"co-sleeping is key culprit in SIDS" - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 11:28 AM - Thread Starter
 
Mama_2_Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Ontario
Posts: 468
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just know I'm going to get a phone call from my mother today.

This article is so slanted! The title of the article should read "drunk, coked up parents co sleeping with their infants can result in SIDS".
I'm just so disappointed to see this article worded the way it is.


http://ca.news.yahoo.com/s/afp/09101...mortality_sids

Mama to one very active DS (5.5) Loving wife to my wonderful DH and our baby girl arrived on December 10, 2009
Mama_2_Boy is offline  
#2 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 11:41 AM
 
StrawberryFields's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 4,455
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You know what always confuses me about these articles/statements? If the parent is co-sleeping, drunk, on drugs, whatever, and rolls over on the baby, or baby gets wedged somewhere, how is that SIDS? Isn't that actually suffocation, smothering, etc.?? I find it hard to believe that the parent having too much to drink and placing baby in a family bed has resulted in a completely unexplainable sudden death of the infant.

mommy to ds 11/05, dd1 01/08, and dd2 01/10!
StrawberryFields is offline  
#3 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 11:46 AM
 
Ruthla's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 47,599
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3 Post(s)
And they defined co-sleeping as "sharing a bed or sofa with a parent." I wish they'd studied this more carefully, and separated out the sober babies in beds from the ones on sofas and/or with a drunk or drugged parent.

Ruth, single mommy to Leah, 19, Hannah, 18, and Jack, 12
Ruthla is offline  
#4 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 11:55 AM
 
Norasmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: The sunny side of the mountains
Posts: 4,403
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
These "studies" are always so slanted toward the side of co-sleeping causes SIDS, but in reality if a parent is sleeping with a baby and they smoke, drink and do drugs that is actually the cause. Uh the key culprit to me would be parents consuming drugs, alcohol and smoking-not so much the sleeping aspect. What a crock of sh**.

It's just another piece of propaganda to instill fear of co-sleeping, but in reality if this article is actually read it shows that drunk parents shouldn't sleep with their babies.

Me Wife to T (14 years)Mama to Princess(4) and Monster Boy(my 1 year old ):
Norasmomma is offline  
#5 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 11:59 AM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)


If your kid suffocates because he fell between the couch cushion or got smothered by you while you were drunk he did NOT DIE FROM SIDS!!!

From the American SIDS institute:
Quote:
SIDS is the sudden death of an infant under one year of age which remains unexplained after a thorough case investigation, including performance of a complete autopsy, examination of the death scene, and review of the clinical history. (Willinger et al, 1991).
If they know these children were suffocated by a parent or object, the death is NOT unexplained. If they can not separate true SIDS from explainable deaths from suffocation, they have no business conducting a study on the issue and certainly no business reporting their "findings" to the media.
fruitfulmomma is online now  
#6 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 12:35 PM
 
mamansolo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Mirabel, Québec
Posts: 14
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I haven't read the article but suffocation is extremely different from SIDS and therelies often the problem with these studies. They mix everything together while they should be kept perfectly separate. Sigh.

Single mother of one (06/12/2009) and fighting every minute for her!
mamansolo is offline  
#7 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 12:59 PM
 
Valkyrie9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Idaho
Posts: 2,171
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The part that spun me up is that they're saying "most" cases of SIDS occurred during co-sleeping, but then you see that the actual percentage is 54%. I'll bet you could get a 4% variance in gender with the same study, so then you could turn around and say, "Boys more likely to die of SIDS."

And it scarcely points out that the other 46% of the fatalities happened in non-co-sleeping situations: what about them? Where are the answers for those families? Why not just say, "We still don't know WTH causes SIDS because there are no clear, defining factors"?!?!

(I knew as soon as I read this article I could come here and rant about it.)
Valkyrie9 is offline  
#8 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 01:39 PM
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Cover letter he!!
Posts: 6,548
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
What about the part saying that its preventable by more parental education?

Umm....I don't need my high school diploma, bachelors degree, or my 2.5years of law school to tell me that drinking/smoking/sleeping on the sofa with my baby is a BAD BAD BAD idea.
Super~Single~Mama is offline  
#9 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 04:51 PM
 
Sheryl1678's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 579
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Because admitting that safe cosleeping can reduce the risk of SIDS wont sell very many cribs.
Sheryl1678 is offline  
#10 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 05:38 PM
 
Zimbah's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: England
Posts: 263
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As per usual, very bad reporting of what seems to me to be pretty good science (or at least nothing glaringly wrong, unlike most news reports). The published research is available here:

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/339/oct13_1/b3666

One of the conclusions is that giving general advice not to co-sleep may result in more people accidentally falling asleep on the sofa with their baby (exhausted parent trying to feed the baby but afraid to feed in bed) and putting them at risk - they conclude it would be better to warn about specific risks (no pillows etc), and of course never to co-sleep after taking drugs or alcohol. Some papers here have reported it properly, but of course most have gone for the quick headline
Zimbah is offline  
#11 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 07:42 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
From the BMJ page...

Quote:
More mothers of SIDS infants than random control infants smoked during pregnancy (60% v 14%), whereas one quarter of the SIDS infants were preterm (26% v 5%) or were in fair or poor health for the last sleep (28% v 6%)
More than half of these mothers were smokers. Research on safe bedsharing has consistently shown that mothers who smoked during pregnancy should not bedshare. We know that smoking also increases risk of preterm birth and poor health in the child. Perhaps instead of blaming and shaming safe bedsharing families, we could spend more time helping women of childbearing age to stop smoking.
fruitfulmomma is online now  
#12 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 08:19 PM
 
anne1140's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 928
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Valkyrie9 View Post
The part that spun me up is that they're saying "most" cases of SIDS occurred during co-sleeping, but then you see that the actual percentage is 54%. I'll bet you could get a 4% variance in gender with the same study, so then you could turn around and say, "Boys more likely to die of SIDS."

And it scarcely points out that the other 46% of the fatalities happened in non-co-sleeping situations: what about them? Where are the answers for those families? Why not just say, "We still don't know WTH causes SIDS because there are no clear, defining factors"?!?!

(I knew as soon as I read this article I could come here and rant about it.)
Well, I just need to point out that this isn't entirely accurate. What you're saying would be true if 50% of the babies studied co-slept and 50% did not, but as the study states, 20% co-slept and 80% did not.

For the sake of even numbers, let's just say:

200 babies co-slept
800 babies did not co-sleep
_______________________
Total=1000 babies studied

100 of the babies died from "SIDS"
54 of those babies co-slept
46 of those babies did not co-sleep

If you bring those numbers back to the original:
54 of the 200 co-sleeping babies died (or 27%)
46 of the 800 non-co-sleeping babies died (or 5.75%)

There you see, in their study, the death numbers actually were significantly higher for the co-sleeping babies.

HOWEVER...
I am not supporting this article. Just pointing out the flaw with the argument.

I do think it's ridiculous to classify suffocation as SIDS, and I also think it's ridiculous that they admit many of the parents co-sleeping who did smother their babies were under the influence of something. If they wanted to conduct an accurate study, they should have just done it with people who co-sleep the way it is recommended.

My theory on this whole thing is that the states and organizations who are pushing for "Baby sleeps best ALONE" are concerned about those who are co-sleeping unsafely, and it's just easier to say, "Don't do it" rather than educate on the proper way of co-sleeping. Not to say that it's right...but that's why I think it happens. Also, misinterpretation of poor studies (such as this one), which, as we know, has happened with the CDC considering circumcision promotion....

Mama to learning.gifJulian Matthew, born 5/10/2011 nocirc.gif  

Hopeful vbac.gif for the next!

 

anne1140 is offline  
#13 of 21 Old 10-14-2009, 08:51 PM
 
noobmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 1,053
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by anne1140 View Post
My theory on this whole thing is that the states and organizations who are pushing for "Baby sleeps best ALONE" are concerned about those who are co-sleeping unsafely, and it's just easier to say, "Don't do it" rather than educate on the proper way of co-sleeping.
Sadly, this happens all the time. No one who knows anything about nutrition ever thought all fats were bad. But it was just easier for the government to push the "low fat" message in the 80s and 90s than to try to explain to people the difference between good and bad fats.
noobmom is offline  
#14 of 21 Old 10-29-2009, 09:13 PM
 
amii's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 3
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by fruitfulmomma View Post
From the BMJ page...



More than half of these mothers were smokers. Research on safe bedsharing has consistently shown that mothers who smoked during pregnancy should not bedshare. We know that smoking also increases risk of preterm birth and poor health in the child. Perhaps instead of blaming and shaming safe bedsharing families, we could spend more time helping women of childbearing age to stop smoking.
I struggled to quit smoking, and managed to do so by 20 weeks pregnant. I currently bedshare, and am wondering how dangerous this really is? I had never heard of this before, and am now terrified to go to sleep tonight?!
amii is offline  
#15 of 21 Old 10-30-2009, 06:46 PM
 
zensven42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The coldest place on Earth
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
random news articles are not usually very well researched nowadays and are mainly sensationalistic, in order to get people to read them.

Here are some well researched papers with info regarding this subject

http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/arti...should%20n.pdf

more here: http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/articles.html


Can't find any research that suggests cosleeping itself results in SIDS.

Tell her to better evaluate the source of her info next time. Anyone can find random "news" articles proving just about anything if they try hard enough. I bet I could find someone stating that the sky is red and women are aliens....doesn't make it true. If she wants more accurate info, she should read the actual entire paper that this story is quoting.

This is interesting: Why couldn't they make something like this in the US instead of just telling people to use a crib? http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/pamphlets/zealand.html

Oh that's right, because most of these sleep studies are funded by corporations who sell cribs, crib items, pacifiers, and other crap like that. Wouldn't want them to lose any profits eh?
zensven42 is offline  
#16 of 21 Old 10-30-2009, 07:03 PM
 
zensven42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The coldest place on Earth
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
OK, here is what I can get from the study so far:

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/1...m&ordinalpos=1


Looks like their results do not state that cosleeping was the major factor in the SIDS deaths, but rather smoking during pregnancy (huge difference!), drug use, and UNSAFE cosleeping conditions such swaddling, sleeping on a sofa, and using pillows. (CONCLUSIONS: Many of the SIDS infants had coslept in a hazardous environment. The major influences on risk, regardless of markers for socioeconomic deprivation, are amenable to change and specific advice needs to be given, particularly on use of alcohol or drugs before cosleeping and cosleeping on a sofa)

It is quite obvious that the "news" article spun the facts to make it appear as if cosleeping itself was the main problem---sensationalism as usual. How rude.
zensven42 is offline  
#17 of 21 Old 10-30-2009, 07:57 PM
 
maygee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 837
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by zensven42 View Post
random news articles are not usually very well researched nowadays and are mainly sensationalistic, in order to get people to read them.

Here are some well researched papers with info regarding this subject

http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/arti...should%20n.pdf

more here: http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/articles.html


Can't find any research that suggests cosleeping itself results in SIDS.

Tell her to better evaluate the source of her info next time. Anyone can find random "news" articles proving just about anything if they try hard enough. I bet I could find someone stating that the sky is red and women are aliens....doesn't make it true. If she wants more accurate info, she should read the actual entire paper that this story is quoting.

This is interesting: Why couldn't they make something like this in the US instead of just telling people to use a crib? http://www.nd.edu/~jmckenn1/lab/pamphlets/zealand.html

Oh that's right, because most of these sleep studies are funded by corporations who sell cribs, crib items, pacifiers, and other crap like that. Wouldn't want them to lose any profits eh?
That just looks like a bassinet or arms reach cosleeper pushed up next to the bed to me.
maygee is offline  
#18 of 21 Old 10-30-2009, 08:57 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,243
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 19 Post(s)
Amii - I think something like the Arms Reach co-sleeper would work for your family. It is similar to the one pictured the the link above for the pamphlet given out in New Zealand.
fruitfulmomma is online now  
#19 of 21 Old 10-31-2009, 01:00 AM
 
zensven42's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: The coldest place on Earth
Posts: 397
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I wasn't referring to the item in the photo (I hadn't even looked at it) I was talking about a pamphlet educating parents about safe ways of cosleeping as opposed to just telling them not to do it at all.
zensven42 is offline  
#20 of 21 Old 10-31-2009, 01:32 AM
ssh
 
ssh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 1,716
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amii View Post
I struggled to quit smoking, and managed to do so by 20 weeks pregnant. I currently bedshare, and am wondering how dangerous this really is? I had never heard of this before, and am now terrified to go to sleep tonight?!
You shouldn't bedshare if you still smoke because smokers exhale toxins during their sleep. Quitting at 20 weeks, all the toxins should be out of your system long before your baby was born.
ssh is offline  
#21 of 21 Old 11-03-2009, 11:37 PM
 
sapphire_chan's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 27,769
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by amii View Post
I struggled to quit smoking, and managed to do so by 20 weeks pregnant. I currently bedshare, and am wondering how dangerous this really is? I had never heard of this before, and am now terrified to go to sleep tonight?!
You're fine. And congratulations on your successful effort and your new baby!
sapphire_chan is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off