Proof" is a very modern, Western concept and there is so much to health beyond that. I had no problem using vaginal EPO with either pregnancy and would use it again. For various reasons, oral EPO was not a fit for me.
More Green For Less Green
Excellent Point!