Re: [ozmidwifery] coth death study

[Pinky McKay]

Title: Re: [ozmidwifery] coth death study

Hi Lieve and Andrea,  yes Jim Sprott is the NZ researcher - I personally wouldnt discredit his work as I have a great respect for him as a forensic scientist - he is wellknown in New Zealand for solving a long standing murder case through meticulous research (The Arthur Allan Thomas case, where a neighbour was wrongly blamed and jailed for years for the murder of a young couple whose baby was found alive in the house) . However, in spite of British studies (as quoted in the article, Lieve) having similar results, there is some further research that refutes these findings. One of the things that may help protect babies is that they do have more arousals whilst sleeping on their backs -I interviewed a SIDS researcher from Monash a few years ago who said that when babies sleep on tummies, they tend to snuggle into the mattress and go into a deeper sleep and have fewer arousals -the mechanism wasnt clear from research at the time as to whether the problem was the obstruction to the baby's breathing (ie rebreathed gases) or whether the baby had difficulty arousing when there was an obstruction.   I also interviewed Prof James mc Kenna re sleep training and SIDS - he speculates that since the arousals seem to be protective, if babies are sleep trained before they are neurologically ready and do therefore have fewer arousals, they may be at a greater risk of sids -William Sears also talks about the mothers body being like a pacemaker to the baby. According to the local SIDS people -their librarian checked for me - there is no research on the effects of infant sleep training on SIDS (BLOODY HELL!!!)      I feel that if mothers want to wrap mattresses this may give them a "bet each way" but with the SIDS research we cant unequivically say babies will be safe on their tummies if the mattress is wrapped. Kaaren Fitzgerald, the founder of the Australian SIDS foundation (now SIDS and KIds) once told me that until they had THREE good studies they couldnt promote the findings. - for instance, Cigarette smoke is implicated in dozens of studies (now that is a toxic gas!)   In light of Jim Sprott and others findings, I think the SIDS official guidelines of using a clean well-fitting mattress is good information. I mention the gases theory but in the same breath then say that mattresses need to be  new, not second hand (greater risk of mould after matresses have been peed and sweated on) , and washed and aired regularly - pram matresses too.   Perhaps there is a collection of factors involved in SIDS risks.   I think this research is additional info for parents rather than alternative SIDS info  - to avoid misshapen heads/ developmental probs -advise tummy time when awake (healthy bubs really dont sleep as much as we are expected to believe- ie two hour stretches in the daytime and ALL night long) and some sleeping in slingsto alter positions - also turn babies heads from side to side. Co-sleeping with baby turning from side to side (one breast to the other)has been a natural way for generations  - I know many of your own babies slept on their sides or tummies before the current SIDS recommendations -babies crawled earlier then too!   Really, we can just offer the info and parents have to accept responsibility for their own choices -whether its birth or childcare (or life) there is no guarantee of a "safe" way: I think many parents simply want a guarantee for whatever they do - otherwise why would so many hand over responsibility for birth/ babies etc to experts?? - did you know over 50 million mothers abandoned their instincts to follow SPOCK, over a million to follow Christopher Green -etc etc   Pinky ----- Original Message ----- From: Andrea Bilcliff To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 14, 2003 7:27 PM Subject: Re: [ozmidwifery] coth death study Lieve, Is this related to work by Jim Sprott in New Zealand? (I haven't read your link) Last year on the UK Midwifery list there was quite a heated discussion about mattress wrapping & SIDS which I believe resulted in the 'banning' of a woman who was very strongly promoting the product. I kept a copy of some of the original postings. If you're interested I could send you a copy. Regards, Andrea Bilcliff