The Conspicuous Absence of Placenta Consumption in Human Postpartum Females: The Fire Hypothesis

Placentophagia and the Tao of POEF

Placentophagia, ingestion of placenta and amniotic fluid, usually during parturition, is a behavioral feature of nearly all nonaquatic, placental mammals, and is a nexus for several interlocking behavioral phenomena. Placentophagia has not been typical of human cultures, but in recent years, some women in affluent societies have engaged in it, thereby bringing publicity to the behavior. First, we summarized benefits of placentophagia for nonhuman mammals, which include increased attractiveness of neonates, enhanced onset of maternal behavior, suppression of pseudopregnancy, and enhancement of opioid hypoalgesia by Placental Opioid-Enhancing Factor (POEF), a benefit that may extend well outside the context of parturition. The research on POEF in animals was discussed in detail. Then we discussed placentophagia (placentophagy) in humans, and whether there is validity to the claims of various benefits reported primarily in the pro-placentophagy literature, and, although human afterbirth shows POEF activity, the POEF effect has not yet been tested in humans. Finally, we discussed the general possible implications, for the management of pain and addiction, of isolating and characterizing POEF.

Consumption of Maternal Placenta in Humans and Nonhuman Mammals: Beneficial and Adverse Effects

Placentophagia is a common mammalian behavior, and the first scientific study of the potential effects of human maternal placentophagia on lactation was in 1917. More recently, in the 1970s, human placentophagia was reported in North America with a trend toward increased consumption. There are different hypotheses about the women and nonhuman mammals' motivation towards placentophagia, but few have been subject to hypotheses testing. In women, the controversy continues; on the one hand, researchers attribute benefits like increased breast milk, weight gain in newborns, decreased postpartum depression and fatigue, and improved mothers' mood. In contrast, bacterial or viral infections, hormonal, or trace elements that could become toxic for both the mother and baby are reported as possible health risks. Other reports argue a lack of scientific rigor to support the self-reported benefits of placentophagia. Also, the way the placenta is prepared (raw, cooked, dehydrated, processed, or encapsulated) alters its components, and thus the desired effects. This review provides relevant information and the different hypotheses and points of view around placentophagia. However, there are still questions to be resolved, and more studies are needed to confirm or reject the data generated so far about placentophagia in humans and nonhuman mammals.

Birth, attitudes and placentophagy: a thematic discourse analysis of discussions on UK parenting forums

BACKGROUND

The post-partum consumption of the placenta by the mother (placentophagy) has been practiced since the 1970s in the global North and is seemingly increasing in popularity. Maternal placentophagy is not known to have been practiced in any other time period or culture, despite being near-ubiquitous in other placental mammals. An in-depth qualitative exploration as to the reasons for the practice, its increasing popularity and how it is narratively incorporated into discourses surrounding "ideal" natural and medical births are given in this paper.

METHODS

1752 posts from 956 users across 85 threads from the parenting forums Mumsnet and Netmums were identified for inclusion. A thematic discourse analysis was performed using NVivo.

RESULTS

Three main themes were identified: women recounted predominantly positive attitudes towards their own experiences of placentophagy, and they were respectful of others' views and experiences; some had negative views, particularly around the concept of disgust, but again, they were respectful of others' experiences. By far the most common method of consumption of the placenta was encapsulation.

CONCLUSIONS

This paper identifies the motivation for placentophagy to almost universally be for medical benefits, most commonly the prevention or treatment of post-natal depression (PND). Whilst disgust is a common reaction, discussion of risks is rare, and positive experiences outweigh negative ones. The increasing popularity of the practice is ascribed in part to the comparative palatability of encapsulation and the use of the internet to share resources and remove barriers. Parenting forums are important spaces to negotiate normative birth practices, including placentophagy, and act to build communities of women who value personal experience over medical evidence and highly value personal choice and bodily autonomy. Placentophagy is discussed in terms of its relation to natural and medical births with arguments being made using both discourses for and against the practice. This paper argues that placentophagy is practiced as a resistance to medicalisation as an assertion of control by the mother, whilst simultaneously being a medicalised phenomenon itself.

Placenta - Worth Trying? Human Maternal Placentophagia: Possible Benefit and Potential Risks

The use of placenta preparations as an individual puerperal remedy can be traced back to historical, traditional practices in Western and Asian medicine. To evaluate the ingestion of processed placenta as a puerperal remedy, the potential risks (trace elements, microorganisms) and possible benefit (hormones in the placental tissue) of such a practice are discussed in this article based on a literature review.

Human placentophagy: a review

Placentophagy or placentophagia, the postpartum ingestion of the placenta, is widespread among mammals; however, no contemporary human culture incorporates eating placenta postpartum as part of its traditions. At present, there is an increasing interest in placentophagy among postpartum women, especially in the United States. The placenta can be eaten raw, cooked, roasted, dehydrated, or encapsulated or through smoothies and tinctures. The most frequently used preparation appears to be placenta encapsulation after steaming and dehydration. Numerous companies offer to prepare the placenta for consumption, although the evidence for positive effects of human placentophagy is anecdotal and limited to self-reported surveys. Without any scientific evidence, individuals promoting placentophagy, especially in the form of placenta encapsulation, claim that it is associated with certain physical and psychosocial benefits. We found that there is no scientific evidence of any clinical benefit of placentophagy among humans, and no placental nutrients and hormones are retained in sufficient amounts after placenta encapsulation to be potentially helpful to the mother postpartum. In contrast to the belief of clinical benefits associated with human placentophagy, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recently issued a warning due to a case in which a newborn infant developed recurrent neonatal group B Streptococcus sepsis after the mother ingested contaminated placenta capsules containing Streptococcus agalactiae. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention recommended that the intake of placenta capsules should be avoided owing to inadequate eradication of infectious pathogens during the encapsulation process. Therefore, in response to a woman who expresses an interest in placentophagy, physicians should inform her about the reported risks and the absence of clinical benefits associated with the ingestion. In addition, clinicians should inquire regarding a history of placenta ingestion in cases of postpartum maternal or neonatal infections such as group B Streptococcus sepsis. In conclusion, there is no professional responsibility on clinicians to offer placentophagy to pregnant women. Moreover, because placentophagy is potentially harmful with no documented benefit, counseling women should be directive: physicians should discourage this practice. Health care organizations should develop clear clinical guidelines to implement a scientific and professional approach to human placentophagy.

Placentophagy: therapeutic miracle or myth?

Postpartum women are consuming their placentas encapsulated, cooked, and raw for the prevention of postpartum depression (PPD), pain relief, and other health benefits. Placentophagy is supported by health advocates who assert that the placenta retains hormones and nutrients that are beneficial to the mother. A computerized search was conducted using PubMed, Medline Ovid, and PsychINFO between January 1950 and January 2014. Keywords included placentophagy, placentophagia, maternal placentophagia, maternal placentophagy, human placentophagia, and human placentophagy. A total of 49 articles were identified. Empirical studies of human or animal consumption of human placentas were included. Editorial commentaries were excluded. Animal placentophagy studies were chosen based on their relevance to human practice. Ten articles (four human, six animal) were selected for inclusion. A minority of women in developed countries perceive placentophagy to reduce PPD risk and enhance recovery. Experimental animal research in support of pain reduction has not been applied in humans. Studies investigating placenta consumption for facilitating uterine contraction, resumption of normal cyclic estrogen cycle, and milk production are inconclusive. The health benefits and risks of placentophagy require further investigation of the retained contents of raw, cooked, and encapsulated placenta and its effects on the postpartum woman.

Differences in placentophagia in relation to reproductive status in the California mouse (Peromyscus californicus)

Parturient females ingest placenta in most mammalian species, whereas fathers may do so in species in which both parents provide care for their offspring. To determine if the propensity to eat placenta varies with reproductive status in the biparental California mouse, we presented placenta to virgin (housed with a same-sex pairmate), expectant (pregnant with their first litter), and multiparous adult males and females. Liver was presented identically, 3-7 days later, as a control. Multiparous females were more likely to eat placenta than expectant and virgin females (p-values <0.016), whereas both multiparous and expectant males had higher incidences of placentophagia than virgins (p-values <0.016). Liver consumption did not differ among groups within either sex. These results suggest that propensity to eat placenta increases with maternal/birthing experience in females, and with paternal experience and/or cohabitation with a pregnant female in males.

Placental release or disposal? Experiences of perinatal pathologists

Placentas have been often considered medical waste in hospitals. This view is particularly held by the patients themselves, who may not understand the importance of placental examination. Hospitals have been receiving requests for placental release to patients and need to be prepared to handle these requests. Therefore, a survey was conducted to explore the experiences and practices of perinatal pathologists with respect to placental release. Utilizing SurveyMonkey, we emailed a survey to 192 practicing perinatal pathologists in the United States and Canada. Questions were asked about policies in force at their particular institution, conditions of release, and the purpose of release, ie, what the disposition of the placenta was after release to the family. Thirty-six responses were received; 22 (61.1%) of respondents did allow release of placentas, and those who did not release usually reported that they had not received requests for release. In most cases, specific policies were in place, with multiple departments within the hospital having input on the creation of the policy. Parental signature was required in most cases. The most common reason for patient request was to bury the placenta, although some placental release was for consumption and/or encapsulation. Although there are no specific religious requirements for use or burial of the placenta after delivery, there are many cultural reasons for requests. Hospitals and specific providers need to be aware of this interest and have a specific policy in place so that they are prepared when a request is received.

Placentophagia in humans and nonhuman mammals: causes and consequences

Afterbirth ingestion by nonhuman mammalian mothers has a number of benefits: (1) increasing the interaction between the mother and infant; (2) potentiating pregnancy-mediated analgesia in the delivering mother; (3) potentiating maternal brain opioid circuits that facilitate the onset of caretaking behavior; and (4) suppressing postpartum pseudopregnancy. Childbirth is fraught with additional problems for which there are no practical nonhuman animal models: postpartum depression, failure to bond, hostility toward infants. Ingested afterbirth may contain components that ameliorate these problems, but the issue has not been tested empirically. The results of such studies, if positive, will be medically relevant. If negative, speculations and recommendations will persist, as it is not possible to prove the negative. A more challenging anthropological question is "why don't humans engage in placentophagia as a biological imperative?" Is it possible that there is more adaptive advantage in not doing so?