Myths: Children, firm mattress and bed sharing

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Quite long time ago capitalists decided that they need to sell more children beds and also sell special children mattresses.

So they got to scientists, paid them and things started to turn.

Various U.S. medical groups warn parents not to place their infants to sleep in adult beds due to serious safety risks. Bed-sharing puts babies at risk of suffocation, strangulation, and SIDS. Studies have found that bed-sharing is the most common cause of deaths in babies, especially those 3 months and younger. Because of the risks involved, both the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) advise against bed-sharing.

This guys just forgot to tell you that for small baby it is extreme stress to not have mommy around, touching him. As in nature it means almost certain near death, hence constant repeated cry if you put it even nearby. And issues with your own sleep as result. Not having mommy results in instant big hormones shift and affect development of brain and lot of other functions, including lack of good sleep resulting sometimes in organs defects.

Here strategy had been to use scaring - you can suffocate baby (real thing!), but issue is that by doing that they ask you to not make things much better but to make things worse. Can read some statistics on autism, multiple research show that major cause of this can be lack of physical closeness with mother. Btw, working mother before around age 4 add big part of issues also. But I never saw any of this paid researchers or press to ask for mothers to stay with children as long as possible, as their owners won't like this, but I saw tons of such research results during socialism.

With modern tech you much better to put some sensor on baby with alarm if you are afraid instead of this shit.

SIDS is any sudden or unexpected infant death that occurs during sleep within the first year of life and that cannot be explained after thorough investigation. Most SIDS cases occur within the first six months of life, and babies between the ages of 2 and 4 months are at the highest risk. SIDS remains the leading cause of death among U.S. babies.

Note here same tech as used during COVID early hysteria. If you look at statistics in 1990 they put almost 70% of any baby death in sleep as death from SIDS, as it is some fuzzy and totally undefined thing - no one cares. A babies sleep 19-20 hours a day and some babies obviously die due to health defects and such - you can get nice numbers. Lately they just asked doctors to change statistics and put same cases under different death categories. And now they cite numbers of ALL, 100% deaths during sleep, as such number is more impressive.

Suffocation from a soft mattress, memory foam, waterbed,

For almost 100% of real babies your soft mattress is NOT soft, it is hard, as baby is light. So this guys lie openly. They use games with words to cheat you into spending money.

And to make you pay they offer you to buy extremely hard mattress (as you need to feel difference to spend money, not because it must be such hard).

Why they want to sell you so hard thing? Because 99,9% of people don't buy such mattress for themselves, and your don't want your baby to suffer on your subpar mattress don't you, you want best for your baby, you want to check advises from best professionals.

Note how they put it:

Consumer Reports notes that if the mattress feels good or even okay for you, then it is definitely not a mattress your baby should be sleeping on.

This is how paid criminals get their salary.

Babies should always be placed to sleep on their backs on a firm mattress without any pillows, blankets, toys, stuffed animals, or other items.

Baby physically is not much different from adult, so sleeping without pillow on the back and on extremely hard mattress is not the thing baby likes.

Also if you open up any medical papers on suffocation you'll see that almost all of cases happen during.. sleeping on the back and with some issue with pillow - too high head position or too low. Such way you can have tongue blocking the airway.

Ideally manufacturers want to sell you thing like (feels similar to a brick):

And separate expensive bed.

In Mordor they did not have SIDS being promoted by media, so here reasons for same type mattresses usage are totally different. Media tell you that children spine is completely different and by making them sleep weird and with deformed spine we make stuff better. Money always make wonders in presstitutes heads.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Look how paid for pseudo science guys ask to avoid scientific approach

The AAP Task Force supports the earlier conclusion of a National Institutes of Health Consensus Conference that recommended against using home monitors as a strategy to prevent SIDS. In the past, health care providers considered the use of cardiorespiratory monitors to reduce risk in certain groups such as siblings born in families who had previously lost a child from SIDS. However, no national consensus deems this practice as necessary or effective. In fact, the Collaborative Home Infant Monitoring Evaluation (CHIME) study, which used specially designed electronic monitors in the home to detect cardiorespiratory events in infants, raised serious questions about the relationship between SIDS and events detected by home monitors. For this reason, home monitors are not recommended as a way to reduce the risk of SIDS.

Now you know where all this fake HCQ studies come from? Same guys, same methods.

Only with HCQ and Vitamin D publications media killed hundreds of thousands and made life much worse for tens of millions. Due to political and economic agenda, they don't acre for people or your children.

Why simple children oxygen/hear rate monitor with wireless link is not advised? Because it is now too cheap and mass produced, and you will resell it after baby will grow up and it will work another 7-10 years just fine. Not good for this guys.

Whole capitalist science is corrupt and rotten by its nature.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Quite good book on many aspects of baby and mother related business.

Separating a newborn from his mother at birth or shortly after birth is standard practice in most American hospitals. Even hospitals that allow moms and babies to have skin-to-skin contact in the first few minutes of life insist on taking the baby away within an hour of birth. Yet more than half a dozen scientific studies show that the outcome for infant health and for mother-baby bonding is better when a mother and a baby are not interrupted in this way. Dozens more nonhuman mammal studies show that early uninterrupted contact actually stimulates oxytocin and other hormones, which enhance the feeling that can only be described as being in love. Early uninterrupted skin-to-skin contact has been shown to reduce crying, improve bonding, keep the baby warm, and facilitate breastfeeding.

One of the most recent studies, published in Biological Psychiatry in November 2011, illustrates how much maternal-infant separation stresses the baby by measuring the physiological impact on newborns. When researchers compared stress levels in infants sleeping by themselves to infants sleeping with their mothers, they found something startling: newborns sleeping alone had a 176 percent increase in autonomic nervous system activity compared to newborns sleeping with their mothers. The almost threefold increase in nervous system activity is a stress response, showing that the separated newborns were anxious, even as they slept.

“Though they were sleeping, the quality of that sleep was poor,” Nils Bergman, M.D., an independent researcher and one of the study’s coauthors, explains to me. “Good-quality sleep consists of sleep cycling with approximately equal amounts of active sleep (when REM also happens) and quiet sleep, when the brain is wiring neural circuits. During separation, some of the infants had no sleep cycling at all, and of those that did had brief periods of cycling only.”

Why were the newborn infants so anxious and sleeping so badly? Because humans, like other primates, need to be in constant contact with their mothers. “Maternal separation for a newborn primate is perceived as a very dire threat,” continues Bergman, who worked as a mission doctor in a rural hospital in Zimbabwe, where the survival rate of premature infants who weighed between 2.2 and 3.3 pounds jumped from only 10 percent to 50 percent when mothers were instructed to carry them skin-to-skin in pouches on their fronts. (Survival rates for bigger babies jumped to 90 percent.) That experience changed Bergman’s understanding of what human infants needed after they were born. “I realized that I was seeing the real biology of Homo sapiens at work, and that what I had learned at medical school was a result of modern culture equipped with amazing technology, but no understanding of human biology.”

Bergman points out that animal research scientists separate newborn mammals from their mothers in order to study the damage on the developing newborn brain. So why do hospitals do this? One reason is for the convenience of the pediatrician, who is responsible for examining a newborn to make sure he is healthy. While it’s entirely possible to examine a baby’s reflexes, evaluate his condition, and even resuscitate a baby on the mother’s chest, it’s not as easy. The doctor has to get into an awkward position and is likely to get blood and other birthing fluids on his clothes.

Vitaliy_Kiselev

There is no scientific or medical data regarding proper support and comfort in a child's mattress. Most of what we have seen is anecdotal or pseudoscience. The only rule that we are aware of is having an extra firm mattress only matters with a crib mattress when you have concerns of SIDS and suffocation from too soft of a mattress and inability to move for very young children/babies.

https://spindlemattress.com/blogs/faq/firmness-for-a-child

Vitaliy_Kiselev

Following a warning letter from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), Owlet has stopped selling its popular Smart Sock family in the US. On October 5th, the agency contacted Owlet to tell the company it was selling the wearables “without marketing approval, clearance or authorization.”

In a response spotted by Deseret News, Owlet says it’s complying with the FDA’s request. It has stopped selling the socks while it seeks clearance from the FDA. The company says it will offer a “new sleep monitoring solution” in the near future.

It is big market where babies better die more, FDA thinks.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories

Tags in Topic

Top Posters