What's breaking your kids bones?

Could you imagine if your nine your old broke his arm, and upon visiting the doctor you found out he had osteoporosis? Impossible, you say. Osteoporosis only affects older adults. Not anymore.

Calcium deficiency in US kids as at an all-time high. A study comparing the residents of Rochester, Minnesota from 1999-2001 with those of 1969 to 1971, found a 42 percent increase in broken arms, and the biggest jump was among kids ages 8-14. “Kids are more calcium-deficient than ever before,” says Sundeep Khosla, M.D., professor of medicine at the Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, in Rochester, and the study’s lead researcher. (Parents Mag, pg 42, March 2007).

The article continues to give reasons why this is happening: too much soda and juice, not as much exercise, lactose intolerance. Good theories, and all probably do contribute to the problem. But there is one MAJOR cause that is glaringly overlooked.

Soy.

Tucked neatly away on the third page, the article mentions that when children are lactose intolerant, parents will often supplement with soy, which has no calcium. They recommend giving calcium supplements if this is the case with your child. What amazes me is that soy isn’t on the first page; heck, in the title, as the main cause of this disease!

To me, it’s so obvious that the recent popularity and huge increase in soy consumption is the number cause of calcium-deficient kids! Parents are duped into thinking that soy is healthier, so they give soy formula, soy yogurt, soy ice cream, the list goes on. Lactose intolerance is also on the rise, and instead of finding other milk alternatives, (i.e. goat’s milk) like people used to do, soy becomes the easy solution.

Did you know the FDA has never approved soy for human consumption? Did you also know that soy contains very harmful toxins and has been linked to a number of life threatening diseases? Please check out www.soyonlineservice.co.nz to read the truth about soy and what it can do to you and your children. Don’t blow this off as some silly conspiracy theory until you read this site. It’s worth the 15 minutes.

It saddens me that this research in Rochester didn’t include soy, and I wonder why it didn’t, especially when it seems so obvious. Was it intentionally left out? Check out the website above and decide for yourself. Most parents will read the magazine article, maybe cut down on soda, and never think twice about that organic Silk Soymilk in their fridge. What a shame.

The truth about SIDS

Those astute or concerned readers will have noticed that recently, a new study on SIDS has been released that link a brain defect with the cause of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. It was because of this article that I researched and wrote the following article on SIDS.

It was a hot topic in my mom’s group; so much in fact that I almost lost a few friends over it. I had no idea it would be so controversial. I still stand by my opinion and even when presented with other ideas and research, have not found any of it to be as convincing as the book I read called “The Cot Death Cover-Up” by Jim Sprott.

Here is a (long) excerpt from the letter I wrote to my mom friends:

…Before I divulge the gist of the book, let me share some interesting facts about SIDS that you may not know.
We are told before our babies are born to put them on their back so they don’t suffocate and die of SIDS. Oh, and don’t smoke cause that will increase the risk. That’s about as much as we’re told. There are SO many other known facts about SIDS that the SIDS alliance itself has posted on it’s website, but aren’t made common knowledge.

Here are just a FEW of the facts that if you think about, don’t make sense when combined with this recent brain defect research (or any medical condition, for that matter):

• The risk of SIDS rise from one baby in a family to the next, increasingly higher with each child (so for example, 3rd children are much more likely to die than the first born.)
• SIDS is much more common in winter
• SIDS happens more frequently when children are over-dressed (too warm)
• SIDS is much more common with single parents
• SIDS rarely kills babies under one month of age
• SIDS is more common with colored minority population, including African Americans (whereas the recent research says it may not apply to them)

Now, if this recent theory were true, none of these points make sense. If it was truly genetic and medical, why on earth is it more common for single parents? Or more common in the winter? Would being too warm suddenly make you get this disease? Why would all 2nd, 3rd, or 4th children have the defect more often than first-born children? Why would this disease wait to kick in for a month? It makes no sense.

As I’m sure most of you know, SIDS is given as a diagnosis when there is NO other evidence or reason for death. Right there this rules out suffocation because if someone suffocates, an autopsy can reveal this. So right there we are already misled by most of what we hear (take away all blankets, animals, bumpers, sleep on a hard mattress, etc so your baby won’t suffocate and die of SIDS! How many times have you heard this?) SIDS is not suffocation. And I would argue that it’s not a medical condition, either. The suffocation theory also doesn’t work with most of the points above.

So what causes SIDS, you ask? While the SIDS alliance claims there is no known reason, I believe there is and if you spend some time looking into it, I believe you will agree.

I won’t go into it too much here, but I will put forth the idea and let you explore it on your own. There is TONS of research and proven evidence that says that SIDS is caused by toxic gases that are given off by the baby’s mattress. If you’ve heard of this theory and also heard that it was “supposedly” disproved, I beg you to look into that deeper. It has never been disproved.

Quickly, here are a few facts. A New Zealand study studied 100,000 babies (a LOT more than this current study did) that slept on wrapped mattresses (so no gases could get through). NONE of them died. If 7 out of 10,000 babies die of SIDS, then at least 70 babies should have died in this study. NONE did. That is significant. And that is just the beginning.

Here’s the short theory: SIDS is caused by gaseous poisoning (three specific gases). These gases are commonly found in mattresses and become toxic when they react with common household fungi.

Here’s the longer one (for those more scientific minds): SIDS is caused by gaseous poisoning, the gases being phosphine, arsine and stibine. These toxic gases can be generated from the mattress on which the baby sleeps. The gases are formed by the action of common household fungi (e.g. Scopulariopsis brevicaulis) on compounds or (respectively) the elements phosphorus, arsenic and antimony within the mattress.

If you think about that cause and apply it to the points above (and ALL of the facts they know about SIDS), every single one plays out.

• The risk increases with each child because parents commonly reuse mattresses from one child to the next. The older the mattress, the more fungus has been established in the mattress from sweat, spit up, urine, etc. (even the waterproof ones)
• Babies are more bundled up in winter, and therefore sweat more. This would cause the fungus to build up more and therefore react quicker with the gases.
• See number 2.
• Single parents are much more likely to buy used mattresses because of finances
• A significant number of babies sleep on new mattresses, and it takes around one month for fungi capable of gas generation to become established in a mattress. However, a baby less than one month old can die of cot death if he or she is placed on a mattress which has recently been used by another baby and is already capable of generating toxic gas.
• Minority populations are more likely to use second hand items.
• The reason “back to sleep” has helped is because gases are heavier than air. Gases are more likely to accumulate near the surface of the mattress and even under the mattress (near the floor) When a baby sleeps on their stomachs, if there are gases present, their mouths are much closer to the gases then if they’re on their backs. This is why side sleeping didn’t degrease the risk, either.

How do you prevent SIDS? Wrap your mattresses. You can buy a mattress wrap for $25. They are not only sold by the guy who did this research, so he’s not just trying to make a buck. Oh, and you might be asking why this research isn’t well known or on the news? Well, that’s a whole other email, but the long and the short of is that the SIDS alliance is a multi-million dollar company that would lose all its’ funding once a solution (especially this cheap) was found. Secondly, it is the government that requires flame-retardants be put in all mattresses. These poisonous gases are mainly present because of these flame-retardants. Can you imagine the lawsuits that would ensue if the public found out it was a government mandated chemical that was killing their children? It makes sense why this research has been denied and kept “hidden” for all this time.

Without making this any longer, I’ll just tell all you moms that I was very skeptical about this when I first read it. I thought of all the questions there were and wrote them down. Then I emailed the man who wrote this book and helped come up with this theory. Not only did he write me back, he wrote me back several times and answered all my questions, as well as gave case by case proof of why the evidence out there supposedly disproving this theory was false. After these emails and reading his book, I’m completely convinced of this theory. My baby sleeps on a wrapped mattress, on her tummy, and I sleep well at night.

Here’s the website: http://www.cotlife2000.com/ and http://www.prevent-sids.org/
Here’s where you can buy the book (HIGHLY recommended) : http://www.eves-%20best.com/the-cot-death-cover-up.htm
Here’s just one of many sites you can buy the covers from: http://www.eves-best.com/babesafe-mattress-covers.htm

Don’t take my word for it. Research it yourself, but don’t stop on the surface level. I found many persuasive arguments against this theory that had I stopped there, I wouldn’t have believed it. Most importantly, read the book before you make your final judgment call. It’s amazing to me how many mom’s fervently disagreed without reading one page.

Do it for yourself, your sanity, and mostly, do it for your baby.

Why all the fuss about sleep?

As a new mom, sleep was the hottest topic, one worth obsessing over, for about four months. Everyone had their problems, their theories, their ideas, solutions, tricks, gadgets, slings, miracle remedies, you name it. I must have read almost a dozen books on the subject. (38 more and I’d be an expert!) Many emails were exchanged in my moms group from sleep-deprived parents begging for help.

I gave birth to a horrible sleeper. She not only had her days and nights mixed up for seven weeks straight, but once that was sorted out she would take three hours every night to fall asleep and wake up minimum of 3-4 times a night. I was miserable and determined to find a solution. Before I had a baby, I was an advocate of the cry-it-out method. Once my precious baby girl stole my heart, I couldn’t imagine enforcing it.

As the weeks dragged on and on, it was with impending dread that I knew crying it out was all that was left. I fought it all the way till the end. Then, even when it was only option left (that or never sleep for the next two years), I still had to hire a professional sleep consultant to help me through it.

But let me tell you; it worked. It worked well, and it worked fast, and while it was very hard, it was very, very worth it. From 4.5 months on, my baby has slept 12 hours every night, even while sick and teething. She was put in her own crib, and went to sleep. Yes, she has her occasional bad nights, but I can count them on both hands and she’s now approaching her first birthday.

It was because of this battle and eventual victory that I became the “sleep expert” amongst my peers. In response to many pleas (and answers), I wrote the following letter about sleep. If you are sleep deprived and your baby is over 4 months old, this one’s for you.

Dear Moms,

Well, here I am as usual, giving my two (or three) cents. I know what I’m about to say will probably offend most of you, but since everyone else is offering their thoughts, then I will too. I hope this message will be taken the right way; I'm not criticizing anyone's parenting or saying I know everything. I'm just offering up what I've learned. I’m not going to say the popular thing, which is “do what works for you.” I realize that every mom and baby is different, and we do have to find our own way. But the ‘do what works for you' philosophy can only go so far. If your baby cries when they fall down while learning to walk, are you going to stop them from walking because hearing them cry doesn’t work for you? No, you know they have to learn the skill, no matter how many times they fall down and cry. What I’m going to propose in this letter is that learning the skill of falling asleep is the same.

I’m amazed (but not surprised) at how many of us are going through the same exact thing at the same time. I know some have been dealing with night wakings longer than others, but it seems that in general, when our babies hit the 5 to 6 months mark, suddenly all the good sleep habits flew out the window. Is this a coincidence? No. The reason this is happening is because at this age, our babies get a lot smarter. They become aware that they are not part of you, and therefore understand your absence better. Because of this, they decide they want to see you throughout the night, too. They now have the ability to learn cause and effect. They cry, you respond. It becomes a game.

While it’s true that babies are always changing and going through stages, it’s actually studied and proven that not all sleep problems will simply disappear. Some will, some won’t. It depends on your child. I’ve talked to many parents who say their kid didn’t sleep through the night until they were three years old. This is NOT the problem going away. If your baby wakes up every night for three years, that is a problem – not a phase.

My purpose of this letter is not to argue about which parenting philosophy is best. I know I would be out numbered in my opinion. What I want to point out is this: when your baby wakes up 5 to 6 times a night, they are losing the precious sleep that they need to grow and develop. We all know that interrupted sleep cycles make us tired and grumpy during the day. Our babies are no different.

Dr. Marc Weissbluth, in his book “Healthy Sleep Habits, Happy Child” said the most profound thing about sleep that I’ve read. He pointed out that sleep is food for the brain, just like milk is food for the body. In this day and age, we would never dream about not feeding our children when they are hungry. In fact, the current fad is demand feeding – feed your baby every time they cry! And yet, sleep – which is just as important – is mostly ignored. How many specialists came in your room at the hospital to teach you how much sleep your baby needed?

In his book, Dr. Weissbluth relays study after study about the effects of LACK of sleep on young children. I won’t take the time to type it all out, but the list of adverse effects that lack of sleep have on kids, their behavior, their intelligence, adaptability, concentration, social skills – the list goes on – is long and mind blowing.

By responding to your baby five to six (or more) times a night, patting, rocking, walking – whatever it is that you have to do – you are depriving your child of sleep. They are waking up anyway, I realize that. But by responding that way, you are prolonging and perpetuating the problem. Yes, you are providing temporary comfort. But are you really doing what’s best for your baby? Or what’s easiest for you?

It’s extremely hard to hear your baby cry. I know that from personal experience. That’s why I tried every single method out there to get my baby to sleep. I didn’t want to let her cry. But in the end I realized that I wasn’t letting her cry because it was hard on ME, not because it was hard on her. I was sacrificing her sleep because I didn’t want to have to deal with the discomfort of hearing her cry. That was the bottom line. I knew that letting her cry wasn’t going to kill her. But I did feel like it was going to kill me. When my baby cried, I felt like a bad parent – and that wasn’t something I wanted to feel like.

I finally realized, with some help from a professional, that babies cry because it’s all they can do. It doesn’t necessarily mean they’re scared, hurting, mad, sad, or hating me. They cry (when going to sleep) because they are “protesting” learning a new skill.

Learning how to put yourself to sleep is a skill. When our kids learn to walk or read I’m sure there will be some crying, frustration, tears, etc. But we will still teach them until they learn. We’ll do this because we know they can’t go through life without learning these skills. And yet, when it comes to the skill of falling to sleep unassisted, we decide they don’t need to learn this skill and we help them every time.

Our babies need to learn this skill, and the only way they will learn it is if we give them space to do so. This means that they will cry, and they will “protest” the difficulty of learning this new skill. If they could talk, they’d say, “Mom, I don’t like this. It’s too hard.” But instead, they cry. If you rush to their rescue, they will either never learn it, or simply take months (or years) to outgrow it.

I knew I was doing my child a disservice by not letting her learn this skill. I decided that no matter how hard it was on ME, I was going to give her the gift of sleep. Most babies only take 3-5 nights. Mine took a week and a half. But now, she has a skill she will never forget. And at 6 months, she sleeps 12 hours straight with no wakings. She goes to sleep awake every night with no crying. And she takes consistent naps. And she's a very happy baby. Please don’t think I’m bragging; cause I’m not. I simply helped her learn something that every baby is capable of learning. It was hard, but it was worth it – for both of us.

I know that the philosophy of the age is “do whatever works for you.” And that’s fine. But I think doing what’s best for your baby is better. There is no scientific evidence, proof, or research that proves letting your baby cry is emotionally damaging. That theory stems from an Austrian psychoanalyst Otto Rank in 1929. He claimed that the birthing process interrupts the mother-child in-utero harmony and the only way to reestablish this harmony is constant day and night presence and availability of the mother. By 1949, this theory, lacking verifiable data, was dismissed – only to resurface many years later disguised under a new name – attachment parenting. It’s this philosophy that claims letting your baby cry is traumatizing to the child, and yet, they offer no actual proof for this claim (I’ve read the book, and there is none).

I know that I won’t change your minds and I’m sure I’ve offended many of you – and for that I apologize – it wasn’t my intention. But with all the things I’ve learned about sleep (I’ve read 8 or 9 books on it now), I really wanted to share how important sleep is for our children. If you let the numerous amount of night wakings continue, you are keeping your baby from getting they sleep they need. I feel that that fact is more important than how WE ‘feel’ about the issue. If you let your baby learn to fall asleep on his/her own (i.e. cry), you will give them a new skill, they will get the sleep they need to grow and be healthy, and you will restore rest and sanity to the rest of your household!

A Brief Introduction

Instead of writing a long post about who I am, what I believe, and why I’m starting this blog, I will just briefly explain that this blog will mostly be my response to common, every day ideas, news, articles, research, etc. Since I am a mother, much of it will focus on issues confronting parents today. It won’t be limited to those topics, however. It mainly depends on what I read and what moves me to rant.

The reason I feel my ideas are worth reading is because they are usually opposite of common opinion. With the media being very unified in voice these days, there aren’t many avenues one has to read a different view; thus, the Divergent View is born.