-VISIT OUR OTHER FORUMS- OB-GYN-L Ultrasound Ultrasound History Fibroid Forum Physicians-in-Training Tech Talk OBSTET-L (portuguese) OBGIN-L (spanish) Nursing

Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor From: David Rivera (cuurmudgeon@sbcglobal.net) Sun Jun 12 07:46:34 2005 Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ] Next message: David Rivera: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor" Previous message: Len2976@aol.com: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor" In reply to: Garry E. Siegel, M.D.: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor" And the patient is likely to say "SCREW NATURE!!! I'M TIRED OF THIS!!!" "Garry E. Siegel, M.D." <garrys@mindspring.com> wrote:Agree; most importantly, there is no reason whatsoever to induce/AROM. Nature will decide this one. Garry At Sat, 11 Jun 2005, Len2976@aol.com wrote: > >Betsy-- > >That's what I was planning about 10:00 p.m. tonight (2 hrs from now) if >there is no change. I used to also add seconal p.o., but it is no longer >available. > >Lenora -- Garry E. Siegel, M.D. Private Practice Roswell, GA Next message: David Rivera: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor" Previous message: Len2976@aol.com: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor" In reply to: Garry E. Siegel, M.D.: "Re: 36+ weeksBHC vs early labor"

Return to

Mail a New Message to the Forum: ob-gyn-l@obgyn.net Forum Administrator: geffrey.klein@obgyn.net Report Technical Problems: webmaster@obgyn.net Last Updated: Wed Jul 2 04:40:17 2008

The American Medical Association is no longer designating CME hours for AMA Category II CME credit. However, physicians themselves may self designate learning activities as Category II CME credit hours if they feel it is of sufficient educational merit and meets the formal definitions of continuing medical education. OBGYN.net believes these interaction in this forum meets these criteria. For further information see the AMA web site.