July 08, 2005

• The article does not provide a lot of information. It should consider what type of mattress is used, comforter, blankets, position of the baby, prior health/attitude of the baby, etc. This may or may not have been included in the actual study, but as it is, the article is meaningless.
• Also, there are very, very few data points. Less than 100 kids in a year -- that's easily attributed to other causes. Illness, as you've said. Or intoxication with alcohol or prescription drugs (NEVER sleep in a bed with a baby if you've even taken Nyquil!). Or unawareness that a baby was in the bed (sad but true, and it's one of the leading causes of this sort of thing). Co-sleeping is an emotionally and physically healthier way for babies and moms to sleep. Both get more sleep and both get dramatic emotional and mental benefits.
• "But the researchers discovered that 52 per cent of the babies that died spent at least part of their final night in their parents' bed. " And 50% of all pilots flying commercial airliners right now graduated in the bottom half of their class! That statistic is misleading and the article incomplete. Maybe the baby was fussy because of what was going cause it to pass away and 52% of the parents tried to provide comfort. Joke of it all is, every resource I've ever been exposed to stresses kangaroo-ing newborns (skin to skin contact) especially in the first three months of life.
• This is one of those debates that gives me a headache. In general, childcare is a touchy area that has many issues that are neither right or wrong - obviously. Our son (he's now 13-months) has shared the bed with us since he came home from the hospital. For the first 2 months he slept in this contraption. Sometimes I can really appreciate co-sleeping, and then there are those times when I just want to get some peace without those little legs kicking me in the face at 3:00 in-the-morning. I suppose it's like everything else in life - having both good and bad qualities. Well, all I know is there is nothing like waking up in the morning with this smiling guy laying next to me... Too bad he's gonna get demoted to his own bed soon! Bad article indeed. Amazing how much space a year-old kid can take up on a king-size bed! Check the t-shirt thread if you want to see a pic of the little devil.
• My son is 16mos and has slept with us since he was a week old. He has recently become too big for the three of us to fit in our double-bed together and for the past two weeks I've slept on the floor in a sleeping bag. This weekend we are buying him his own "big-boy-bed." and Daddy gets to give up his nest.
• Good luck! And I'm familar with the "sleeping-on-the-floor" bit as well.
• There seems to be a fundamental misunderstanding of correlation and causality here. As with EVERY "study" about everything I have ever seen reported in any news outlet. ("TV causes violence" is the classic- maybe kids who tend to be violent anyway would want to watch violent stuff on TV too??)
• And then there's "listening to Beethoven makes you smarter." of course Led Zeppelin would probably have the same effect, but that wouldnt "sound right" on TV and in the papers, so they dont test for it. After all, science is all about only testing for the possibilities that sound good, and then bending the data to get the results you want.
• Why is it that every time I read something about cot death it contradicts the shit in the previous stuff?
• Statistically speaking, causation is correlated with correlation. However, it would be a fallacy to say causation causes correlation, because correlation does not imply causation.
• Useless study, blah blah blah. I bet that Beethoven "stat" has more to do with the kind of parents who would listen to Beethoven on a semi-regular basis than the music itself.
• statsbusters site in case anyone is interested...
• There have been several of those classical music studies- I think they have claimed that just listening to it makes you smarter, I suppose compared to a control group who listens to nothing. if its in a lab, the group who listened to nothing probably got so bored they scored lower on the tests they got afterwards. What irks me about it is it's the complete antithesis of the real scientific method- twisting experimental conditions to produce a result that "seems right" because it reinforces societal sterotypes- smart people listen to classical, dumbasses listen to rock or hip-hop or, God forbid, country.
• "Statistically speaking, causation is correlated with correlation. However, it would be a fallacy to say causation causes correlation, because correlation does not imply causation." Say, isn't this what Professor Higgins had Eliza Doolittle repeat to teach her how to enunciate properly?
• Is that the movie where some bored academic decides to teach some street rabble how to mechanically psychoanalyze talking animals? I found it tepid and derivative.
• After all, science is all about only testing for the possibilities that sound good, and then bending the data to get the results you want. Did science beat you up for your lunch money when you were a kid or something? This sounds like a grudge. Science is about making hypotheses and testing them. Reporting is about spin.
• if its in a lab, the group who listened to nothing probably got so bored they scored lower on the tests they got afterwards. But wouldn't that prove the point that listening to music makes you score better?
• listening to music makes you score better Wearing an iPod and a melancholy expression is no longer the chick magnet it used to be.
• Well, fractalid, you have to admit that sexy research gets more funding.
• Did science beat you up for your lunch money when you were a kid or something? I was beaten up and science had my lunch money. However, no one could prove the cause and effect. seriously, I am a fan of real science and an enemy of pseudo-science
• "Statistically speaking, causation is correlated with correlation. However, it would be a fallacy to say causation causes correlation, because correlation does not imply causation." As a corollary, note that correlation, altough correlatively linked with causation, does not cause causation.
• Useless study, blah blah blah. I bet that Beethoven "stat" has more to do with the kind of parents who would listen to Beethoven on a semi-regular basis than the music itself. You're referring to what is commonly called "the Mozart effect." To the best of my knowledge, the effect is most pronounced with the music of Mozart for some reason; Led Zep doesn't really have the same effect. Most of the Mozart Effect stuff out there on the web is pseudoscientific nonsense, but there has been a great deal of research on this: the first study (by these guys) was published in Nature (abstract) in 1993. Regardless of all of the research, the legitimacy of the effect is still questionable at best. The best summation I've found is here. [/derail]
• seriously, I am a fan of real science and an enemy of pseudo-science Yay! Sorry if I came off too snarky... any enemy of pseudo-science is a friend of mine. At least, there's a strong correlation.
• there's "listening to Beethoven makes you smarter." of course Led Zeppelin would probably have the same effect I think you may have been listening to too much Zep.
• Hah! Nice irony there, Wolof.
• Sorry, I can't hear you.
• P.S. -- unheard Beethoven (alas, MIDI)
• Regardless of all of the research, the legitimacy of the effect is still questionable at best That's what i was getting at. I have an odd feeling no one has tested for the "Zeppelin effect." And how about the Flatt & scruggs effect? nitty gritty Dirt band effect?
• And 50% of all pilots flying commercial airliners right now graduated in the bottom half of their class! Someone explain to me the banality of this statistic, coz I don't see it.