Hi Everybody:
      I've been reading with interest the discussion on this topic. Here's
$.02 more.
MIDIRS Midwifery Digest has had a number of great articles about Vit. K. The
association between the injection and childhood leukemia has not been
sustained in other studies. One wonders about needing Vit. K since every human
is born with a low level, which gradually rises to an adequate level on the
8th day of life. (I wonder how many boy babies died in the desert long ago,
until they figured that one out?) I would feel that if we aren't born with it,
then we can survive without it. However, on the other side of the coin, the
only cases of Hemorrhagic Disease of the Newborn (HDN) occur in human-milk fed
infants, about 6 per 100,000.
      There are three types of HDN, immediate onset, which an injection would
do little for if the baby is already born in trouble, a mid-range and a late
onset. The latter two types have warning signs which any parent can be taught
to recognize.  One might consider using vitamin K if birth was traumatic, with
bruising, or if a circumcision is planned, or if any surgery is required in
the first few days. A study( Acta Paediatr 85:1137-1139 1996) from Denmark
reported success with  repeated oral administration of vitamin K, as one dose
at birth was not enough to prevent 6 cases occuring in 134,500 infants. Other
areas of investigation center around supplementing the nursing mother, to
raise the Vit. K content of her milk (Pediatrics Vol. 99 No. 1 Jan 1997 88-92,
to cite one paper.) I have also read that vit K was intially discovered to be
useful because women given general anesthesia (common at birth in the 40s and
50s) delivered babies whose blood didn't clot easily. It would  be interesting
to find out what else was going on in the nursing mothers whose children
developed HDN. Again, we can only give advice and the parents are the ones who
have to make the decision. Warmly, Nikki