"[...] leading baby box companies sells its products as an essential gift for new parents, claiming studies have proven the link.
I asked the company if I could see these studies, but they said that studies showing positive results had not been published yet. Experts say that there are no studies showing the efficacy of baby boxes."
Right, but what I'm saying is that the study they are citing likely shows the results of parents being given a baby box, not buying one.
I don't think buying vs giving is important per se. I'm just saying that the aggregate data will likely show more benefit from people being given the boxes, as that will have more impact on people of lower means.
It is true that there are not many published studies with empirical evidence in the public domain and most of the data comes from 90 years of anecdotal evidence; however, the issue is not that baby box manufacturers are against studies, it's that there is not a lot of funding for SIDS research. We've actively reached out to research organizations to test our product, but they do not have the financial resources to do so.
That said, there have since been some published studies about the efficacy of baby boxes (here is one from Temple University: https://medicine.temple.edu/news/temple-study-shows-baby-box...). There are also some ongoing studies that I'm aware of that have yet to be published. Here are the findings from the Temple study:
5,187 dyads received baby boxes and follow up phone calls 2763 parents completed the follow-up survey Patient satisfaction with the distribution of the bassinet was high.
25% reduction in bed-sharing for all infants. Face-to-face sleep education and providing a baby box with a firm mattress and fitted sheet reduced the rate of bed-sharing by 25% in the first eight days of life.
50% reduction in bed-sharing for breastfed infants.For exclusively breastfed infants, a population at increased risk of bed-sharing, bed-sharing was reduced by 50%.
Mothers use the baby box. Of the mothers who received the baby box, a majority said they used the box as a sleeping place for their infants.
12% of mothers use the baby box as a primary sleep space. Of the mothers who received the baby box, 12% said they used the box as the primary or usual sleeping space for their infants.
Looking specifically at the breastfed infant population (breastfeeding has been shown to reduce the risk of SUIDS but also increase bed-sharing):
92% (184/199) of the breastfeeding respondents used the bassinet;
52% (104/199) used the bassinet as a sleeping space; and 11% used the bassinet as the primary sleeping space.
Of the 104 recipients who used the bassinet as a sleeping space, 63 (60%) responded the bassinet makes breastfeeding easier.
In the present study, a majority of bassinet recipients used it as an infant sleeping space. A majority of exclusively breastfeeding mothers reported that the cardboard bassinet facilitated breastfeeding.
i don't understand how reduced bed-sharing is a benefit. according to my understanding and our experience, co-sleeping is actually the best experience babies can get. and it also facilitates breast-feeding at night as mom just needs to roll over and provide access, and not get out of bed if the baby wakes up hungry.
how exactly does the bassinet facilitate breastfeeding, and how were they feeding before?
This could be a much larger discussion and probably better suited for another forum; however, there is a big distinction between co-sleeping and bed-sharing. Long story short: Bed-sharing means sharing the same sleeping surface, such as a family bed, with your baby. Co-sleeping means sleeping in close proximity to your baby, sometimes on the same surface and sometimes not (in other words, bed-sharing is one way to co-sleep, but not the only way).
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends room sharing because it can decrease the risk of SIDS by as much as 50% and is much safer than bed sharing. In addition, room sharing will make it easier for you to feed, comfort, and watch your baby.
The AAP goes on to say: Bed-sharing is not recommended for any babies. However, certain situations make bed-sharing even more dangerous. Therefore, you should not bed share with your baby if:
* Your baby is younger than 4 months old.
* Your baby was born prematurely or with low birth weight.
* You or any other person in the bed is a smoker (even if you do not smoke in bed).
* The mother of the baby smoked during pregnancy.
* You have taken any medicines or drugs that might make it harder for you to wake up.
* You drank any alcohol.
* You are not the baby's parent.
* The surface is soft, such as a waterbed, old mattress, sofa, couch, or armchair.
* There is soft bedding like pillows or blankets on the bed.
With that being said, bed sharing is common in certain cultures where the prevalence of SIDS is low, including Asian communities (Japan, Hong Kong, Bangladesh, and those in UK) and Pacific Islander communities in New Zealand. Actually, it is not the bed sharing that distinguishes these cultures, but other factors (e.g., smoking and use of alcohol/drugs) which in conjunction with cosleeping may put infants at risk. However, there is conflicting evidence regarding the safety and efficacy of bed sharing during infancy—while it has been shown to facilitate breastfeeding and provide protection against hypothermia, it has been identified as a risk factor for SIDS.
Finally, to answer your question: breast feeding and bed-sharing are often linked. Having a lightweight bassinet, such as a baby box, decreases the practice of bed-sharing and thus decreases the risk of SIDS.
you are right, this is a much larger discussion. so i just want to mention this. what is missing in the research is other purported benefits from bed-sharing, such as the mental development of the baby as suggested by the attachment theory.
it is not clear from the mentioned study if research on other benefits of bed-sharing doesn't exist, or whether such studies were excluded because they didn't fit the focus of the review.
The PC British layout is annoying. It swaps @ and " relative to the US layout, among some other important keys, which means that when you're dropped at a US-layout terminal you struggle.
It also doesn't have the wonderful set of Alt+ combinations as the Mac British layout for typing various types of diacritics, widths of dashes, Greek letters, mathematical symbols, opening and closing quotes, and other things. PC layout users are stuck with acute accents, the Euro symbol, and nothing else.
Luckily, the Mac "British - PC" layout (not the same as the actual British PC layout) does include the extra Alt+ combos.
I'm not sure why anyone would find the Mac British layout difficult to program with. It's closer to the US layout than the PC British layout. I suppose # requiring Alt might be bothersome, but # isn't a symbol used that frequently in programming, and Alt+3 is not that difficult to type.
Having always used a standard british keyboard, the subtle differences, e.g. location of \, #, ", `, ~, really slow me down. It just seems petty for Apple to ignore the standard and go it's own way... then again, it is Apple.
Also, I use # loads every day for c++ macros, and #if 0 blocks.
When you've committed something, but then rebased or reset the branch position so the commit is not longer in the history of any branch or tag. This usually isn't a problem, because when you rebase work you are making a copy of the commit so references to the data should be the same.
I also think it's worth noting, `git gc`, which is triggered automatically occasionally, actually runs `git prune`.
NaturalMotion (http://www.naturalmotion.com/) is a leading game technology
and development company creating animation software used in AAA titles such
as Rockstar Games' Grand Theft Auto IV and Irrational Games' BioShock
Infinity.
We're looking for talented C++ programmers to join our team building
our industry leading animation tools.
If you want to help make game characters come to life, get in touch.
"[...] leading baby box companies sells its products as an essential gift for new parents, claiming studies have proven the link.
I asked the company if I could see these studies, but they said that studies showing positive results had not been published yet. Experts say that there are no studies showing the efficacy of baby boxes."