A new study on breastfeeding suggests that giving infants only breast milk during their first 6 months may not be best for their health:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20110114/ts_afp/healthchildrenresearchbritain
Ten years ago, based in part on studies done in developing countries, the World Health Organization recommended that babies be fed exclusively breast milk for the first 6 months. This practice was thought to give rise to fewer infections and growth problems. Apparently, however, what is best for baby's health depends to some extent on whether the baby is growing up in a developed country; when the baby lives somewhere with access to better quality food, it is better to start to introduce other foods sooner - doing so seems to make make anemia and the development of allergies less likely! Researchers in Sweden confirmed the link between allergies and late introduction of foods other than breast milk: they found that early onset celiac disease increased after a recommendation to delay introduction of gluten until age six months, "and it fell to previous levels after the recommendation reverted to four months". This makes sense in principle, too, given that the body seems to learn from what it is exposed to early in life what is foreign and what is not. (For this reason, children who grow up in a household with pets are less likely to have dander allergies, for example.)
As interesting as this study is, almost equally interesting is the response to it: one breastfeeding advocate challenged the findings not on any kind of scientific grounds, but because it "plays into the hands of the baby food industry". Whether or not it does, what does this matter if exclusively breastfeeding longer really does contribute to nutrition deficiencies and the development of allergies in the child? (As my husband commented, this is akin to opposing the development of an AIDS vaccine because it would benefit the pharmaceutical industry.)
On this issue, as with many issues having to do with birth and with child care, too often the question is which answer is consistent with one's uncritically accepted broader ideals, not which answer is actually right (let alone whether one's broader ideals are). A person's views on birth, child care and parenting, are almost always tied to his or her most fundamental ideas - about what it is to be human, what parenting requires, what raising a baby to be a healthy well-adjusted person means and requires, gender roles, and even about the value of modern medicine and technology more generally. For this reason, it's harder to get people like the breastfeeding advocate quoted above (or the doctors who treat pregnancy as a medical problem) to really consider the facts in their full context and reevaluate their judgments accordingly. In this case, it would mean considering introducing solid foods before 6 months. One thing that remains uncontroversial, however, is the health benefit, in terms of boosting the baby's immune system, of breastfeeding for newborns; the results of this study do not speak against the established health benefits of breastfeeding, just in favor of also introducing foods other than breast milk a little earlier in the baby's life.
Showing posts with label nutrition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label nutrition. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Monday, January 3, 2011
Should you worry about that New Year's Eve sip of bubbly?
Many women entirely abstain from alcohol during pregnancy and worry about the possible fetal effects of any alcohol they consumed before they knew they were pregnant. Their caution and concern may seem well-placed; studies that show that excess alcohol consumption during pregnancy can cause low birth weight, cognitive impairment, behavioral problems, or even full-blown fetal alcohol syndrome. The effects of heavy drinking during pregnancy are uncontroversial and are very serious to the health of the developing fetus, not to mention that anyone with binge drinking tendencies or a bottle-of-Jack-per-week habit is obviously ill-suited to be a parent for other reasons.
If heavy drinking causes serious effects, doesn't it make sense to assume that even light drinking has some detrimental effects? In short, no. Obviously, the fact that excessive ingestion of any substance can have serious consequences doesn't necessarily mean that there are any risks to occasional, moderate ingestion of the same substance. For example, although cyanide is lethal in sufficient doses, no one swears off eating apples because their seeds contain trace amounts of cynaide - the amount found in the seeds is so insignificant that accidentally swallowing the seeds has absolutely no detrimental effect.
Thus, it is perhaps not surprising that new medical research shows that light drinking during pregnancy - i.e. having 1 or 2 drinks per week - has no discernible affects on your developing baby. Researchers followed the children of women with different drinking habits (those who abstained entirely during pregnancy, those who had 1-2 drinks per week and those who were heavier drinkers) until the children were 5 years old, and found that light drinking during pregnancy had absolutely no detrimental effect on children's cognitive abilities or behavioral tendencies. (Light drinking by the mothers at first actually seemed to have beneficial cognitive and behavioral effects on their children, until researchers controlled for the income and education levels of the mothers.)
For a decent layperson's summary of the study, click here. To read the abstract and access a link to the full text of the study, in all its technical detail, click here. (Note: the full text of the study can only be accessed through a university library or with some other kind of subscription to the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.)
In short, the problem with studies of the fetal effects of the consumption of just about anything during pregnancy is that they tend to focus on pregnant women who ingest a lot of the substance. This makes it difficult for pregnant women to know what commonly ingested foods and medicines may be entirely safe in moderation. This kind of study, with its focus on moderate alcohol consumption, is thus a valuable find (even if it is, unfortunately, retrospective regarding pregnant women's alcohol consumption). It finds no evidence that light alcohol consumption during pregnancy causes any harm to the developing fetus, so have a glass of wine on date night if you'd like, and don't sweat that New Year's Eve toast!
If heavy drinking causes serious effects, doesn't it make sense to assume that even light drinking has some detrimental effects? In short, no. Obviously, the fact that excessive ingestion of any substance can have serious consequences doesn't necessarily mean that there are any risks to occasional, moderate ingestion of the same substance. For example, although cyanide is lethal in sufficient doses, no one swears off eating apples because their seeds contain trace amounts of cynaide - the amount found in the seeds is so insignificant that accidentally swallowing the seeds has absolutely no detrimental effect.
Thus, it is perhaps not surprising that new medical research shows that light drinking during pregnancy - i.e. having 1 or 2 drinks per week - has no discernible affects on your developing baby. Researchers followed the children of women with different drinking habits (those who abstained entirely during pregnancy, those who had 1-2 drinks per week and those who were heavier drinkers) until the children were 5 years old, and found that light drinking during pregnancy had absolutely no detrimental effect on children's cognitive abilities or behavioral tendencies. (Light drinking by the mothers at first actually seemed to have beneficial cognitive and behavioral effects on their children, until researchers controlled for the income and education levels of the mothers.)
For a decent layperson's summary of the study, click here. To read the abstract and access a link to the full text of the study, in all its technical detail, click here. (Note: the full text of the study can only be accessed through a university library or with some other kind of subscription to the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health.)
In short, the problem with studies of the fetal effects of the consumption of just about anything during pregnancy is that they tend to focus on pregnant women who ingest a lot of the substance. This makes it difficult for pregnant women to know what commonly ingested foods and medicines may be entirely safe in moderation. This kind of study, with its focus on moderate alcohol consumption, is thus a valuable find (even if it is, unfortunately, retrospective regarding pregnant women's alcohol consumption). It finds no evidence that light alcohol consumption during pregnancy causes any harm to the developing fetus, so have a glass of wine on date night if you'd like, and don't sweat that New Year's Eve toast!
Monday, November 22, 2010
Don't, Don't, Don't...
After I graduated from university, I spent a year living in Japan, teaching English. Dan Strack, a fellow English teacher, hilariously captured in song what it's like to be a Westerner in Japan. Needless to say, any Westerner living in Japan who wants to try to avoid embarrassment has to learn some new rules. His song "Don't" (from his album The Gaijin Years) offers a few tips on doing this. Here are the opening lyrics:
There are two main concerns with eating raw sushi during pregnancy: the risks of eating uncooked meat and the mercury content of fish. Let's look at each supposed risk in turn. Uncooked meat is more likely to harbor parasites, and eating uncooked meat is more likely to cause food-borne illnesses. Some food-borne illnesses can be life-threatening to a fetus, even if they would just be a rather disgusting inconvenience to a healthy adult. Raw sushi served in the States, though not cooked to kill parasites and other icky stuff, is flash frozen—this basically provides the same protection from parasites and microoganisms as cooking does. A 1991 National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine study seems to confirm that food-borne illnesses from sushi are not a serious concern; most seafood-associated illnesses come from raw mollusks. If you remove those from the statistical pool, your risk of falling ill from eating seafood is 1 in 2 million servings. By comparison, the risk from eating cooked chicken is 1 in 25,000. Given my own food poisoning experiences—all 3 caused by chicken and none caused by anything else, and this despite the fact that I regularly eat sushi, medium-rare steaks, and pork that isn't well-done—this seems about right. If we consider only this risk, it seems you'd be wiser to swear off chicken and eat sushi your whole pregnancy. (This isn't completely fair to chicken, though, since salmonella is typically less dangerous to the fetus than some other common parasites and bacteria.) Avoiding raw shellfish does seem like a good idea, though.
What about the mercury risk? Mercury poisoning can cause severe neurological damage, damage to peripheral vision, and worse, and the effects are typically more serious for the fetus than for the mom ingesting the mercury-laden food. Who would want to risk this? No one would, of course, but there is no reason to think that anyone is taking any risk from eating fish—even from eating fish on a regular basis. Some of the scary literature out there is based on the fact that EPA's "reference dose" for ingestion of mercury is set many, many times below the level of mercury that has been shown to cause any harm. Almost three-quarters of Japanese women of childbearing age have mercury levels above the EPA reference dose. Similary, "over-achieving Chinese children in Hong Kong, whose blood-mercury levels are between 10 and 18 times as high as their counterparts in the United States" are clearly not suffering any ill-effects from their fish consumption. The only clinical cases documenting mercury poisoning from fish involve people eating fish from waters that were the direct dumping grounds for industrial waste (the infamous Minamata Bay and Niigata mercury poisonings).
Based on the very low incidence of food-borne illnesses from eating fish and the fact that there is no reason to think that the trace amounts of mercury in fish will lead to any health effects—especially among Westerners who simply do not eat much fish, even if they have a serious sushi habit—I don't see any reason to avoid sushi when pregnant. Given the nutritional value of fish, sushi will probably only be beneficial to your health and that of your developing baby.
For my next post: the risks of ingesting alcohol when pregnant.
Sources
http://www.mercuryfacts.org/faqMercury.cfm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/opinion/15shaw.html
Living in Japan is like crossing a minefield:The "don'ts" continue for several verses and several minutes, and then the song (almost) concludes:
embarrassing explosions can happen every day.
Even if you understood everything going on around you,
chances are you still wouldn't understand what to do or say...
I hate to dwell on negatives or be too pessimistic,
but here are a few rules that have been useful to me.
Don't, don't, don't...
Don't wear your shoes on tatatmi
Don't try to guess what's in that pastry...
Don't buy the salt-flavored toothpaste
Don't take part in a late-night downtown drag-race
Don't use umbrellas with typhoon winds blowingBeing pregnant seems to come with a similarly endless list of don'ts. No alcohol, caffeine, soft cheeses, over-the-counter meds, hot tub use, sushi, etc. Since this is turning into a Japan-themed post, let's look at the evidence regarding eating sushi (and fish more generally) during pregnancy. I admit to immediately being skeptical of all the warnings against pregnant women eating sushi and cooked fish - the majority of Japanese women still list sushi as their favorite food (for Japanese men, it's steak), many eat it daily, and they don't seem to slack off on their sushi habit when pregnant. And when they're not eating sushi, they're often eating grilled fish, or some kind of soup or sauce made from fish stock. Yet neither they nor their babies have the sorts of health problems one would expect given the dire warnings we hear from US health agencies. So what's going on?
Don't you wonder how long this song can keep going?
You may think I'm just exaggerating, so I'll sum it all up.
There's just one thing to keep in mind when push comes to shove
Remember...all...of the above
Note: Before I get started, I should stress that I'm not a doctor and this is not medical advice.
I'm just an educated, thinking person sorting through the publicly available evidence
and hysteria (ha!) regarding this issue.
and hysteria (ha!) regarding this issue.
There are two main concerns with eating raw sushi during pregnancy: the risks of eating uncooked meat and the mercury content of fish. Let's look at each supposed risk in turn. Uncooked meat is more likely to harbor parasites, and eating uncooked meat is more likely to cause food-borne illnesses. Some food-borne illnesses can be life-threatening to a fetus, even if they would just be a rather disgusting inconvenience to a healthy adult. Raw sushi served in the States, though not cooked to kill parasites and other icky stuff, is flash frozen—this basically provides the same protection from parasites and microoganisms as cooking does. A 1991 National Academy of Sciences Institute of Medicine study seems to confirm that food-borne illnesses from sushi are not a serious concern; most seafood-associated illnesses come from raw mollusks. If you remove those from the statistical pool, your risk of falling ill from eating seafood is 1 in 2 million servings. By comparison, the risk from eating cooked chicken is 1 in 25,000. Given my own food poisoning experiences—all 3 caused by chicken and none caused by anything else, and this despite the fact that I regularly eat sushi, medium-rare steaks, and pork that isn't well-done—this seems about right. If we consider only this risk, it seems you'd be wiser to swear off chicken and eat sushi your whole pregnancy. (This isn't completely fair to chicken, though, since salmonella is typically less dangerous to the fetus than some other common parasites and bacteria.) Avoiding raw shellfish does seem like a good idea, though.
What about the mercury risk? Mercury poisoning can cause severe neurological damage, damage to peripheral vision, and worse, and the effects are typically more serious for the fetus than for the mom ingesting the mercury-laden food. Who would want to risk this? No one would, of course, but there is no reason to think that anyone is taking any risk from eating fish—even from eating fish on a regular basis. Some of the scary literature out there is based on the fact that EPA's "reference dose" for ingestion of mercury is set many, many times below the level of mercury that has been shown to cause any harm. Almost three-quarters of Japanese women of childbearing age have mercury levels above the EPA reference dose. Similary, "over-achieving Chinese children in Hong Kong, whose blood-mercury levels are between 10 and 18 times as high as their counterparts in the United States" are clearly not suffering any ill-effects from their fish consumption. The only clinical cases documenting mercury poisoning from fish involve people eating fish from waters that were the direct dumping grounds for industrial waste (the infamous Minamata Bay and Niigata mercury poisonings).
Based on the very low incidence of food-borne illnesses from eating fish and the fact that there is no reason to think that the trace amounts of mercury in fish will lead to any health effects—especially among Westerners who simply do not eat much fish, even if they have a serious sushi habit—I don't see any reason to avoid sushi when pregnant. Given the nutritional value of fish, sushi will probably only be beneficial to your health and that of your developing baby.
For my next post: the risks of ingesting alcohol when pregnant.
Sources
http://www.mercuryfacts.org/faqMercury.cfm
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/15/opinion/15shaw.html
Read more at http://www.babymed.com/food-and-nutrition/how-safe-it-eat-sushi-or-raw-fish-during-pregnancy?ktrack=kcplink
Wednesday, November 17, 2010
"I think I might be dying"
I was recently talking to the woman who cleans our apartment for us about her first pregnancy. She was on birth control when she got pregnant (oops!) and had no inkling at all that she was expecting for the first month or so. She finally went to the doctor when morning sickness kicked in, and she described her state to her doctor as, "I think I might be dying. I'm so sick every night." She thought she must have cancer or some other sort of terrible malady to feel that nauseous all the time. That's how fun morning sickness can be!
The surprising thing for me about morning sickness was that it's not just in the morning! In fact, I have hardly ever felt sick in the morning—the evening is usually the worst time. As many pregnancy books point out, "morning sickness" is a misnomer for many women. Fortunately, I'm feeling sick less and less often as the first trimester comes to an end.
The good news is, you can do a few things to control and prevent first trimester nausea. Everyone has different tips on how to do so, and I'm sure different things work for different women, but here are a few things I've found most helpful:
Have any other tips for preventing first-trimester nausea? Post them in the comments below!
The surprising thing for me about morning sickness was that it's not just in the morning! In fact, I have hardly ever felt sick in the morning—the evening is usually the worst time. As many pregnancy books point out, "morning sickness" is a misnomer for many women. Fortunately, I'm feeling sick less and less often as the first trimester comes to an end.
The good news is, you can do a few things to control and prevent first trimester nausea. Everyone has different tips on how to do so, and I'm sure different things work for different women, but here are a few things I've found most helpful:
- Get enough sleep. Before I got pregnant, I'd very regularly get by on 5-6 hours of sleep. But now anything less than 7-1/2 or 8 hours of sleep is a recipe for me feeling barfy and exhausted the whole next day. As soon as I realized this and started sleeping enough, the intense bouts of nausea went away.
- Stay hydrated. This will also help keep you from feeling warm or feverish. It's a good idea to always carry water with you.
- Never let your stomach be too full or empty. I find I have to eat a little something every 2-3 hours. For this reason, I also make sure to eat something shortly after I get up in the morning.
- Each snack should be a good mix of fat, protein and carbs - or at least these are the kinds of snacks I've found most effective at settling my stomach. I pretty much lived on egg and cheese sandwiches, cheese and crackers, baked potatoes with sour cream, and apples during the worst week or two of nausea. I also drank a lot of milk and water.
- Don't eat anything sugary. I am a huge chocolate fan, and usually have a little bit of chocolate every day. I could only eat small amounts of very dark, slightly bitter chocolate for most of the first trimester. Desserts were out of the question. Strangely, honey did not have the same ill effects as sugar, so if you want to sweeten something, try a bit of honey. (I believe you are supposed to stick to pasteurized honey while pregnant.)
- There is something to that pregnant women and pickles myth, but it's not just pickles—anything sour or bitter seems to go down well. A tiny bit of straight lemon juice (I'd just suck on a lemon slice) was strangely effective at calming my stomach. This worked much better than any over-the-counter remedy; the few I tried were completely useless—save your money for cute maternity clothes instead.
- Ginger candy was also excellent at settling my stomach. I really liked The Ginger People's gin-gin candies. Just don't get overly sweet ginger candy—the sugar cancels out the beneficial effects of the ginger.
- If your prenatal multivitamin makes you sick, talk to your doctor about switching to a folic-acid-only supplement. My doctor suggested that as a possibility before I even mentioned feeling nauseous.
- Pay attention to your body. Everyone has different smells and tastes that set them off. For me, onions and Indian food did it, though I was a big fan of both before I got pregnant. Processed meats, including bacon, also just seem gross to me right now.
- Once the worst week or two of morning sickness was over, I craved steaks regularly, and I always felt great after eating one. (My husband has spent a lot of time grilling on the barbeque recently.) Your mileage may vary, but if that sounds at all appealing to you, give it a try. Hamburgers—extra pickles, no onions—have a similar effect, though I often don't want the bun.
Have any other tips for preventing first-trimester nausea? Post them in the comments below!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)