3-Year-Old SWALLOWS POPCORN KERNEL. 6 Months Later, Doctors Are Forced To PULL LIFE SUPPORT

Did you know that according to the American Academy of Pediatrics, choking is one of the leading causes of death for children under the age of three? Common foods such as hot dogs, grapes, and popcorn are the biggest culprits. As a safety suggestion from the AAP, these types of foods should never be consumed before a child reaches five.

With that said, here is a heartbreaking story about a two-year-old girl who has passed away after suffering from irreparable brain damage when she choked on a popcorn kernel.

Mirranda’s family are now trying to raise awareness about the dangers of giving toddlers popcorn amongst other types of food that could pose a potential choking hazard to children.

On the mother’s birthday, she and her husband Pat were in the living room when their daughter — Mirranda, came to them choking on a popcorn kernel. With her eyes bulging, her parents’ panicked because their baby girl couldn’t breathe. The popcorn kernel was deep inside Mirranda’s throat inhibiting her from breathing. Her father began CPR, but by the time paramedics arrived, Mirranda’s heart had stopped.

Despite the fact that Mirranda’s heart stopped for a while, doctors at VCU Medical Center were able to save her. Mirranda survived, but doctors informed her parents that she had suffered from irreparable brain damage. Eventually Mirranda’s health got worse and after her kidneys gave out, the young child passed away.

Although Mirranda has passed away, her family cannot stress enough about the dangers of children ingesting certain types of food. The two-year-old isn’t the first child to choke on a piece of popcorn, but the family hopes that she can be the last.

Before we end this article, we would like to leave you with a few tips on how you can prevent your child from choking.

  • Don’t offer high risk foods: big chunks of meat, hard candies, grapes, popcorn, and cheese.
  • Supervise the child when they’re eating. This might seem like common sense, but do not let them walk or run while eating.
  • Cut their foods up into small pieces or mash them into a paste.
  • Carefully evaluate all of their toys and determine which ones may be hazardous.
  • Take a class on cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) and choking first aid for children.

We hope you found this article informative and education. Our deepest condolences go out to Mirranda and her family. SOURCE: SHAREBLY

HERE IS A LIST OF EVERY SINGLE TIME OBAMA COMMITTED AN IMPEACHABLE OFFENSE THAT DEMS & MEDIA COVERED UP “Impeach!” It’s been more than eight years since Democrats uttered that word – long enough for anyone to wonder if it was still in their vocabulary, considering the deafening silence through the dozens of serious scandals during President Obama’s administration – but now that President Trump is the man in the White House, it’s back with a vengeance. Democrats everywhere are wildly slinging the “I” word, hoping to nail Trump for high crimes and misdemeanors after the New York Times claimed a memo written by former FBI Director James Comey said the president urged him to end the federal investigation into former national security adviser Michael Flynn. Some members of Congress are getting in on the action. They include Reps. Maxine Water, D-Calif., and Al Green, D-Texas. Even a Republican, Rep. Justin Amash, claimed Wednesday there are grounds to impeach President Trump. House Oversign Committee Chair Rep. Jason Chaffetz, R-Utah, asked for the alleged Comey memo and other documents. Chaffetz tweeted that he is prepared to subpoena the information. And Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., invoked “Watergate.” Now the Democratic Party is reportedly poll testing impeachment as a 2018 election issue. More than 1 million people signed a petition calling on Congress to impeach Trump. Wasting no time Wednesday, the mainstream media sprang into action, enthusiastically echoing the left’s impeachment calls. MSNBC launched a Watergate ad implying Trump is America’s new Richard Nixon. “Watergate. We know its name because there were reporters who never stopped asking questions,” says MSNBC host Chris Hayes, who hinted that Trump is next on the impeachment chopping block. “Now, who knows where the questions will take us. But I know this: I’m not going to stop asking them.” Meanwhile, some overzealous members of the left plastered fliers around Washington, D.C., demanding all White House staffers resign Wednesday. The posters read: “If you work for this White House you are complicit in hate-mongering, lies, corrupt taking of Americans’ tax money via self-dealing and emoluments, and quite possibly federal crimes and treason. Also, any wars will be on your soul. … Resign now.” But constitutional scholar Jonathan Turley, who voted for President Obama, warned “impeachment” enthusiasts not to get ahead of themselves with President Trump. Why? At this time, there’s no evidence Trump actually committed a crime. “The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo,” Turley wrote in a May 17 opinion piece posted at the Hill. Turley explained: For the first time, the Comey memo pushes the litany of controversies surrounding Trump into the scope of the United States criminal code. However, if this is food for obstruction of justice, it is still an awfully thin soup. Some commentators seem to be alleging criminal conduct in office or calling for impeachment before Trump completed the words of his inaugural oath of office. Not surprising, within minutes of the New York Times report, the response was a chorus of breathless “gotcha” announcements. But this memo is neither the Pentagon Papers nor the Watergate tapes. Indeed, it raises as many questions for Comey as it does Trump in terms of the alleged underlying conduct. A good place to start would be with the federal law, specifically 18 U.S.C. 1503. The criminal code demands more than what Comey reportedly describes in his memo. There are dozens of different variations of obstruction charges ranging from threatening witnesses to influencing jurors. None would fit this case. That leaves the omnibus provision on attempts to interfere with the “due administration of justice.” However, that still leaves the need to show that the effort was to influence “corruptly” when Trump could say that he did little but express concern for a longtime associate. The term “corruptly” is actually defined differently under the various obstruction provisions, but it often involves a showing that someone acted “with the intent to secure an unlawful benefit for oneself or another.” Encouraging leniency or advocating for an associate is improper but not necessarily seeking an unlawful benefit for him. . Obama’s Iran nuke deal Obama knew about Hillary’s private email server Obama IRS targets conservatives Obama’s DOJ spies on AP reporters Obamacare & Obama’s false promises Illegal-alien amnesty by executive order Benghazi-gate Operation Fast & Furious 5 Taliban leaders for Bergdahl Extortion 17 ‘Recess ‘ appointments – when Senate was in session Appointment of ‘czars’ without Senate approval Suing Arizona for enforcing federal law Refusal to defend Defense of Marriage Act Illegally conducting war against Libya NSA: Spying on Americans Muslim Brotherhood ties Miriam Carey Birth certificate Executive orders Solyndra and the lost $535 million Egypt Cap & Trade: When in doubt, bypass Congress Refusal to prosecute New Black Panthers Obama’s U.S. citizen ‘hit list’