We were among those who refused vitamin K for our kids and only later
heard about the possible leukemia connection (I have heard that it
was a study published in Lancet a few years ago, although I have
not read the study myself)
  Our thinking was along the lines of "the body has been doing this
successfully for a LONG time now, why is it necessary?" The other
question is how do we know that it is so benign? Studies on these
things tend to look for and find drastic effects like leukemia, ut
it is much more difficlut to find more subtle effects.
  I guess my question still is, why is it important to give kids
vitamin K at birth when, as I understand it, the body begins producing
it in the first few days and certainly by a week.
  Feel free to answer by private e-mail if people are tired of this
topic.
  Thanks,
   Naomi Bar-Yam