Hacker News Reader

Comment by tptacek | Hacker News Reader

I upvoted you, since I've had the (apparently not so) unique experience of having my first kid at the same time as my first "real" startup, and it was fraught with peril. I agree that the preachiness of your comment is grating, but the tone of the blog post you're commenting on kind of warrants it.

That said, the real risk in this scenario isn't to the child; the risk is that you'll demolish your relationship with the other parent. The kid will be fine for the first year or so. They're basically very smelly houseplants until they get to crawling age. You're constantly terrified that they're going to randomly die on you, but the rules for preventing that outcome are straightforward and hard to forget.

View on HN

You are SO right. The relationship with Mummy is about the only dicey thing right now. It's good right now, but there have been moments.

"You're constantly terrified that they're going to randomly die on you, but the rules for preventing that outcome are straightforward and hard to forget."

Amen, brother. Right again.

It wasn't meant to be preachy, so much as a word of caution. I (perhaps mistakenly) believe in some sort of unofficial "hacker dad" fraternity exists where people can be a bit informal.

You're constantly terrified that they're going to randomly die on you, but the rules for preventing that outcome are straightforward and hard to forget.

Changing the recommendation from sleeping face-down to sleeping on the back has reduced the rate of SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome or something like that) in Sweden by roughly 80% since 1992. There was a peak at 1.1 per 1000 live births in 1991, and it's now at 0.25 or less (in 2008 it was down to 0.13)[1].

Some babies sleep better face down, but I prefer somewhat uneasy sleep for six to nine months (until they can turn over by themselves) to a tenfold higher risk of death.

[1]: (Swedish) http://www.internetmedicin.se/dyn_main.asp?page=1466

I haven't heard any solid research behind the back vs. face down approach, and I don't believe any currently exists.

This recommendation apparently comes due to raw statistics until some better data can be gathered.

That said, I'm not a gambler and my kids when on their backs. Then they wanted to sleep face down, now they sleep on their backs again (I have infant triplets).

I wish there was more solid data on SIDS, but it's apparently proven a difficult area of study.

I have 4 kids. They all slept face down. They all lived.

The point being, even the stuff we fear in the western world is really pretty unlikely. Feed them, don't drop them and you are pretty much good. (for the first year)

For things that occur so rarely, you can't extrapolate based on your experience. By your logic, we shouldn't get vaccinated because "my 4 cousins didn't, and they lived."

My point was not as much about how you do or don't die from SIDS, but rather that it is mostly a 1st world problem. We don't worry about cholora or dysentery.

I think that was the OP's point. SIDS is rare and probably has nothing to do with a baby's position.It's a medical guess, at this point.

I almost feel irresponsible mentioning this, so let me say that one should always listen to their doctors.

SIDS is rare and probably has nothing to do with a baby's position.

There's a bunch of research on the subject, and the resulting recommendation is that sleeping on the back is preferred. I haven't read the actual studies, but a bunch are mentioned in the article I linked to:

Alm B, Lagercrantz H, Wennergren G. Stop SIDS - sleeping solitary supine, sucking soother, stopping smoking substitutes. Acta Paediatr. 2006 Mar;95(3):260-2.

Swedish Medical Research Council State of the Art Conference on the Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Proceedings. Gothenburg, 3-5 June 1992. Acta Paediatr Suppl 1993;389(1):1-129.

Alm B, Milerad J, Wennergren G, Skjaerven R, Øyen N, Norvenius G, et al. A case-control study of smoking and sudden infant death syndrome in the Scandinavian countries, 1992 to 1995. The Nordic Epidemiological SIDS Study. Arch Dis Child 1998;78(4):329-34.

Alm B, Norvenius SG, Wennergren G, Skjaerven R, Oyen N, Milerad J, et al. Changes in the epidemiology of sudden infant death syndrome in Sweden 1973-1996. Arch Dis Child 2001;84(1):24-30.

Alm B, Möllborg P, Erdes L, Pettersson R, Aberg N, Norvenius G, Wennergren G. SIDS risk factors and factors associated with prone sleeping in Sweden. Arch Dis Child. 2006;91:915-9.

Wennergren G. Prevention of sudden infant death syndrome. Pediatr Pulmonol 2004;37 Suppl 26:110-1.

Carpenter RG, Irgens LM, Blair PS, England PD, Fleming P, Huber J, et al. Sudden unexplained infant death in 20 regions in Europe: case control study. Lancet 2004;363(9404):185-91.

American Academy of Pediatrics, Task Force on Sudden Infant Death Syndrome. Policy Statement. The changing concept of sudden infant death syndrome: diagnostic coding shifts, controversies regarding the sleeping environment, and new variables to consider in reducing risk. Pediatrics 2005;116:1245-55.

[edit: google the names of the studies and you'll find abstracts or more]

I've read some of the actual studies you've quoted (and others), and they seem to indicate that infants that sleep on their backs fair slightly better in statistics. Some also blame heavier blankets and "bumper pads" (the pads that wrap around the bars at the base of the mattress).

As I mentioned elsewhere, my understanding is that it's merely a recommendation based on statistics with no direct correlation.

My babies went on their backs, because even a %.001 difference is enough for me to play the game, seeing as I don't know what I'd do if one of them passed away.

a recommendation based on statistics with no direct correlation

"a recommendation based on statistics" usually means there is a correlation. I think you mean that it may not imply causation, which is true of course.

Even the high number is "only" 1.1 in 1000, so 0.11%. Still, 0.013% is quite a bit lower. My kids haven't had any trouble sleeping on their backs (yet - the young one is only four months), but if they had I think I'd let them sleep face down and just watch them better. There are devices that detect breathing in a baby bed and warn if none is detected for X seconds, which might ease the minds of worried parents - regardless if face up/down.

"The kid will be fine for the first year or so. They're basically very smelly houseplants until they get to crawling age."

The major exception is that they lose the ability to learn the phonemes of other languages after the first year. There are other potential abilities that are lost after the first year too, but nothing as difficult and time consuming as this. (Because for whatever reason playing a CD/DVD doesn't work so you actually need to find someone to speak to your child in person, which usually means doing some sort of baby exchange for a few hours a week.)

What I mean is that the kid isn't going to grow up writing emo poems about his neglectful dad if dad's reading commit logs during "quality time" at 2 months. I don't mean that babies do fine if you stick them in a Skinner Box. Yes, talk to the baby.

Try reading the commit logs out loud.

"My child learned to merge at 7 months - we're so proud!"

My mom likes to tell people I could operate a remote conntrol at 18 months. Not sure if either a) its normal or b) its a good thing.

I took my dads typewriter apart at the ripe old age of three. He didn't think it was a 'good thing' either.

They're basically very smelly houseplants until they get to crawling age.

Maybe some kids are like that. Others can be quite challenging from the get go (such as a kid with a serious medical condition or other handicap, very high IQ, or all of the above).

YMMV. Mine certainly did.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com