Strollerderby : study

They Say: Staying Together for the Kids? Don't

JeanneSager — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:01:00 GMT

How many times have you heard someone in marital distress say they're just trying to make it through for the kids? Might want to give them a hug next time and tell them they shouldn't worry about it.

A new study has found what plenty of kids of bitter, bickering parents already knew: staying together for the kids doesn't work.

Looking at teens from almost two thousands households and tracking them through to their early thirties, the study out of Cornell University in New York linked "exposure to parental conflict in adolescence . . . with poorer academic achievement, increased substance use and early family formation and dissolution, often in ways indistinguishable from living in a stepfather or single-mother family."

Again, not totally surprised here. But it's an important finding FOR parents who have long sought comfort as they navigate the difficult road of divorce. The dissolution of a relationship is almost never easy, and blame is quite often the name of the game. When kids are involved, the ante is upped as couples have to factor in more than just the two people in the marriage itself.

Studies have already found that divorce does not change the way a person parents. If you're doing a good job before the split, there's no reason to think you'll fall down on the job after the decree becomes final.

Parents should also take a long, hard look at their kids pre-split. Poor behavior that parents have often associated with post-divorce stress has been found to be something parents were overlooking in the midst of their marital discord. It was already there. The good news? Researchers say it doesn't actually get worse.

At the end of the day, I could never tell someone, "hey, yeah, get divorced." That's a very personal decision. But knowing you're worrying about your kids in the process means you're already far ahead of a lot of parents.

Image: OrlandoNest

Mamas Don't Let Your Kids Grow Up to Drink and Party

JeanneSager — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 17:36:00 GMT

The secret to teetotalling kids may have been discovered by a teen with a taste for the straight life.

Chelsea Lynn Jurman, a seventeen-year-old from New York, is one of forty finalists in the new incarnation of the Westinghouse Science competition, with her social science study of what influence talk of parents' wild party days has on their teen's drinking habits.

The news, Jurman found, is not good. If you talk about teenage indiscretions in front of your kids, her survey of one hundred twenty-three teens shows they're more likely to believe that it's acceptable to do so themselves. If the kids didn't hear much about their parents drinking as kids, they were more likely to just say no.

I'm divided on how I feel about this study. I've always felt there's a delicate balance between lying to our kids and revealing too much. It's my problem with kids and parents meeting on Facebook - not everyone in the family needs to know EVERYTHING about each other. Telling kids about your youthful indiscretions, then instructing them not to copy you, is literally the "do as I say, not as I do" model of parenting - which works, um, never.

On the other hand, if my now three-year-old daughter one days asks if I had any alcohol as a child, I don't think I can lie to her. "No, Mommy waited until she was twenty-one and in perfect accordance with all laws" is A. a lie B. not realistic and C. likely to make a teenager roll her eyes and walk away. I'll lose that "teachable moment" we're always searching for. I'd like to think I'll divulge the bits that are most important for a growing teen - "Yes, I drank, but I never drove with any alcohol in my system," or "Yes, but I never drank at a party where I didn't know everyone, and trust everyone."

My colleague Shannon discussed the interesting theory that some parents think they need to drink FOR the kids, but this isn't a matter of how you model drinking behaviors today (which I do think is an important part of developing appropriate attitudes toward alcohol). Parents have to decide how much of their past they can edit. Is there anything you'll be holding back?

Image: Scientific American

Bye Bye BPA: Bottles Will Go Bisphenol Free

Mom Buys High School Musical Star's Condoms: Would You?

How to Tell if Your Tot's Gonna Gamble

JeanneSager — Wed, 04 Mar 2009 21:26:00 GMT

Does your tot seem a tad impulsive? Take a cue from Kenny Rodgers - it might be time to let him know when to fold 'em, know when to hold 'em, know when to walk away . . .

OK, if he's impulsive, he probably has down running.

A new study says impulsive kindergartners are more likely to fall prey to gambling addictions when they age. In fact, the study says the problems start at the ripe old age of sixth grade.

Er, OK. And what does a sixth grade gambling addict look like? Is he up to his ears in I.O.U. used Nintendo game markers?

All joking aside, this is a serious study. Published in this month's issue of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, the study follows one hundred sixty-three kids over a six-year time frame. When the kids were in kindergarten, their teachers were asked to rate their "inattentiveness, distractibility and hyperactivity" on a scale of one to nine. If nine is distractible, I'd have to rate any kindergartner I know an eight point six.

Six years later, when the kids were eleven, the researchers were back, asking them how often they played cards or bingo for money, bought lottery tickets, played video games or video poker for money, or bet on sports. The study took place in Canada, which should account for at least some minute differences. I don't see many American children being granted access to lottery tickets - the sole time I purchased a lottery ticket, I know I was carded (I was in my twenties).

As for betting on sports or playing cards for money - does that necessarily mean kids are on a highway to hell? We played poker for money in the back four seats of our bus in high school - almost every day. I had jars full of pennies in my room because I was adept at bluffing. Yet, I live a half hour from a video lottery gaming center, and I haven't gambled once. For that matter, none of the people I played WITH have gambling troubles today.

I understand adult gambling addiction is a real problem and clearly linked to impulse control. But what ever happened to letting kindergartners being kindergartners? Sure, they might throw crayons without thinking now, but twenty years from now, they might just know how to hold 'em.

Image: Triin

Morning News: McCain Takes Aim at Obama's Fancy 'Copter

Madeline Holler — Tue, 24 Feb 2009 14:00:00 GMT

At yesterday's Fiscal Responsibility Summit -- attended by the President and high-ranking Congress members, not free-spending teens and their pursed-lipped mothers as the name might suggest -- John McCain scolded Obama for an expensive fleet of helicopters that could soon be at the president's disposal. "Your helicopter is now going to cost as much as Air Force One," the Arizona Senator said to his former rival, who basically said, "yeah, I don't think I need them either." NB: the helicopters were ordered during the Bush administration.

Obama's response should only endear him further to a large number of Americans. In a Washington Post-ABC News poll, he's get high marks for his first month in office and for the almost $790 billion stimulus package and the $75 billion mortgage bailout program. Nearly 8 in 10 respondents say the President has exceeded their expectations. Love fest? Not from everyone. Republicans aren't as happy as they were back during the trasition. And few of any party seem to like the idea of bailing out the auto industry. Michigan? Ouch?

Still, more, more, give them more!

All the hundreds of billions in bailouts and the projected $1.5 trillion deficit by year's end makes this record-breaking Yves St. Laurent art auction look just kind of profitable. $261 million? It was lying around in the couch cushions.

A San Francisco lawmaker has got a great money-making scheme. Taxing pot! It's his state's largest cash crop (huh. We thought it was almonds.) and he thinks Californian's deserve a cut of the package.

Make $300 just by cutting up your American Express credit card. Really. They'll pay you.

Now, now, don't get mad if you got rid of that account years ago. It's a fact: anger can kill you. Settle down!

Will Obama's chief of staff Rahm Emanuel be the next to resign over tax dodging? Apparently, there are questions about whether he should have listed the Washington, D.C., basement room where he has lived for five years -- for free! -- on his taxes. Could he have written off the the air mattress and naked light bulb dangling from the ceiling?

Random: A Miami University student discovered an authentic fingerprint of Abraham Lincoln. That's cool! And odd.

Great, great news for Bedouin girls in Israel's Negev: genital mutilation is no more. It's gone. Over. Does not happen. What changed? The laws, for one. But also education, showing you can't just threaten to put people in jail.

Welcome to the world, Scarlet Starr (Hollywood name ...). She's the new baby girl and first child of Sporty Spice, Mel C.

The Real Story Behind Palin's Nomination

Economy Kills Kids' Fun As We Know It

Photo: HuffPo

Study Launched to Examine Malnourished Breastfed Babies

JeanneSager — Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:02:00 GMT

The first-ever study to examine what every breastfeeding mom fears has been kicked off in the United Kingdom: scientists will finally take a look at whether baby is really getting enough.

Although doctors say its rare that babies fall ill from lack of nourishment during breastfeeding, the doctors who have launched this project say there's a tendency not to talk about the very real risks involved - because no one wants to rock the breastfeeding boat.

"People are very cagey about saying anything that might give breastfeeding a bad name," Dr. Sam Richmond, a consultant neonatologist at Sunderland Royal Hospital, told the BBC News. "But it does need to be addressed - and properly studied - because the consequences can be so severe."

Writing an article for Babble that examines a few of the most common hurdles (just a few - to hit every hurdle would have taken me three books!), I found that every mom I talked to went through that phase - usually when they came home from the hospital - when they wondered how the milk they were producing could ever be enough to sustain a hungry baby. The best comment came from a pediatrician quoted in the article who admitted she felt the same way - and she KNOWS better. After all, she's a pediatrician. Kind of makes you feel better, doesn't it?

My hope is that these types of studies - which as Richmond points out are very necessary - will help put better information into the hands of worried mothers. If we could understand the circumstances of malnourished babies in breastfeeding conditions, moms who have nothing to worry about can have one less burden in those crucial early days of breastfeeding. What's more, for those who simply CAN'T breastfeed because of this very real condition, there will be evidence to use to back them up when a breastfeeding nazi comes knocking on her door.

Image: BBC News

Also on Babble:

Your Breastfeeding Timeline

Florida Dad Pushing To Ban ALL Thimerosal in Vaccines

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 22:01:00 GMT

I'm already prepared for what "Dr. Gary" is going to say to this post.

Because the chiropractor friend of Florida Gov. Charlie Crist and father of two autistic children isn't listening to anyone in his bid to have the state ban all vaccines that contain thimerosal.

All of them. Even those not administered to kids.

The proposal by Dr. Gary Kompothecras would be the strictest in the nation, and doctors say it would keep vaccines like the one that prevents the flu, from saving people most at risk of dying. Kompothecras's response? He calls everyone who dares disagree with them "dirt bags."

The argument over vaccines and autism is at an all-time fervor of late, spurred by last week's revelation by the London Times that the "study" that started all the hubub about autism and thimerosal back in the nineties was bogus. As in fabricated. Made up. Nonsense. Then came the report from a special court here in the states that says the measles vaccine didn't cause three children's autism. All of that was preceded by another study, this one in Italy, that determined thimerosal itself is safe.

What's concerned me most in the responses here on Babble to each reporting of these incidents is not that parents are concerned about autism or concerned about vaccines. That's natural. Autism is real. Autism is terrifying. And there is still a lot about vaccinations that we don't know.

It's the all-consuming nature of the focus on vaccinations. It's the refusal to home in on anything else. It's the assumption that disagreement means another parent doesn't care about your plight. We have written dozens of stories here on the 'Derby about other studies that have been linked to autism. The environment. Aged parents. Prematurity.

But there are still parents like Kompothecras who are blind to any other suggestions. Dare disagree with him, and he calls you a "dirt bag." The trouble is, they are not only doing a disservice to their own kids, but a disservice to other people. In Kompothecras' case, his proposed ban of the flu vaccine would put the thousands of Florida residents who are at highest risk for the flu - ie. the elderly, the asthmatic - at permanent risk. People die from the flu. But he doesn't care.

He is doing this because, as he told the Herald Tribune, "If I can do this, my son won't go down for nothing."

How can you argue with that? How can you argue with the parent of an autistic child who only wants an answer? Because I do believe autism is real. And I do believe that the parents of autistic children need an answer. The fact that I am pro-vaccination because I've seen it save lives does not mean I am unfeeling or that I refuse to see the forest for the trees. Autism diagnoses are up, and there are children in trouble. Somewhere, some scientist has to break this code.

But I don't see how taking the flu vaccine out of the hands of people who need it, people who choose to use it, is going to help the parents of autistic children. I don't see how ignoring existing science and accusing parents who are "pro-vax" of being "dirt bags" or "not caring," is going to provide an answer.

Might there be something else in a vaccination that might lead to autism? Maybe. There might also be a link in the environment. In aged parents. In prematurity.

So let's get started on those. Thimerosal is a dead horse. It doesn't deserve another beating.

Image: Herald Tribune

Pollution Causing Asthma Before Baby's Even Born

JeanneSager — Mon, 16 Feb 2009 18:30:00 GMT

A warning to all pregnant women: stay out of traffic.

A new study says traffic fumes will actually reprogram the DNA of an otherwise healthy fetus, paving the way for the child to be born asthmatic.

Scared? Me too. We've long known that pollution = bad for your health, and for pregnant women there's always that extra fear that what harms her harms her baby as well. But the idea of DNA being reprogrammed whilst inside the body runs a bit too close to science fiction for my tastes.

Expect it's not . . . fiction that is. The study at the Center for Environmental Genetics at the University of Cincinnati homed in on the ACSL3 gene, which other studies have shown is involved in the structure of cell membranes. Looking at the cord blood of fifty-three kids (a very small study, I'll admit), the BBC News has reported that scientists found "a significant association between chemical changes which control activation of the gene and high levels of maternal PAH exposure."

Curiously, the kids themselves were reportedly showing signs of asthma by age five, not at birth. As an asthmatic myself, I know that asthma in kids is still mystifying medical experts because a child can show signs at a very young age, only to have them disappear for a time and then show up again when they're teenagers (a major bone of contention between pediatricians and parents over whether it's appropriate to continue treatment when a child isn't showing symptoms). It manifests itself in different ways from person to person - with some kids highly affected by the cold, others by the warmth. Some people have symptoms brought on by stress, others by environmental factors. Pollution itself reportedly causes at least two-thirds of asthmatic events - which would seem to support this study.

So why is this good news? Because if a mother knows she's been subjected to traffic fumes, and doctors can test her child for the malformed gene, treatment can start early - before kids show symptoms.

The only question I have - will they be willing to listen?

Image: BBC NEWS

Special Court Says Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

Brett Singer — Thu, 12 Feb 2009 20:15:00 GMT

In a decision that will infuriate many parents (including readers of this web site), a special court has ruled that the MMR vaccine did not cause autism in three children.

Special Master George Hastings of the Department of Justice wrote that, "The evidence does not support the general proposition that thimerosal-containing vaccines can damage infants' immune systems." The ruling comes from The Vaccine Court Omnibus Autism Proceeding. (Aside: "Special Master"? "Omnibus"? It sounds like a comic book.)

Addressing one of the children whose parents say became autistic after receiving the MMR vaccine, Hastings said, "I further conclude that while Michelle Cedillo has tragically suffered from autism and other severe conditions, the petitioners have also failed to demonstrate that her vaccinations played any role at all in causing those problems."

There have been over 5,000 cases filed by parents seeking compensation from the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, a $2.5 billion fund that was created through a "75-cent-per-dose tax on vaccines," according to Reuters.

Everyone's least favorite vaccine guy Dr. Paul Offit hailed the decision, saying, "it's a great day for America's children when the court rules in favor of science." I think there are a few parents out there who will disagree with him.

Does this put the issue to rest? I doubt it. I myself am highly skeptical of the notion that vaccines "cause" autism, mostly because so far the studies that I have read about can't find a link between the vaccines and autism. Of course, it doesn't help the anti-vaccine movement's case that the doctor who conducted a landmark study on the matter faked his data.

I know that many of you have strong feelings on this issue. Does this court ruling change your opinion at all?

Source: Reuters

Image: USA Today via Babble

Researcher Fabricated Autism Link in Vaccine

What Does a Smile Mean? Teaching Emotions to Autistic Children

They Say: Vaccines are Safe - Take That Jenny McCarthy

They Say: Teens WANT to Help Their Parents

JeanneSager — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:28:00 GMT

Toddlers are always thought of as the people pleasers and their teen counterparts as the surly loner types. Not so says a new study from researchers at three American universities.

The small study finds teens may actually WANT to help their families.

Researchers at the University of Rochester, the University of Missouri-Columbia, and the University of Illinois at Chicago, presented one hundred twenty kids in grades seven through ten and their parents with stories in which teens or parents asked for help. The study subjects were asked to determine whether the protaganist in the stories should provide the help or not, and decide whether it was OK to opt for personal desires instead.

The results indicate that parents believe kids are more selfish while the kids are more likely to put personal desires aside to offer their assistance. No wonder teens and parents collide!

The results were most interesting in light of the comments on my recent post about the benefits to having a big family in economic times. Based on the experiences of larger families I know, I suggested that having a large age gap provides for built-in babysitters when parents are forced to get a second job or a non-working parent finds they must take a job to make ends meet.

Not surprisingly, the responses ranged - some parents refuse to make their kids babysit, others felt it was the responsibility of teens to kick in. As a much older sister who did almost all of the babysitting, I concur that it's irresponsible for parents to put their own burdens squarely on the shoulders of their older kids. Before giving birth, parents need to look at their situation and determine how to ensure all of their kids get equal advantages - the new baby is the responsibility of his or her parents, not his or her siblings.

But babysitting is a chore. And kids have responsibilities to do chores as part of the family unit. If that's the chore parents decide to assign, cutting out other chores to ensure teens still have the ability to enjoy childhood and take advantage of after-school activities at school or other pursuits, parents should take heed of this study. It shows they're on the right track.

This study seems to further evidence that kids - no matter their age - want to be part of the family structure. They crave structure, and with that comes some sort of responsibility to prove they're vital cogs in the family wheel.

Does this mean we can stop dreading the teen years?

Image: Cincinnati Children's

Four Reasons Big Families Might Have it Better in This Economy

Researcher Fabricated Autism Link in Vaccine

JeanneSager — Sun, 08 Feb 2009 17:01:00 GMT

The man who launched a decade's-long fear for parents heading to have their children vaccinated has been proven a forgery.

The Sunday Times revealed the results of an investigation today showing Andrew Wakefield, the man who posited that the MMR vaccine was at the root of the increased autism diagnoses, fabricated his research.

Published in 1998 in The Lancet, the study claimed eight out of twelve children vaccinated with the MMR innoculation began showing symptoms that fall somewhere on the autism spectrum within days of getting the shot. It was performed at the same time as another study, for which Wakefield was paid, that was supposed to help parents who believed there was a link between the two put up a legal case. Some of the kids were used in both studies, and Wakefield has often been accused of crossing a clear ethical boundary in performing both studies.

The study has borne numerous attacks over the years - in part because it included just twelve children - but it is the most-often quoted piece of evidence by parents who point a finger at pro-vax parents as risking their kids' lives (this despite studies published in the time period since that have debunked his story). The investigation by the Times is just another nail in the coffin for that line of thinking. The investigation revealed that in most of the twelve cases, the ailments described in Wakefield's published reports were different from their hospital and general practitioner records.

From the Times: "Although the research paper claimed that problems came on within days of the jab, in only one case did medical records suggest this was true, and in many of the cases medical concerns had been raised before the children were vaccinated."

I feel for parents of autistic children who are searching for a reason. Autism is very real and equally terrifying, but as a parent who has vaccinated her child, I have always bristled at the inference that I am a bad parent for making that choice - with so little evidence to support their claims.

Image: USA Today

Think Your Kids Are Driving You Crazy? Caffeine Tied to Hallucinations

JeanneSager — Thu, 15 Jan 2009 17:57:00 GMT

There is an unspoken rule in our house that I do not have to fully listen to my daughter until I have had my caffeine injection. That's all I need - one big gulp of diet Pepsi, and I am a fully functioning parent.

But a normal parent can hear voices, right? Or maybe have a mirage - a clean toy room - pop up in front of their eyes? Oh come on, don't tell me you haven't heard "I want to go to bed early tonight, after I eat my green beans and take a quick bath" in your head over and over until your spouse told you wipe the stupid grin off of your face.

Now we can blame it on the real mother's little helper: caffeine.

A set of researchers in the United Kingdom have linked high intake of caffeine to hallucinations.

The study at Durham University determined a high caffeine user (classified as more than seven cups of coffee a day) was three times more likely to have heard a person speak when there was nobody there. It was a small study, using just two hundred students, but the subjects reported seeing and hearing people who weren't there and sensing the presence of people who were dead (no mention of any resemblance to Bruce Willis).

If any of this worries you, have heart: researchers were quick to note that hallucinations are not indicative of mental illness!

So your kids could be driving your crazy . . . but maybe not literally.

Image: Piffe the Penguin (I see a cat in my coffee, please tell me I'm hallucinating again)

Daddy Club Rule: Don't Argue Kids Shows

Mom Shoplifts Parenting Book With Kids in Tow

They Say: Kids Need To Be Taught to Handle School Stress

Fire Starts While Toddler has Mom Locked in the Basement

They Say: Vicks VapoRub Bad for Baby

JeanneSager — Wed, 14 Jan 2009 15:31:00 GMT

Have you always been slightly creeped out by rubbing greasy slime along your kid's upper lip? Good news - you don't have to do it anymore.

Of course, if you're one of those people who has always wiped the Vicks VapoRub under the kid's nose, and hoped for the best, you might want to keep reading.

Reseachers at Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina announced this week that Vicks VapoRub applied under the nose of children two and under might actually be making it more difficult for them to breathe.

Of course, Vicks is not promoted for kids under two, and the package clearly states it should not be put directly under the nose. But hundreds of parents do it anyway - thinking the layer of gunk under the nose is going to get their kids' mucus moving faster than it would if they smeared it on the chest (in other words, if they followed directions). Unfortunately, according to Wake Forest researcher Dr. Bruce Rubin, the incredients in VapoRub can irritate the nasal passages and cause the body to produce more mucus. The thickened secretions - especially in infants and young children, whose airways are narrower than an adults - will then make breathing more difficult.

Rubin and his colleagues started their project after treating an eighteen-month-old girl in respiratory distress whose parents had treated her with VapoRub, under the nose - despite warnings on the package.

Those pesky directions, they'll get you every time.

Image/Source: Reuters

Dad Gives Away 500 Lobsters For Cystic Fibrosis Awareness

New to Birth Certificate: Does Mom Have Chlamydia?

They Say: Schools Near Fast Food Makes Fat Kids

They Say: One in Two Hundred Kids are Vegetarian

JeanneSager — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 17:55:00 GMT

Think your kid is just being picky when she turns up her nose at your perfectly cooked hamburgers? Think again.

News out of the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) say vegetarianism is taking hold in American kids. Based on surveys in a study of alternative medicine from 2007, the CDC estimates one in two hundred kids are opting out on meat.

The information comes from interviews with nine thousand parents and other adults speaking on behalf of kids. Breaking down the ages of the kids the study dealt with, teens - who usually have more control over their diet - are considered even more likely to be vegetarian. The CDC says the one in two hundred number can be multiplied by four to six if you're talking specifically about teens.

As a complete vegetarian since I was a junior in high school (with attempts to go vegetarian before that, foiled by my parents, of course), I'm not really surprised to see the spike as kids get older. As a vegetarian parent, married to a meat-eater, I initially struggled with the decision of whether or not to let my child eat meat. But watching other parents deal with picky eaters, I worried that it would be more difficult to ensure she was getting enough of the "good stuff" if we limited her diet to non-meat products. My concern for her overall nutrition won out - she eats meat . . . and veggie burgers. My hope is that one day she'll opt to follow my ways, and by then it will be easier to convince her of the importance of getting the proper nutrients (and she'll be put on the same regimen of vitamins that I take to keep my body in check).

But I realize I'm still in the minority as a parent. The majority of parents I encounter who are not already in a fully vegetarian household have told me unequivocally that they want their kids to eat meat. My own parents still think I'm nuts. So I'm speaking from experience when I say it's a tough road for a lot of kids - they want to cut out meat, but their parents, their friends and their school lunch program make it tough.

It's only as a teenager, that becoming a vegetarian becomes a true option for these kids - because parents who eat meat often pooh pooh their choices when they're younger. They (we) are often written off as picky eaters, with parents forcing kids to eat meat simply because that's the way everyone else does things.

But it doesn't have to be that way. If anything, if these kids are truly trying vegetarianism because they want to embrace a fad, having their parents embrace it with them (at least having their parents support their choices - what they eat themselves be darned) might make them go back the other way. For the rest of these kids, learning good nutrition needs to start in the home, and that means having parents who become educated about how vegetarians remain a nutritious and balanced diet.

Image: The Age

Why They Shouldn't Eat the Snow

Babble Talk: Is Ditching the Baby Monitor Child Abuse?

FDA Asked to Approve Gardasil for Boys

Kid and Kangaroo Best of Friends

Biggest Loser's Having a Baby, Gaining Weight

Study: Virginity Pledges Fail Big Time. Bristol Palin Declines to Comment

Cole Gamble — Thu, 01 Jan 2009 17:00:00 GMT

According to the research, 1 out of 8 teens will take a vow of virginity until marriage. Did you think the stat was that high? That’s means 1 of every 8 couples in America is having some very awkward, highly uninformed and unprepared post-marital sex. But virginity pledges aren’t about enjoying sex (‘cause that would be super sinful to enjoy your body). Instead, these pledges are meant to save youngsters from the dangers of sex with the fool proof abstinence method.

But guess what? It doesn’t work. At all. What’s more, virginity pledge takers are more likely to engage in dangerous sexual activity such as not wearing a condom.

You know abstinence is also the main line of strategy our outgoing administration has used to combat the AIDS epidemic in Africa. Upon hearing that they could just stop having sex, all of the genocidal rapists primarily responsible for the epidemic must have slapped their collective heads and said, “Why didn’t I think of that?”

If you could tell by the tone of this blog, I see no point in virginity pledges and in fact find them dangerous. That’s is not to say I want my kids doing when they’re 13 and I certainly not going to encourage them to do it sooner than later. It’s just that it’s completely biological normal to want to have sex as a teen. When you stand in the way of biology you tend to get burned.

But maybe I’m way off. Do you think virginity pledges are a good thing? Maybe you didn’t believe in them when you were young and single, but now that you have kids of your own you’ve flipped your position. How wrong am I?

More by this author:

4 Ways Birth and Breastfeeding Will Ruin Sex

8-Year-Old Too Young to Divorce?

The 33 Most Ridiculous Toys Ever

Pete Wentz: "I've Tasted Ashley's Breast Milk."

Teacher Beats Student to Death for Late Homework

A Guy’s Take on Stay at Home Moms and Dads (Part 1: The Cons)

Banana Dildos and the 10 Worst Toys and Gifts This Christmas (part 1)

Desert Island Disks – Kid Music Edition

They Say: Shunning Gay Kids Bad for Their Health

JeanneSager — Tue, 30 Dec 2008 16:36:00 GMT

Gee, who would have ever thought being told they're just not good enough could be bad for kids?

Apparently researchers at the César E. Chávez Institute at San Francisco State University. They actually took money and did a full-fledged study to figure out gay kids are at higher risk for a number of health problems if they're shunned by their families. Ya think?

What ever happened to funding studies that do things like - oh I don't know - find a cure for children's cancer?

The study published in the Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics showed a link between the family rejection of lesbian, gay and bisexual kids and a higher risk of a serious health problems, such as depression, illegal drug use, risk for HIV infection, and suicide attempts. Compared to kids who came from families who were accepting of their sexuality, those who experienced rejection were more than eight times more likely to have attempted suicide, almost six times more likely to be depressed, three times more likely to use illegal drugs and three times more likely to have unprotected sex.

I'm not excusing the parents here - they need to get a grip. But let's say they struck sexuality from the criteria and looked simply at kids who were rejected by their families versus those we were accepted. I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a child who's mom or dad tells them they're worthless who hasn't contemplated suicide or wouldn't qualify for a dose of Prozac.

It's encouraging that researchers are willing to look at sexuality in children - lending further credence to the fact that people are born gay (or straight), and evidence of sexuality in kids is natural. But sometimes, they just go too far to categorize kids and families. Gay kids need love. So do straight kids. If parents can't provide it, their kids are in trouble, period.

Image/Source: RedOrbit

They Say: Schools Near Fast Food Makes Fat Kids

Principal Censors Pro-Gay School Paper

Dad Uses Alternative Meds, Girl Ends up Braindamaged

Jamie Foxx: Just a Normal Dad?

They Say -- Kids Who Skip Breakfast and Hate Mom Have Sex Sooner

They Say: Schools Near Fast Food Makes Fat Kids

JeanneSager — Fri, 26 Dec 2008 13:09:00 GMT

Think your kids are OK as long as you keep them clear of Burger King and Taco ~~Hell~~ Bell? Guess again.

A new study says kids who attend schools within walking distance of a fast food restaurant are more likely to be obese. If they can see the golden arches, they can walk.

The study, which appears in the most recent issue of the American Journal of Public Health, looked at data from half a million kids in middle and high schools in California. It found students who attend schools near fast food restaurants eat fewer servings of vegetables and fruits, and drink far more soda than students at schools not located near fast food restaurants. By near, by the way, they mean within half a mile of the school. They cite the restaurants serve as hangouts for the kids – and with hanging out comes eating.

Before you start Google mapping the Mickey D's and Wendy's in your area to pick the best school, you might want to look at kids outside of California. The closest fast food restaurant is at least half an hour from the local school in my hometown. And we've got plenty of fat kids in my town. What we don't have much of? Sidewalks. Or kids who would have reason to walk past a fast food restaurant, or walk at all for that matter.

Living in the country might mean we're free of the fast food menace, but the need to drive everywhere and the lack of parks and playgrounds means we have a lot of sedentary children. But I dare not move - because this study shows I'm screwed either way.

The free order of fries goes to someone who can find me somewhere my kid WON'T be influenced by crappy foods

Image: FastFoodHealth.org

Source: Reuters

Why They Shouldn't Eat the Snow

Man Says Drinking Breastmilk Cured His Cancer

New Food Pyramid Promises to Help Picky Eaters

They Say: Pregnant Women Can Eat Nuts

Your Mother-in-Law Really Is Bad For Your Health

JeanneSager — Tue, 16 Dec 2008 17:35:00 GMT

If you're one of those people who read that headline and shook your head in denial, good for you. But let me tell you - you just aren't normal.

Lucky, yes. Normal. . . well, let scientists in Japan be the judge. Because a study by Harvard Medical School researchers showed Japanese women who live with their mothers-in-law are three times more likely to have a heart attack.

Making this study even more significant? Japanese women are traditionally at a much lower risk of cardiac disease than those of us living in the states.

The study followed ninety-one thousand men and women ages forty to sixty-nine over a ten-year period, determining men had little affect on their health when Mom came to live with them while their wives saw a decrease in cardiac health. The women were less likely to drink and smoke (maybe because they had someone breathing down their neck, clucking every time they picked up a wineglass?), but despite not having had any cardiac issues before the study began, six hundred seventy-one participants had been diagnosed with coronary artery disease by the study's end and three hundred thirty-nine had died of heart disease.

On the positive end for parents, the women who had both a mother-in-law and her own children living at home were actually better off than those whose kids have already flown the coop (it's like multiple children - more than one person for the old bat to heckle, er, watch over). Rather than tripling her chances of having a heart attack, the woman's chances were doubled.

So, Dads, it's up to you - which Mom needs your help?

Image: Amazon

Source: New York Times

They Say: Forward-Facing Stroller's Bad for Baby

Babywearing Moms New Pain in Motrin's Side

Parents Must Give Adopted Son Back to Native American Mother

What's the Sexiest Age for Women?

Kelly Mills — Thu, 11 Dec 2008 14:32:00 GMT

Hmm, how can you not read an article that starts with the line, "Being sexy is often perceived to be a key essence of femininity." What is that? Yo, you are blowin' my mind on a Thursday morning. Anyhow, it's just a run-down of a survey of 1,000 women: How much sex they have now versus when they were younger, how much they enjoy it, and so on. Turns out middle-aged women have less sex but 56 percent feel they enjoy it more now that they are older and wiser. I guess going for quality is better than quantity.

Anyhow, they asked the women what age they felt the sexiest. I took note. So what was the magic number? The majority felt sexiest at age 34. Whoa now, that's my age. I guess if I am like the majority of women (and we could speculate on that one for days) I have one more month of feeling the sexiest of my life. Actually, the article says, "it was at the age of 34 when they had felt more sexy." Can I get a side of sexy with that? I'm upping my sexy intake right now. Can you ask Justin to bring my sexy back, I only loaned it to him for a short time. (Don't ask why I'm nitpicking the copy here, I guess it's just that I'm seeing my sexy clock run out soon and it's making me critical.)

So how does this information help us women? Um...I'll have to get back to you on that. If you would like to share the age you had the biggest stockpile of sexy in your (hee hee) arsenal, I'm all ears.

Case Made In Defense of Teasing

Kelly Mills — Wed, 10 Dec 2008 18:32:00 GMT

Fears of bullying and violence and discrimination have led many schools to adopt very strong policies against teasing. And lord knows most of us could probably dredge up a painful school year or two when the taunts of classmates made our lives hell. In our important relationships, we are encouraged to avoid poking and instead honestly share our feelings. And don't even get me started on the workplace... I mean, you'd be hard-pressed to defend teasing, right?

Hmm, during a difficult discussion with my sister about some serious tension between us, I said, "I think at least we can both agree the real problem here is you are a bitch." She laughed.

This is part of the point of a great New York Times article in defense of teasing. The arguement is that while bullying and harassment are acts of aggression, other forms of teasing can actually serve to build bonds between people, alleviate tension, and allow us to deliver messages to each other in a less direct form. For example, couples who teased each other during discussions about loaded issues came away from the conversation feeling closer than couples who engaged in only direct discussion. And teasing can also help signal what behaviors are okay, and help establish social status. By prohibiting kids from teasing, we are discouraging an important kind of social interaction, one that can even help teach us not to take ourselves too seriously.

At least that's the case made here, and me and my bitch sister would probably agree. But what do you think?

HIV Positive Teen Sues School for Harassment

NY Times (and I) Post Crap Study on Bullying

They Say: Parents Who Use Forward-Facing Strollers Treat Their Kids Like “Accessories”

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Tue, 09 Dec 2008 00:00:00 GMT

The New Zealand publication Stuff has its panties all in a bunch over forward-facing strollers, seeing them as nothing more than the latest torture device for innocent youngsters everywhere.

Remember the recent study that found that babies who are walked in forward-facing strollers could be “emotionally impoverished” because they are denied facial contact with their parents, and are forced instead to familiarize themselves with, uh, the rest of the world? Well, Karl du Fresne has covered the study under the headline “Babies Paraded as Parents’ Fashion Accessories.” I’m not sure what kind of childhood this du Fresne character had, but he seems to think that parents are universally, egregiously selfish and vain, and the forward-facing stroller is just one more example of this mass parenting travesty.

Du Fresne sees it as “no surprise” that being “propelled toward a procession of bewildering, and possibly frightening, strangers” would impair children’s development. And naturally, the only possible reason he can imagine for such horrific parenting is—fashion. He feels that parents everywhere see their children as nothing more than “a fashion accessory to be shown off for maximum advantage. This is accomplished far more effectively when the unfortunate infant is facing forward.”

Take that, forward-facing stroller users! I’ll bet you force your kids to wear diapers with those cutesy animal prints on them, too, you sickos.

Photo: Little Baby Guide

They Say: Forward-Facing Strollers Are Bad for Baby

IVF Babies Two to Four Times More Likely to Have Birth Defects

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Fri, 21 Nov 2008 20:30:00 GMT

A study by researchers with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has found that babies conceived through in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection have a higher rate of birth defects than babies conceived naturally.

In a study of 18,500 babies, the CDC found that babies conceived through assisted reproduction were about twice as likely to develop heart defects and cleft palates and about four times more likely to develop gastrointestinal problems (esophageal atresia and anorectal atresia). The study factored in other health risks, such as smoking, and applied only to single births (since multiple births are also associated with a higher risk of birth defects).

Although the risk of birth defects is very low with any method of conception, the CDC notes that "it is still important for parents who are considering using ART [assisted reproductive technology] to think about all of the potential risks and benefits of this technology."

Childcare Relationships and Bickering Parents Affect Kids' Stress Hormones

Hannah Tennant-Moore — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 22:30:00 GMT

It seems self-evident that kids with poor childcare relationships or parents who frequently fight are more stressed than other kids. But now two new studies have established this common sense theory from a biological standpoint, by monitoring the levels of cortisol (the human stress hormone) in preschoolers and 6-year-olds. As parents across the country struggle to afford high quality childcare and to maintain a stable home environment, these studies are unfortunately quite applicable to these trying economic times.

In most people, cortisol levels decrease throughout the day. But for many children in full-time daycare, the stress hormone increases as the day progresses. Researchers found that class size clearly affected children’s moods, with preschoolers in classes of 10 or fewer children producing less cortisol than those in classrooms with closer to 20 other kids.

Children with poor relationships with their daycare providers became more stressed after one-on-one interactions with the teacher, while clingier kids had higher overall cortisol increases throughout the day.

Similarly, a study of 6-year-olds with bickering parents found that those who were very involved in and distressed about the fights produced more cortisol than other 6-year-olds. Since high levels of cortisol have been linked to health and psychological problems, this finding offers a biological understanding of why kids who get very upset by their parents’ arguments are more likely to have psychological problems later. (Whether higher levels of cortisol are a cause or an effect of psychological disorders is not clear.)

The study’s authors hope that understanding the biological basis of stress in young children will change the way kids in these common problematic situations are treated. For instance, monitoring kids’ levels of cortisol could help indicate whether a given intervention is working to relieve stress or not.

Day Care Enrollments Plummet as Families Struggle to Pay the Bills

Is Cutting Your Sitter's Pay the Best Way to Save Money?

Photo: pregnancy-depression-help.com

They Say: Fat-Eating Pregos Make for Fat-Loving Kids

JeanneSager — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 20:39:00 GMT

Tired of hearing your mom comment on the size of your butt? Tell her it's her fault. A new study published in the Journal of Neuroscience says women who indulge in fat-laden foods during pregnancy are setting the stage for parenting a child who will constantly struggle with his or her weight.

Researchers say the developing fetus' brain is essentially being hard-wired to crave fatty foods as their moms eat for two . . . or four. The study was performed on rats rather than humans, but it makes good sense. What are kids eating when they're inside us? Exactly what we're eating. So wouldn't it make sense that they'd develop a taste for those foods?

My father used to joke that he considered leaving my mother if she served one more plate of spinach during her pregnancy (she had to get that iron somehow), and wouldn't you know it - one of my favorite foods is a nice big chunk of spinach pie oozing with feta and wrapped in delicate phyllo dough.

Although my propensity to pop M&Ms would point to plenty of desserts served after those spinach-rich dinners . . .

Image: Raising Kids

They Say: Lead Bullets Make Game Risk for Pregnant Women, Kids

They Say: Text Messaging Can Fight Childhood Obesity

Save Money: Kids Eat Free at Restaurants . . . Well, Some of Them

What Do You Do When Your Kid is an Extreme Partisan?

Kelly Mills — Tue, 04 Nov 2008 16:25:00 GMT

This has been the most emotionally charged election I can remember since, well, ever, and it makes sense that the kids would pick up on that. But Slate's Emily Bazelon asks, what do you do when your children's political allegiances are extreme? She covers a Halloween experiment in which kids chose candy from either side of a porch: The Obama side--marked with a large sign and life-size cutout--and the McCain side, with corresponding signage and cutout. The blue neighborhood kids gave Obama 78 percent of the vote.

But when offered two pieces of candy at the Obama side versus four at the McCain side, support for Obama only dropped by ten percent. The kids were pretty fixed in their political ways, even though their vote obviously didn't "count" (hmm, like the electoral college.) And Bazelon notes that her sweet kids threw around the word "traitor" to candy defectors. And, she observes, with kids who are reared on lots of lessons in tolerance, it may be that McCain is one of the few people they can clearly think of as a bad guy.

It makes me just slightly uncomfortable to see children actively campaigning, if only because you know that until a certain age, the opinions they express are not likely their own. Then again, isn't it our job to pass on our values, political or otherwise? And I've seen this "death and destruction to candidate so-and-so" in my area too, from young children who just seem to want to be able to freely bash a clear villain. What about your kids? Does it bother you?

Take Your Kids To Vote...NOW!

Witch Tricks Obama Kids on Halloween

They Say: Drinking Coffee While Pregnant Can Affect the Fetus

SunnyChanel — Mon, 03 Nov 2008 22:00:00 GMT

A new study came out today that makes the claim that pregnant women who drink caffeine, even just one cup of joe a day, are at a higher risk in giving birth to a low birth rate baby. Now, I know every woman is different, but I drank coffee every day while pregnant (with the blessing of my OBGYN, of course) and my daughter was born at 10 ½ pounds. So my personal results were that drinking coffee didn’t do squat in percolating a lighter baby.

A more scientific study than my own anecdotal one, was done by the British Medical Journal where they found that women who drank one or two cups of coffee had a 20% risk of having a low birth weight baby and woman who had two or three cups had a 50% risk. But it’s not just java, they stated that “any source of caffeine, including that from tea, cola, chocolate and some prescription drugs, to relatively slower fetal growth.”

This follows a study in the U.S. in January that linked miscarriages to larger doses of caffeine (two or cups of coffee a day). To read more about this recent study, click here. And if you’re knocked up you may consider putting down that latte, mocha or cup of Sumatra, you’ll be drinking plenty of coffee once you are a sleep deprived new parent.