Hi ladies,
Was reading "ahead" on The Bump and noted that TB recommends looking into cord blood banking. I searched the contributions made in the community and came across an awesome post IMHO about the benefits of delayed cord clamping.
I thought I'd share it with you ladies - partly because I found it helpful but also because there are some awesome research-oriented mamas-to-be that I hope will confirm or rebut this info

Will post in next comment. Because smartphone is hard
Re: Cord blood banking versus delayed cord clamping
Lots and lots of good research shows definitely that full term babies are less likely to suffer from iron deficiency six months after birth. Full term... Not preterm. I am shocked at how many of your OB doctors are telling you otherwise. I assume this is because it is not convent for them to wait around to clamp and cut the cord... I am disgusted to think that is the truth, but I can think of no other reason they would say this. The WHO (World Heath Organization) recommends 1-3 minutes delay for all infants. Anyway, I am just going to leave some links here...
WHO: https://www.who.int/elena/titles/full_recommendations/cord_clamping/en/
from NPR: https://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2015/05/26/409697568/delayed-umbilical-cord-clamping-may-benefit-children-years-later
and a CNN article: https://www.cnn.com/2015/05/29/health/cut-the-cord/
If any of you are inclined to read them I would also be happy to include some studies. They can just be a little stuffy to read. I will also say that a delay in clamping does slightly increase the risk of jaundice in infants.... a small price to pay for the benefits. Also, the AAP doesn't yet exactly endorse delayed clamping in full term infants, but say that it should be clamped between 30-60 seconds..... a time still longer than most are delayed in hospital. It is important to note that the AAP is often years behind the international community on recommendations
I did also come across a cord blood banking thread where the members who were posting sounded so enthusiastic and robotic that it seemed like they may have been shills. Makes me wonder if that is exactly the case.
Both are really great options so I want to make sure we are informed from reliable sources.
We are saving cord blood and cord tissue.
How it works with the company I'm using is they send you a specimen selection kit to bring with you to the hospital. The Dr.'s retrieve the cord blood and cord tissue samples, which only require a few inches of the cord to get what they need. I then contact a currier service to deliver the samples to the lab. Once the samples are tested for viability and likelihood of they are cryogenically frozen for possible use in the future and I pay a yearly storage fee.
Now what are they used for? Well as of right now the uses are limited. However, with the growing research around stem cells and the possible benefits to saving them we decided it was worth the investment. If my child gets sick in the future and having these stem cells and cord tissue means they will have access to a potentially life saving medicine then the investment would be worth every penny. We make choices every day with the wellbeing of our children in mind, this is just another choice to make and for my husband and I it was a no-brainer.
My husband and I DO NOT work for a blood banking center or even in the medical industry; the above information is just my honest opinion and why my husband I chose to save cord blood and cord tissue.
At my childbirth class last weekend they talked briefly about delayed cord cutting and I asked if that was an option for me as we are planning to save the cord blood and cord cells. The delivery nurse said it was to some extent because they only need about a 4"-5" section of the cord to collect their specimen. My hospital policy is to wait a minute before cutting the cord, so we'll experience the best of both worlds I suppose.
Me:29 / DH:32
Married 8/2009
Expecting our First Bundle of Joy 2/2/16