According to a recent study by the University of Glasgow in Scotland, the more children a couple have, the happier they are.  The catch?  This only holds true for married couples.  The same children and happiness correlation didn’t apply to single, co-habiting or separated parents. The study took into account not only marital status but gender, income, age, and education.

So what seemed to explain this difference?  Dr. Luis Angeles, who headed the program had this to say:

“One is tempted to advance that children make people better off under the ‘right conditions’ — a time in life when people feel that they are ready, or at least willing, to enter parenthood…likely signal…may well be the act of marriage.”

That’s Not What I’ve Heard

This is the first study that challenges previous ones which concluded that having more children makes parents less happy, not more. However, the key with the distinction may well be the marital status of the parents.  In other words, marriage is the signal that one is ready for commitment, not just to marriage, but to family life in general.

Other interesting findings is that the happiness correlation was markedly stronger with Moms. The parents also expressed that children were one of the most important thing in their lives.

So if you and your spouse want to improve your life satisfaction? Have kids, and don’t stop at one, or even two.

Booster Seats Are Safer

The journal “Pediatrics” published the results of a study, conducted by the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia and the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia’s Center for Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, confirming previous reports that it’s safer to keep children aged 4 through 8 in a booster seat during car travel.

The new study gives us solid figures: Children in belt-positioning booster seats are 45% less likely to sustain injuries in a crash than children using standard safety belts.

Booster seats protected children even better during side-impact crashes, reducing the risk of injury 68% for near-side impacts and 82 % for far-side impacts. The most common type of injury children sustain in vehicle crashes is a head injury, accounting for 65 % of all injuries regardless of the type of restraint used. The data did not show a difference in the level of protection using a high-back booster or a backless booster seat.

The good news?

The study considered injuries sustained in 21,943 crashes in which at least one child received medical attention, as well as crashes where no children were injured, and the vast majority of injuries were not fatal, whether children wore a regular seat belt or used a booster seat.

Car Seats for the Car Only

It bears repeating that parents should follow the American Academy of Pediatrics car seat guidelines to keep their children safe during road trips. But it’s equally important to note the danger that exists when parents keep infants in car seats for extended periods when they are not traveling.

In a related article, CBS News reported the results of a study presented to the AAP that shows 8,700 emergency room visits resulting from inappropriate use of a car seat/carrier.

Most of the injuries occurred when parents placed car seat/carriers on soft surfaces, like beds and sofas, or high surfaces like counters and tabletops. This causes a risk of suffocation in infants, but babies can also suffer injuries to the head or extremities if the car seat tips or falls.

If you do place your baby in a carrier:

• Place the carrier on flat ground only.

• Be aware in public places; do not place the carrier and baby in high-foot-traffic areas.

• Avoid keeping baby in the carrier for long periods of time every day; this can lead to weak muscles and flat spots on the head.

The Bottom Line on Car Seat Safety

Car seats are intended for use in motor vehicles to protect infants, toddlers and children from injury in a crash. Use a car seat or booster seat, for as long as possible with your child, for its intended purpose. But don’t leave your infant in a carrier/car seat for extended lengths of time when you’re not traveling.

More Information

The flu, especially the swine flu is making headlines everyday and I deemed it wise to give you the latest flu updates that may be relevant for you and your family.

Swine Flu Shots in New York Schools

Schools in New York City will start offering H1N1 shots end of October, the NY Times report. Those of you residing in NYC might already have received the consent forms. The vaccination will cover primary public schools but private schools who want to participate will also get access to the vaccine. The shots or nasal sprays will be administered by school nurses. Middle and high schools are scheduled later in November and December. Other cities and states are expected to follow suit.

Pregnant Women Urged to Get the H1N1 flu Vaccine

Pregnant women are on top of the H1N1 vaccination priority list. This is because pregnant women seem to be especially vulnerable. Health authorities say that the mortality rate among women infected with H1N1 is six times higher than what is normally observed in the general population. The reasons for pregnant women’s vulnerability are their young age and an immune system that is naturally weakened in order not to reject the growing fetus. It is, however, very hard for pregnant women to accept the flu vaccine despite health official’s reassurances of its safety. So far, 28 deaths have been reported among pregnant women in the US but health officials think it could be more. Many cases go unreported for confidentiality reasons. An NY Times report features one almost fatal case.

Tamiflu for Children in Short Supply

In another report from the NY Times earlier this month, Mary Poppin’s advice that a spoonful of sugar would make medicine more palatable may also be true for the flu drug Tamiflu. The liquid pediatric version of the drug is in short supply as drug companies are concentrating on producing more pills which are definitely much faster to manufacture than Tamiflu syrup. Some sources say that the manufacturing process for the suspension is almost 25 times longer than for the pills. Pharmacists are therefore advised to mix Tamiflu capsules in a liquid that consists of sugar, purified water, artificial cherry flavoring. The instructions on how to mix the liquid version are given in the Tamiflu labels, the report says. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also gives easy to understand instructions in their site.

Flu Fears Prompt Review of the Sportsman Handshake

The hockey season has started and sports associations are scrambling to come up with hygiene guidelines that would hopeful prevent the swine flu. CBC reports that the chief medical officer of Hockey Canada sent out a bulletin with recommended precautionary measures which include no sharing of water bottles and – yes – maybe even do without the end-of-game handshake. It’s not only hockey that is affected. I am a soccer mom here in Switzerland and as early as school start in August, there were already instructions to avoid the sportsmen handshake, if possible. Just one more challenge for parents to find the balance between short-term preventive measure and long-term character building. At least hockey players wear gloves…

Groundbreaking medical research completed by a team at the Institute of Cancer Research, a college of the University of London, working in conjunction with researchers in Japan, discovered that certain cancer cells can cross the placenta of an afflicted mother-to-be into her unborn baby.

Such a link had been suspected previously, with about 17 cases of leukemia and melanoma supposedly passed on from mother to fetus, but genetic “fingerprinting” has established a definite link.

In the most recent case, a Japanese mother died from complications of leukemia one month after giving birth. Eleven months later, her supposedly healthy baby daughter was diagnosed with lymphoma, which is now in remission.

The researchers discovered that cancer cells of both mother and baby carried the identical mutated cancer gene, but the infant had not inherited the gene – instead, it passed through the placenta during the mother’s pregnancy.

Cause for concern?

The fetus’ immune system did not recognize the cancer cells as foreign bodies and so did not destroy them. However, in an article posted on the Guardian website, a UK-based newspaper, Professor Mel Greaves stresses, “The chances of any pregnant woman with cancer passing it on to her child are remote.” Greaves led the research study that uncovered this important link.

Rather than giving pregnant women yet another thing to worry about (the Japanese mother who prompted the study did not know she had leukemia until after she gave birth), the study provides hope for future cancer research and insight into possible cures.

In the same article, Dr David Grant, scientific director at Leukaemia Research, said: “The important message from this … is that leukemia cells can be destroyed by the immune system. Harnessing the power of the immune system to cure and protect patients from leukemia is one of our priority areas of research.”

This story truly is one about finding a glimmer of good out of sad news.

More Facts About Cancer and Pregnancy

According to research, about 1 in every 1,000 pregnant women is diagnosed with cancer, but pregnancy does not cause any form of cancer. Sometimes standard pre-natal testing, such as ultrasounds or PAP smears, may uncover cancers that had gone previously undetected.

On the other hand, symptoms of certain cancers may be similar to symptoms of pregnancy, which can actually delay detection of the cancer.

Breast cancer, occurring in one in every 3,000 pregnant women, is the most common form of cancer during pregnancy.

Treatment of cancer during pregnancy may include:

• Surgery

• Chemotherapy

• Radiation therapy

The latter two treatments are prescribed conservatively, only after careful consideration to their effects on the fetus. Chemotherapy is often safe in the second and third trimesters, with drugs that do not pass through the placenta.

It Can Be Done

Cancer during pregnancy certainly creates additional challenges for the mother-to-be, but with proper supervision, a complication-free pregnancy with a healthy baby can result. Do the results of this study prove differently?

Certainly, mothers with cancer may wish to consider this additional information but in general, I don’t think a cancer survivor determined to reproduce should let this stop her. What do you think?

Here Are Some Helpful links:

WebMD

Cancer.net

Guardian.co.uk

In the United States, many doctors refuse to deliver a baby weighing more than 9 and a half pounds through a vaginal birth. Some midwives report delivering perfectly healthy 10-pound babies, naturally – it can be done.

But there was little question or debate that Ani, of Jakarta, Indonesia, would need a cesarean section to deliver her 19.2-pound, 24.4 inch, baby boy. The child, as yet unnamed, is the largest baby to be born in the country and the third heaviest in the world.

The largest baby ever born was delivered in Canada in 1879 and weighed 23 pounds, 12 ounces and measuring 30 inches, according to the Guinness Book of World Records. He died 11 hours after birth, however. The largest baby to survive infancy was born in Italy in 1955, weighing 22 pounds, 8 ounces.

Gestational Diabetes to Blame

Reports say the baby grew so large because of the mother’s gestational diabetes. Ani was rushed to the hospital in the ninth month due to complications of the pregnancy. Gestational diabetes, if left unchecked, may result in macrosomia (excessively high birthweight, above the 90^th percentile), neonatal hypoglycemia, jaundice and, in rare instances, stillbirth.

A Difficult Delivery

A gynecologist involved in Ani’s son’s delivery said the c-section birth was a difficult process. Removing the baby without damaging the mother’s uterus was a challenge since his legs were so large. In spite of this, Ani’s baby was born healthy — and extremely hungry. He had minor breathing problems at first and received oxygen, but recovered quickly. Doctors reported that he wanted to eat constantly, and his cries were much louder than the smaller babies beside him in the nursery.

Some Perspective on his Size

My daughter was born (at 41 weeks and 3 days gestation!) weighing only 6 lbs. 4 oz. Today, she tips the scales (and those birth charts some doctors like to bandy about) at a whopping 17 lbs., putting her in the 5^th percentile for weight… and smaller than Ani’s newborn son! The newborn, measuring 24.4 inches long, is practically toddler-sized.

His measurements put him in size 12-month clothes already, so he skipped four clothing sizes (five if you count the hard-to-find “newborn” size). If he continues growing at the rate of most infants, he’ll be wearing 3T before he’s a year old. In all likelihood, however, his growth will level out and, while he may remain large, will drop into the 95^th percentile or less for his age within a few months.

In the meantime, Ani and her family, which includes three other children all born naturally in midwife-assisted births, simply has more of him to love.

Alas, the Brits have done it again! They gave the world the first IVF baby (the called test-tube baby) more than 30 years ago. Last year, they presented the first “breast-cancer-free” baby. And now, here’s their latest coup: the first egg-screening baby.

Welcome Oliver, the first baby ever produced using Array Comparative Genomic Hybridisation (Array CGH), a new technique that allows doctors to check eggs for chromosomal defects before fertilization. Chromosomal aberrations in embryos are responsible for a lot of miscarriages and failed IVF attempts and they are mainly due to defects in the eggs.

During Ovulation

The egg has to discard duplicate copies of its chromosomes to give space for sperm chromosomes during fertilization. The discarded chromosomes are contained in a small cell called a polar body. Sometimes, something goes awry, producing an egg which has too many or two few chromosomes. Down’s Syndrome or trisomy 21 is due to an extra 21 chromosome in the fertilized embryo. About 50% of female eggs have defective chromosomes. This increases dramatically as the woman gets older and could be up to 75% by the time she reaches 39.

In an IVF cycle, embryos are pre-screened before implantation, usually through visual screening under the microscope. However, this pre-implantation screening method does not seem to increase IVF success.

Array CGH

Array CGH performs an “inventory” of the chromosomes in the polar body in order to determine whether the egg has the right number of chromosomes. The test takes 1 to 2 days to complete. By pre-screening the eggs before fertilization, only viable, chromosome defect-free embryos are implanted. The chances of success during an IVF procedure are increased two- fold. What is interesting is that the scientists who develop the method reported that healthy, defect-free eggs are not necessary the “best looking” when viewed under the microscope, casting further doubt on visual egg screening.

Strictly speaking, Oliver is not the first baby to be conceived pre-screened. However, other babies born using similar techniques developed from frozen embryos. In Oliver’s case, using the new technique, the egg was screened, fertilized, and implanted within 48 hours, skipping the cryopreservation step.

Oliver’s mom is 41 years old and is of advanced maternal age through no fault of hers. She had three miscarriages and 13 failed IVF attempts. Late last year, the doctors screened 8 of her eggs using, Array CGH and only 2 were found to be normal. One of those eggs was fertilized, implanted and produced Oliver. I remember writing a post about this technique and her story in January when she was still in her 2^nd trimester. I’ve been wondering all this time how it worked out and now I’m glad to bring you this update.

The Ethical Issues

As usual, in such cases, there are always ethical issues to deal with. For the pro-life advocates, a human embryo represents life, with or without chromosomal aberrations. Do we have the right to choose? Do we have the right the screen? Is this assisted evolution, favoring the strong over the weak? Others would even venture to criticize: why waste so much time and money on IVF? Why not adopt?

I am pretty sure that for Oliver’s mom, what matters most is that she finally got her wish – her very own baby. After all she’s been through, she must be ecstatic to finally have Oliver, who was born two months ago. Only another mom can understand how she feels.

Oliver is the first but he won’t be the last. With his birth, many wanna-be moms’ hopes have been rekindled. All the best for Oliver and his mom.

Now there’s one more reason to hold your newborn baby in your arms as much as possible and save the car seat for the car.

A new study, published in Pediatrics magazine, showed that healthy two-day-old infants placed in car seats for an hour had lower average blood oxygen levels than those lying on their backs in cribs. The upright position of a car seat compresses a baby’s chest cavity, creating airway obstructions that can lower an infant’s blood oxygen saturation level.

You Still Need a Car Seat

While car seats are crucial for protection and safety within moving motor vehicles, infants should not be left in carrier/car seats for extended periods of time when not traveling, according to the findings of the study.

An article published on WebMD.com quotes the study, completed by Lilijana Kornhauser Cerar, MD, of University Medical Centre in Ljubjana, Slovenia, and her colleagues: “The use of [car seats and car beds] should, therefore, be restricted to protection from injury and death in traffic accidents, and they should never serve as a replacement for a crib.”

Previous studies had looked at the blood oxygen levels of pre-term babies in car seats and car beds, but this study shows that even in healthy infants, leaving a baby in a car seat for extended periods of time can cause respiratory issues.

The researchers, based in Slovenia and Boston, studied 200 infants, testing their oxygen saturation level after 30 minutes in a crib and after 60 minutes in a car bed or car seat. After lying in the crib, the average saturation level was 97.9 %. It was 96.3 % in the car bed and 95.7 % in the car seat.

While this drop in blood oxygen levels may not sound consequential, the researchers noted that even mild airway obstruction in infants has been linked to behavioral problems and lower IQ. Additionally, babies in the car seats and beds spent more time with oxygen levels below 95 % than did babies in the hospital cribs.

Perhaps most significantly, many parents let their babies sleep in their car seat if they have a cold. The upright position, ironically, seems to make it easier for a congested newborn to breathe. This is, perhaps, the scariest aspect of the study: parents who think they’re doing the right thing in infants with temporary respiratory problems may be causing the very problems they hope to prevent.

In an article published on Healthfinder.gov, Dr. Iley Browning, an associate professor of pediatrics at the Texas A&M Health Science Center College of Medicine, says, “…dropping oxygen levels are going to get worse when children have colds so you’re making your child worse by putting them in a car seat when they’re sick.”

Cause for Worry?

Do the findings of this new research really present a cause for concern, or is this new study just another “alarmist” theory that gives brand new parents something else to worry about?

I confess to leaving my daughter, as an infant, in her “bucket” in restaurants or stores if she fell asleep in the car seat while I was driving. I also let her sleep in there for up to an hour if she fell asleep in the car and I didn’t want to wake her upon returning home. I am also guilty of letting her sleep in her car seat or infant swing when she had a cold.

Would I do the same thing in light of this new research? Probably not. But I also recently discarded a batch of sippy cups and bottles once new, BPA-free alternatives became available. I don’t make myself crazy with worry, but I follow my intuition.

Other Good Reasons to Hold Your Baby…

While the risk of dangerously-low blood oxygen levels from spending too much time in a car seat is relatively low, (several physicians in several online sources note there is really no risk, at all) there are plenty of other good reasons to keep your newborn out of the “bucket” as often as possible.

Holding your baby (in a sling or in your arms):

• Builds a strong bond between parent and baby (yes, Daddy should hold baby as much as he can, too!)

• Helps regulate a newborn’s heartbeat and body temperature

• Makes an infant feel secure

Additionally, babies held frequently spend more time in a state of “quiet alertness,” which is the time during which they learn the most. Besides, holding a baby can be calming and relaxing for the mother, too.

As the mother of a 10-month-old prepping for a first birthday party, I can tell you that our little ones grow up way too quickly. Treasure every moment and hold them now, while they still let you! It’s important to reiterate that a car seat should always be used in a moving vehicle.

Let’s face it, some children are tough to feed. Most parents know that their children are notoriously picky eaters. Some of us parents, not wanting to fight a losing battle will just give them what they want, just so they will eat something. Well, according to some cancer experts, if processed meats falls into that category, you may need to think twice.

Scientists in the UK have determined that ham and bacon as well as other processed meats should not be given to children. They have asked parents to stop putting sandwiches made from these meats in their children’s lunches. Research has indicated that these meats increase the risk of bowel cancer later in life.

It seems their main concern is that feeding children these meats will lead to unhealthy eating habits. The scientists suggest healthier options like fish, chicken or low fat cheese. The World Cancer Research Fund charity has admitted that the study did not specifically examine the effects of these meats on children. The Charity claims, however, that the evidence could be seen based on studying adults. For this reason they think it is best to encourage children to try other food options instead of processed meats.

The children’s education manager for the charity was quoted online as saying, “If children have processed meat in their lunch every day then over the course of a school year they will be eating quite a lot of it. It is better if children learn to view processed meat as an occasional treat if it is eaten at all.”

The warning by the UK scientists applies to meats that are smoked or have anything added to them. They also recommend keeping the intake of red meat to 500 grams (approximately 1 pound) per week. The study’s findings were arrived at after looking at the results of thousands of previous studies.

What’s a parent to do?

I guess like most things, moderation is key. Feeding some children can indeed be challenging. It is understandable when some parents cave in and feed them whatever they want. Most parents may be on the lookout for childhood obesity, but clearly there are other dangers waiting for children down the road depending on their diets.

It is best to talk to your child’s pediatrician, see if they are aware of the study and get their feedback. Food safety will always be at the forefront of any parent’s mind. Despite the types of food any child shows a preference for, it goes without saying that as parents we must do our best to find ways to get some fruits and vegetables into their diets.

So far I have found a cool trick that have been working for a few months with my now 5-year old son. To get him to eat cucumber, we pretend that each circular slice is a full moon. Each bite changes the shape through the various stages of the moon, three-quarter, half, crescent until it is all gone. Now, if only I could find a way to make a game out of eating carrots.

An article in Wednesday’s U.K. Daily Telegraph reported on a 34-year-old Tunisian woman claiming to be pregnant with 12 babies – six boys and six girls. The woman, it said, conceived 12 babies after fertility treatments following multiple miscarriages.

A few days later, the Telegraph reported that an investigation by the Tunisian Health Ministry revealed that not only is the woman not pregnant with duodecaplets – she’s probably not even pregnant at all.

The article quoted a government spokesperson saying: “She’s claiming to be nine months pregnant with six boys and six girls, but there’s absolutely nothing about her appearance which indicates this.”

A doctor at the only hospital in her town said the woman had never been in their care. The woman refused a physical examination and has now disappeared.

The hoax comes on the heels of Nadya Suleman earning hundreds of thousands of dollars in media deals following her birth of octuplets. The Bellflower, California mom of 14 holds the record for the most live births at any one time.

Why Would She Do It?

While the Tunisian woman’s hoax was most likely financially motivated, there is a rare psychological disorder in which women believe they are pregnant. Women suffering from the disorder, pseudocyesis (false pregnancy), often show symptoms of pregnancy, such as amennorrhoea, morning sickness, tender breasts and a distended abdomen. Some women may feel quickening, or fetal movement. (This article gives a more broad description of the signs of pregnancy).

“Can’t Fool Science”

The incidence of false pregnancy has decreased dramatically in the U.S. since the 1940s, when there was 1 false pregnancy for every 250 actual pregnancies. Now, the incidence is approximately one to six cases of pseudocyesis for every 22,000 births.

More advanced diagnostic techniques for pregnancy make it harder for a woman’s body to “fool itself” into believing she is pregnant. Most cases of pseudocyesis are cured by using an ultrasound to prove to the woman she is not pregnant. In the face of such irrefutable medical proof, most women will become convinced and the symptoms will subside.

However, the underlying cause of the disorder still exists and the woman should be treated by psychotherapy. Doctors aren’t sure what causes the disorder, but an intense desire for a baby or, alternatively, a profound fear of pregnancy, may create the symptoms.

Pseudocyesis, while rare, makes for good drama and has been featured on a number of T.V. shows, including CSI: Crime Scene. Approximately 18 % of women suffering pseudocyesis are actually diagnosed by a doctor as pregnant.

In the absence of any symptoms in the Tunisian woman, known as AF, it would seem her “pregnancy” was a poorly-contrived hoax rather than an actual psychological disorder. Very sad.

Carl R. Darnall Army Medical Center in Fort Hood was locked down on Monday after an attempted newborn abduction from a mother’s room. Technology did its job, however, the infant abduction warning alarm went off and the baby was recovered.

The would-be abductor, reportedly a woman dressed in hospital garb, got away. The AP report requests that anyone with information should contact the Fort Hood CID (Criminal Investigation Department) Office at 254-287-2722 the Fort Hood Military Police at 254-287-4001 or email Hood.CID.SAC.RA@conus.army.mil.

The Good News
This story had a happy ending, with the baby returned to their mother. There are measures every new parent can take that will make your baby less of a target for abduction. The best thing a mother can do is trust her instincts. If a hospital visitor or even supposed staff member seems “not quite right,” do not leave your baby alone with that person.

IN THE HOSPITAL

Check the Child ID Bracelet. Minutes after your baby is born, hospital staff should outfit you, Daddy and baby with matching ID bracelets. Check the numbers right away to make sure they match and make sure the bracelets are affixed firmly around baby’s wrist and ankle.

Send Daddy in with the initial check-up. Very shortly after your baby is born, the doctors will whisk him away to be cleaned, weighed, measured and evaluated. You may be a little bit out of it at this time, but Daddy should follow the doctor with the baby into the other room. If the check-up is done right in the delivery room, that’s even better.

Room-in. Having your baby room in with you provides the best protection against hospital abductions – it also makes it a lot easier to stick to that “every 2 hour” feeding schedule of a nursing mother. Obviously, never leave your baby alone (or with someone you don’t know) in the room, not even so you can go to the bathroom.

Check ID badges of hospital personnel. Before anyone takes your baby back to the nursery for any reason, check their ID badge. Remember, though, ID badges and hospital garb is very easy to forge. Rely on your instincts. If something doesn’t “feel right” about a staff member, insist (politely) on accompanying them wherever they’re going. Most staff shouldn’t have a problem with this. If they do, consider that a red flag. Buzz the nurse’s station.

Never let baby out of sight.
You know your baby will be safe if you go everywhere they go. Again, you don’t have to sound accusatory or paranoid. Merely offer casually: “Oh, great, you’re bringing her to the nursery to see the doctor? I’ll come with you.”

Visiting hours. Visiting hour is a great time to get a few minutes away from your baby to shower, eat or just relax. Only leave the baby with very close friends or relatives. Take a few minutes to educate them on safety procedures and not letting any hospital staff take the baby without your approval.

AT HOME

As improved safety measures and security technology has reduced the number of hospital abductions, the number of newborn abductions from home has increased slightly. How can you best protect your baby at home? A lot of it is simply common sense: don’t leave your baby with someone you don’t know extremely well. Demand I.D. from anybody visiting your home in an “official” capacity – if their I.D. seems suspicious, refuse to let them enter your home. Be aware, too, if a casual acquaintance suddenly starts acting like your best friend after the baby is born – especially if you haven’t known them long.

Nix the lawn signs. Those cute little wooden storks on your front lawn announcing “It’s a girl”? They’re practically welcome signs for child abductors. Keep the celebratory balloons and signs indoors.

Watch your garbage. Similarly, putting boxes out at the curb with pictures of car seats, cribs and high chairs is an advertisement there’s a baby on the way. Drop these off at the recycling plant yourself or discard them over the course of a few weeks, broken down and sandwiched in between plain cardboard boxes. Better yet, keep the boxes. Babies go through gear quickly, and you’ll then have the products in their original boxes for sale, donation or for the next baby.

We are still learning much about the cognitive abilities of infants. We have known for some time that children are capable of learning at a much earlier age than previously thought. In fact there are companies taking advantage of this by pushing products that help children to recognize words before they can even speak.

A new study reported in the Washington Times has revealed something that will probably come as a surprise:  The unborn fetus actually has memories beginning at roughly 30 weeks. This would be about two months before the baby’s birth. In the study, the researchers used sound and vibration along with sonography to arrive at their findings.

Scientist at the Maastricht University Medical Center observed 100 women experiencing a healthy pregnancy concluded that “results indicated that a 34-week-old fetus is able to store information and retrieve it four weeks later.”

How The Pregnancy Study Was Conducted

During the final eight weeks of the pregnancy, each woman received a series of buzzes on their bellies lasting for one second. The buzzes were produced using a fetal vibroacoustic stimulator which is used to measure a baby’s heart rate and to assess general health. The baby is monitored to determine its response to the sounds. The researchers noted the baby’s eyes and mouth, as well as its body language over a period of three weeks. This was done with ultrasound imaging to determine how the unborn baby learned during the period. Over time, the researchers claim, the babies became so used to the sound that they stopped responding to it. This is known as “habituation.” It is the baby’s way of deciding that it won’t be harmed by the stimulus.

This would suggest that expectant parents who talk or read to their unborn babies may be on the right track. It is said that when a baby is born, he or she is already used to the sound of mom’s voice. Even those who are not totally convinced by the study should try to communicate with their unborn babies. Apart from bonding with baby, it is a nice way to start off development.

Almost three years ago, Maria del Carmen Bousada gave birth to twins, setting the record as the oldest mother ever at age 66. This record was broken by Rajo Devi Lohan of India last year who gave birth for the first time at the ancient age of 70. However, Bousada is still the oldest mom to ever give birth to multiples until she passed away earlier this week at the age of 69, leaving her 31-month old twin boys orphans.

In Vitro Fertilization Aided the Late in Life Conception

Bousada has never been married and got pregnant through in vitro fertilization using an unknown donor’s sperms. She reportedly spent all her life savings and even sold her house in order to pay for the fertility treatments. The IVF procedure was performed in Los Angeles where she supposedly lied about her age. Many countries, including the US, have set a maximum age limit for women who want to go through IVF but some don’t.

Bousada’s case will surely spark up the debate of the ethics of having children so late in life. While proponents of the issue argue for freedom of choice that science has enabled us, its opponents question whether it is fair to have children and put them at risk of being orphaned at an early age. One can say that Bousada’s story has proven the opponents right. Earlier this year, a 65-year old British woman created a furor when she decided to have a child and had fertility treatments in an eastern European country.

What Happens to the Children?

Sources told CNN that the children are being well taken care of by a nephew of Bousada. One source (a neighbour) told CNN that “God didn’t let her enjoy her children very much. He should have given her more time.” But what about the kids? They, too, didn’t have much time with their mom. It is sad, but they will barely remember her when they grow up to be adults.

According to a recent study women from wealthy backgrounds tend to give birth to more boys. The study claims that women from poorer classes usually have more girls. In other words, there are more factors than the ones we know of that determine a baby’s sex. The scientists who conducted the study say that the quality of the mother’s life and their environment influence the sex of the baby they end up having.

The Theory Explained

During prosperous times the best way for a mom to pass on her genes to future generations is by having a boy. Healthy and strong boys, the scientists suggest will make sure the line continues by fending off rivals in times of conflict.

On the other hand, if the mother is not well fed because of tough times, the child is likely to be weak. This child, if it is a male, will not be able to fend off attackers and is not expected to live very long. Apparently there is some evolutionary influence at work here as in this case it would make sense to have a girl. In times of difficulty it would make sense to have a girl as she would be less likely to be hurt in a conflict and therefore fail to reproduce.

Of course that might sound like quite a stretch to most of us, but they do back it up with evidence in the study. Reports indicate that the researchers looked at over 95,000 mothers in Rwanda based on a list that was put together in 2002. In Rwanda, men are allowed to have more than one wife, and the women studied were compared based on their marital ranking. A woman’s rank as wife is an indicator of her wealth the study claimed.

The wives higher up in the pecking order are usually wealthier as they receive most of the husband’s wealth. Wives lower down had more daughters than the wives who were higher ranked or even women who were in monogamous marriages. For every 100 sons they had 106 daughters, while women in monogamous marriages had 100 sons compared to 99 daughters.

Looking Closer at the Study

I’m not sure that these figures are entirely significant given that the figures are so close. Also Rwanda is a very poor country, so it is not clear how much wealth the average man would have to spread around. The study went on to point out that unborn baby girls are less likely to be miscarried if the mother is stressed. This could go a long way towards explaining why more women in these circumstances have more girls.

Of course all you have to do is think about wealthy celebrities to test this theory. Glamorous couple David and Victoria Beckham have three sons. Actor Woody Harrelson who certainly can’t be hurting for cash has three daughters he lovingly refers to as the “Goddess Trilogy.” Actor Bruce Willis has only girls as do a number of other wealthy celebrities. The late Princess Di gave birth to two boys, but fellow royal Sarah Ferguson gave birth to two girls. You could look at many examples that either support or disprove the theory.

The study published in the journal, Biology Letters is sure to spawn a lot of debate. I, for one, am not sure I buy into it since there are so many examples of the reverse being true. Granted, the researchers did state that boys are born during prosperous times – so the proof will reveal itself in the birth rate coming out of this economic crisis or will it.

British scientists in Newcastle claim they’ve achieved another milestone in biomedical research – creating a human sperm in the lab for the very first time.

How human sperm is created.

Using stem cells from a human embryo, they simulated the crucial process of meiosis, a type of cell division that splits the number of chromosomes into half. The whole process took about 4 to 6 weeks. The sperm produced were said to be mature and mobile.

This feat has been done before using mouse stem cells but this is the first time that it has been demonstrated to be possible using human stem cells. Gametes (eggs and sperm) are different from other cells in the body because they only have half the number of chromosomes. The chromosomal number is completed only during fertilization, when the egg and the sperm merge and contribute 50-50 to the genetic material. Simulating the process of meiosis is very critical and tedious, which is why nobody has done it until now.

How can this technology be used?

• Understanding (in)fertility in men. In simulating the formation of sperm, scientists can have more insight as to why some men are fertile and some are not.

• Understanding how sperm are affected by environmental factors. Certain chemicals and toxins, including chemotherapy drugs can cause permanent infertility. Scientists think they could help find a solution to reverse this problem.

• Understanding how genetic defects are passed on from father to child. In knowing the sperm is formed and developed, scientists might be able someday to manipulate the process and sort out the good genes from the bad.

The researchers stressed that this has nothing to do with procreation and they have no intention of using the lab-made sperm in fertilizing an egg, a procedure which is illegal in the UK. Expectedly, the announcement created a furor not only in the scientific community but among pro-life and religious groups.

Arguments against laboratory made sperm:

• The human embryos in stem cell research has always been steeped in controversy and considered ethically and politically incorrect. Josephine Quintavalle of Comment on Reproductive Ethics (Corethics) does not see the point of destroying a perfectly viable human embryo to produce experimental sperm.

• Cost-efficiency. From a more practical perspective, one may ask, is it really worth it? While there is a shortage of egg cells available for stem cell research, there is more than ample supply of sperm. Is it really worth the time and the money to create something in the lab that is easily available in nature? Or is it simply about proving that it can be done?

So what do you think? Is this an exciting scientific discovery or is it another one of those scientific dead-ends?

Stem cells and stem cell research have always been steeped in controversy mainly because the earliest source of stem cells discovered was the human embryo. This led to strong resistance against stem cell research based on ethical, moral, and religious grounds. Over the years, new, less controversial sources of stem cells have been identified, including:

• bone marrow
• umbilical cord
• skin
• breast milk
• fat tissue
• menstrual blood

Recently, Brazilian researchers have reported about another potential – and “politically correct” – source of stem cells – discarded Fallopian tubes.

The Fallopian tubes are the tubes that “catch” the eggs from the ovaries, to be transported to the uterus. Sometimes the tubes have to be removed surgically, an intervention called salpingectomy. In many cases, it is performed in connection with oophorectomy (removal of the ovary) and/or hysterectomy (removal of the uterus) in women with cervical or breast cancer. The researchers found abundant immature cells in Fallopian tubes during surgery, cells which can potentially develop into bones, muscles, and other organs.

Stem cell research is cutting edge technology in the quest for curing many diseases, from cancer, to cardiovascular disorders, to neurodegenerative diseases. Identifying more “ethical” sources of stem cells can give this field of research a boost and hopefully produce results. Currently, a few stem cell-based therapies are undergoing clinical trials.

Another victory for American consumers! On June 2, the state of California Senate voted to ban bisphenol A (BPA) from the packaging of baby food and beverage products. You remember BPA, right? It’s that carcinogenic, endocrine disruptor compound found to leach out from plastic bottles (including baby bottles!) and food packaging (including baby formula!).

Well, it seems that the Toxics-Free Babies and Toddlers Act (SB 797) of California will finally put an end to the use of this chemical in the manufacture of plastics and plastic-containing products. At least until the Act goes through the State Assembly. The legislation is also known as the Pavley Bill as it was introduced by Senator Fran Pavley.

The industry lobbyists did try their best to sway the Senate’s decision in their favor but it the end, the Senate members acted rationally based on the mounting scientific evidence that BPA is detrimental to our health. According to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), research studies have linked BPA exposure to the following diseases and health problems:

• Breast cancer

• Heart disease

• Birth defects

• Prostate cancer

• Infertility

• Premature puberty in girls

• Diabetes

• Obesity

California is the not the first state to ban BPA. Earlier this year, Minnesota, then Connecticut set the precedence. It is expected that more states will follow. This is despite the fact that the US FDA has declared the levels of BPA in the food and beverages are very low and considered to be harmless.

As Breast Cancer Fund Gretchen Lee Salter policy manager rightly said “…kids had to come first before the lobbyists.” Indeed, with the Pavley Bill, this is exactly what happened.

It may seem somethings straight out of the Jungle Book or Tarzan but there is nothing cute or romantic about the plight of the 5-year old Russian girl Natasha who was raised by dogs and cats – right within the four walls of her home. She was found in a little flat in Siberia whom she shares with her father, grandparents, and other relatives. Despite the presence of adults in this remote Siberian household, the motherless child – the mother is alive but not living at home – is apparently constantly left alone with the animals. It is speculated that she may never have left the flat at all. Natascha shows the classical signs of “feral upbringing”, also called the “Mowgli Syndrome” – she barks, lunges and eats like a dog. She understands Russian but can’t speak and communicates through barking instead.

There have been stories of feral children – in myths but also real documented cases. The most popular are Tarzan of the Apes and Mowgli of the Jungle Book. Feral children lack the social skills that children with normal upbringing learn during the first years of their lives. They may not be able to walk upright and definitely have undeveloped language skills.

The Russian authorities have removed the girl from her home and placed in an orphanage. Her parents may face charges of child negligence and abuse. I really hope that wherever she is now, Natascha is getting the physical and psychological care that she needs.

Great Britain is trying to come to grips with the extremes of parenthood – first the 13-year father (Alfie) and now the 66-year mother Elizabeth Adeney.

Elizabeth shocked the country when she decided to have a child at the advanced age of 66 – when most women of her age are easing into retirement and coping with the empty nest syndrome. Apparently for the successful career woman, nesting has just started. She reportedly has already delivered her son on Tuesday this week by C-section. Her case highlights the controversies surrounding assisted production, medical tourism, and the laws governing these. Apparently, Elizabeth had in vitro fertilization outside the UK where the age limit is 50. Should her act of circumventing the law through medical tourism be considered illegal? Elizabeth reportedly received hate mails about her decision to have a child.

Elizabeth’s case brought out the question as to when is a mother too old to have a child?

For many people, the answer is clear – the biological clock decides. There are others, however, who believe in taking advantage of what science has to offer. After all, even in the Bible, there is the case of Sarah who delivered Isaac at the very ripe age of 80+.

Many people are also bringing up the gender question – when is a father too old to be a father? Think of Anthony Quinn, Larry King, and J. Howard Marshall. Is anybody complaining at all?

What do you think? When is it too old to have a child?

A little boy possibly saved the life of his father and little brother in Nebraska on Sunday. Tustin Mains, a 6 year old boy, was riding in the back seat of his father’s Chevy Avalanche, next to his three year old brother, when he saw his dad “fall asleep” at the wheel. The sharp thinking Kindergartner quickly got out of his seat, crawled up to the front and climbed into his dad’s lap, where he was able to see out the windshield and reach the steering wheel.

His dad, Phillip Mains, had not actually fallen asleep, but was unconscious due to low blood sugar. Thankfully, Phillip’s foot had slipped from the accelerator, but the truck continued to roll while idling at about 15 miles per hour, witnesses say. When he slumped over on the way home from a restaurant, his older son managed to handle the vehicle for several blocks before being rescued.

Passersby recognized that something was wrong, and alerted the police. Several other cars drove behind and in front of Tustin with their emergency flashers on until being rescued by North Platte police officer Roger Freeze. Freeze made contact with Tustin, parked his patrol car and chased the truck on foot. After about a block, he caught up with it. With the doors locked, he was unable to enter the vehicle. But before losing consciousness, Phillip had rolled down the window. Although the boy was startled when Freeze appeared, Freeze managed to reach in and put the car in park, bringing the Avalanche to a stop.

When Tustin was driving, he was able to maneuver through town, and even turned around when he didn’t recognize his surroundings. Amazingly, all three passengers, the officer, and the vehicle are all unharmed. But Tustin admits he was pretty scared by the whole ordeal. Police Chief Martin Gutschenritter praised the boy, saying, “That is also a very special young man. He was able to take quick action when his dad was incapacitated, and we are very proud of him, too.”

Chief Gutschenritter said the department will officially recognize the valiant effort that Officer Freeze made. “Investigator Freeze’s quick action possibly averted tragedy. I will be issuing him a departmental citation for his quick, professional action on this case. Phillip Mains also heaped praise on the officer. “To chase down a moving vehicle and get it stopped the way he did took a lot of nerve and it weren’t for him, things could have turned out much worse.”

As a mom, I would be so proud to call Tustin my own. I have some pretty terrific kids, but I don’t know how they would react in such a frightening situation. I can’t say I would offer my son driving lessons. But this story does remind me how important it is to teach my kids how to think and react in an emergency. It also reinforces my concern that my son know where we live–to be able to get himself home if something happened. I also need to remember to thank my friend who is a police officer–and teach my kids to respect the police. They really put themselves on the line for us all every day.

In February, 13-year old Alfie Patten made headlines as Britain’s youngest father, having  conceived a child with his friend Chantelle Steadman, 15, when he was only 12. Problem is, he’s not the dad.

It wasn’t long after the story flooded the internet and tabloid papers that other boys came forward, suggested that they, too, could be the baby’s father because they had a sexual relationship with the girl at the same time she became pregnant. A publicist, Max Clifford, who represents Alfie and his family, said at the time, “It is inevitable there are going to be doubts, particularly with the number of boys who’ve come forward claiming to have had sex with Chantelle. There is one boy in particular who does seem to have a stronger resemblance to the child.”

That could have been Richard Goodsell, 16. The teen said he had a sexual relationship with Chantelle for three months. “I know I could be the father. Everyone thinks I am. My friends all tell me that baby has my eyes– even my mum thinks so.” Tyler Barker, 14, who lives down the street was not so cavalier. In fact, he was terrified. “I slept with Chantelle in her bed about nine months ago and I’m really worried I could be the father, he said.

Clearly, a paternity test was in order. A DNA test first confirmed that Patten was not the daddy. Subsequent tests revealed that the “winner” was Tyler Barker.

Considering all of the negative media stories about teen pregnancy, sexuality and innocence lost, you’d think that the boy and his own parents would be relieved. Leading politicians got on their soapboxes about the moral condition of modern society. But no. “Alfie is distraught and upset about everything.” Apparently, he and his mother both thought the other boys were lying. Chantelle did say at the time that Alfie was the only boy she had ever slept with. Alfie had no suspicion that she had not been faithful to him.

When Maisie Roxanne was born on February 9, 2009, Alfie said he didn’t know how he’d support the baby, but insisted he’d be a good dad. Since then, observers say he clearly adores the baby and is distressed that he is not her father.

At the time, I thought this story was sad. I guess I still do. The world descended on Alfie Patten who responded as maturely as a 13-year old can be expected to. He steps up, admits responsibility and prepares to do what he can to love and care for a little one. And now that it’s over, where does that leave him? And what about Tyler Barker. If he doesn’t want to be a dad, can they all just let Alfie fill the shoes? Considering Chantelle didn’t even own up to sleeping with these other boys, it seem like she must want Alfie to be the dad, too.

I hope there is a happy ending here. But I can’t see it yet.