Ethical or unethical research?
		Windle with DeMarsh, Wilson, and Alt (1941, 1942, 1948), and like many before and since, did research with human infants using immediate or delayed clamping of the cord.  I am not sure I understand why any more  "randomized controlled trials" need to be done.  Windle would during the 1950s begin doing research with monkeys, which many now would find unethical.  If it's unethical to do experiment with animals, how can use of human subjects be ethical?
		In any case, Windle and his colleagues found increased erythropoiesis (more active blood formation) in infants when the cord was clamped early that when it was clamped late.  Early clamping of the umbilical cord leaves the infant in an anemic state.  The main reason immediate clamping of the cord has gained favor, is the thinking that fewer red cells leads to less likelihood of developing jaundice, with the aim of preventing kernicterus (yellow staining of nuclei in the subcortical motor system.  This goal has not been accomplished.   Sadly, kernicterus is still prevalent.