Tim--I'd be interested to hear more about which vaccines you think might be necesarry and which ones you are skipping.

I'd make sure the mother had very good levels of K (and everything else healthy) in her blood during the entire gestation and breast feeding. As long as the mother is healthy with healthy levels, K should be sufficient in the child at birth. Nature is not so stupid as to not provide the baby with what it needs. Considering the crappy diet that many mother's consume (full of 'healthy' grains), I am not surprised that many babies have problems. But the problem with trying to shoot the baby full of all kinds of 'fixes' is we do not know what we are doing in the first place and we are medicating all babies because of the problems of a few. Interesting link here: http://www.aims.org.uk/Journal/Vol13No2/vitk.htm Apparently, there was a big stink about k injections potentially causing cancer. SOme studies found this but a later study seems to have debunked it. I do see that some types of K supplements seem to be potentially toxic. I'd look into what type of injection is planned and see if that is one of the potentially toxic forms. The truth is we do not know for sure what is a natural and healthy level of K for a baby. It's only an assumption that the baby's level should be equal to an adult's level.

If it was me, no way would I allow my newborn to be supplemented with Vitamin K. Such supplementation is not without risk (http://vaclib.org/basic/vitamin-k.htm) and for a healthy baby boy, unless he is going to be circumcised immediately after birth, where clotting of the blood will be necessary as a result of the surgical procedure (vitamin K and prothrombin are necessary for blood clotting), there should be no reason for this to be done.

In a quick search on the web I cannot find an original cite, but Dr. Emmett Holt, of Holt Pediatrics fame (http://archives.med.nyu.edu/collections/findingaids/holt.html), demonstrated that vitamin K levels (while very low in a newborn the first few days of life) are normal on the eighth day after a child is born, and that a related factor in blood clotting, prothrombin, is at the highest levels it will ever be in the life of the newborn, on the eighth day after birth, higher than at any other time of life.

You might also want to check out this blog post on the dangers on vitamin k shots for newborns: http://bit.ly/a2vTlM

No and no. Why? I wanted as natural, unassisted births as possible. My pregnancies and labors were uncomplicated, I was free of any infections/health problems so I didn't see the need. I withheld any shots and tests (PKU) until 2 weeks post partum. Without shots/pokes there isn't the need for VitK. But that's just my humble opinion.

Yes and yes.

Vitamin K1 is used to make vital blood clotting factors. Vitamin K1 deficiency can cause excessive bleeding or stroke in young infants. Breast milk can be deficient in vitamin K1 (perhaps modern breast milk differs from paleolithic breast milk in vitamin K content). You can substitute oral vitamin K, but K1 supplementation in early infancy is a good idea.

Ocular gonorrhea is a rapidly progressive infection in newborns that can cause blindness or even death. Antibiotic ointment prevents most cases of ocular gonorrhea and chlamydia in infants. On a population basis, this is a very cost-effective treatment, but you may decide it's not indicated in your particular situation. Maternal gonorrhea and chlamydia infections are very common and often asymptomatic. A negative test early in pregnancy does not guarantee lack of infection at delivery.

In most hospitals, you have the right to refuse vitamin K and antibiotic eye ointment. However, CW is not always wrong just because it's conventional.

As a new dad (my boy, Fritz, is 3 months old today), I can tell you we skipped every thing that put any foreign object in the boy's body. From the moment of birth, he was laid upon his mother's bare skin and immediately began to suckle. No wiping washing weighing measuring poking prodding or other abuses where laid upon the boy. No shots, no eye ointment. His mother received no drugs, so no danger of things passing to him.

My wife and I live clean, no STDs, no hepatitis exposure, no risk factors in that regard, so no need for the standard regime of shots and such. We both ate very clean local meats, wild game, and such pre pregnancy and the duration, just to maximize our kid's chances.

Vitamin K in a shot just does not seem needed for a baby grown is such a hospitable nutritional environment. Plus he's got perfect baby food available, grown for him by his very own mother from proper foods.

Vit K and silver ointment in the eyes boiled down more to CW proving to us it was safe or called for in our particular situation. Both seemed more a risk than a necessity.