Tag Archive for 'American Academy of Pediatrics'

How Safe is Your Sunscreen? The ABCs of Sunscreen

Published on June 22, 2011 in Health & Safety, Organic and Skincare. 4 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , .

Did you know that just one blistering sunburn in childhood or adolescence more than doubles the chances of developing melanoma later in life? The same is true for a person who has had 5 or more sunburns at any age. Regardless of what type of sunscreen you use (chemical or mineral-based), the proven benefits of sunscreen outweigh potential risks. That being said, you can limit your child’s exposure to known chemicals by knowing which ingredients to avoid.

First, a few facts about sunscreen to get out of the way.

Chemical versus “Mineral” Sunscreens

Today’s sunscreen market is dominated by either “chemical” sunscreens or “mineral” sunscreens. Any liquid that you put on your child’s skin can penetrate her skin and get absorbed into her bloodstream, so it is very important to know the difference between the two types of sunscreen.

How Do I Know Whether My Sunscreen is “Chemical” or “Mineral” Based?

The best advice we can give you is to check the list of ingredients on your sunscreen bottle before you make a purchase. Mineral sunscreens contain either zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide as the active ingredient. Chemical sunscreens usually contain one or more of the following ingredients:

  • Benzophenones (dixoybenzone, oxybenzone) - linked to allergies, hormone disruption and cell damage. Also linked to low birth weight in baby girls whose mothers have been exposed to oxybenzone during pregnancy.
  • PABA and PABA esters (ethyl dihydroxy propyl PAB, glyceryl PABA, p-aminobenzoic acid, padimate-O or octyl dimethyl PABA) – research shows this chemical releases free radicals, damages DNA, has estrogenic activity, and can cause allergic reactions.
  • Ethylhexyl p-methoxycinnamate and Octyl methoxycinnamate – Estrogenic effects have been found in laboratory animals as well as disruption of thyroid hormone, and brain signaling.
  • Octocrylene -may be used in combination with other UV absorbers for higher SPF formulas. Produces oxygen radicals when exposed to UV light.
  • Ethylhexyl salicylate, Octyl salicylate – It is a penetration enhancer, which may increase the amount of other chemical ingredients passing through skin.
  • Homosalate – Research indicates it is a weak hormone disruptor, and can enhance the penetration of a toxic herbicide.
  • Menthyl Anthranilate – not permitted for use in Europe or Japan. 1 study found that it produces damaging reactive oxygen species when exposed to sunlight.
  • Avobenzone – Sunlight causes this ingredient to break down into unknown chemicals, especially in the presence of another active ingredient, Octinoxate.

What’s Wrong With Chemical Sunscreens?

Chemical sunscreens are concerning for 3 reasons:
(1) They are powerful free radical generators.
This means that the chemicals used in chemical sunscreens increase cellular damage and changes to the skin, that can lead to cancer.

(2) They have strong estrogenic activity.
Several chemicals used in chemical sunscreens may disrupt the body’s hormone system. A human’s hormone system influences almost every cell, organ and function of our bodies, including the ability to have children.

(3) Synthetic chemicals used in chemical sunscreens tend to accumulate in the body.
No one truly knows how the new chemicals that have been introduced in sunscreens will affect our bodies over time. Many of these chemicals were created in laboratories and have not been tested, for generations, on humans.

Why Are Mineral Sunscreens Better?

The Environmental Working Group (EWG) has determined that Mineral sunscreens offer the best “safety profile” of today’s sunscreens. Mineral sunscreens are labeled as such because they contain zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide minerals. Mineral sunscreens are often classified as having either micronized- or nano-scale particles of zinc oxide and/or titanium dioxide.

Zinc Oxide versus Titanium Dioxide

In case you were wondering, there is a difference between what both minerals offer in sunscreens.

Zinc Oxide offers broad spectrum protection against all UVA and UVB rays.

Titanium Dioxide, on the other hand, protects against both UVA and UVB rays, but does not cover the entire UVA spectrum. Also, recent research suggests that zinc oxide is superior to titanium dioxide at wavelengths between 340 and 380 nm.

Micronized versus Nanoparticle Sunscreens

This section caused me the most headaches while writing this article. Believe it or not, it is important to know whether your mineral sunscreen contains micronized or nanoparticles, and their sizes, because sunscreens with larger particle sizes (micronized) are less reactive than smaller particles (nanoparticles). As such, micronized sunscreens are usually classified as containing mineral particles greater than 100 nm in size.

What Is A Nanoparticle And Why Is It In Sunscreen?

According to the ASTM International Committee on Nanotechnology, a nanoparticle is defined as a particle between 1 to 100 nm and can be “composed of many different base materials (carbon, silicon, and metals such as gold, cadmium, and selenium)”. Many mineral sunscreens appear white or grayish when applied. So several mineral sunscreen companies have begun using nanoparticles in their sunscreens, in order to make the particle size small enough to get better absorbed into the skin and not create whitening.

However, according to Environment, Health & Safety at MIT:
“In the last year and a half, there have been a number of research articles on the toxicity of different types of nanomaterials. These studies have suggested effects at the cellular level and in short-term animal tests. The effects seen depend on the base material of the nanoparticle, its size and structure, and its substituents and coatings. Additional toxicology testing is being funded or planned by the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National Toxicology Program, and other research organizations in the US and in Europe. ”

So try to avoid nanoparticle mineral sunscreens and buy micronized mineral sunscreens.

What Does Uncoated/Coated Zinc Oxide Mean And Why Does It Matter?

Coated Zinc Oxide
Many sunscreen companies use zinc oxide whose particles have been coated with an inert substance. Coating minerals make small nanoparticles less reactive (less likely to generate free radicals) and easier to mix with base ingredients.

Uncoated Zinc Oxide
Uncoated zinc oxide is more photoreactive than coated zinc oxide, which means that when uncoated zinc oxide is exposed to UV light, it can generate free radicals, which can damage living cells.

Sunscreen companies, such as Badger, that use uncoated zinc oxide argue that uncoated zinc oxide is less reactive than even coated titanium dioxide, and that researchers have found that zinc oxide sits on the outer, dead, layer of skin. Therefore, any free radicals generated will not affect the living cells below the dead layer of skin.

Sun Protection Factor (SPF)

The SPF is a laboratory’s measure of the effectiveness of sunscreen. According to Wikipedia, “The SPF is the amount of UV radiation required to cause sunburn on skin with the sunscreen on, as a multiple of the amount required without the sunscreen.” In other words, if you normally get sunburned after 1 hour in the sun then a SPF 30 sunscreen would allow you to stay out in the sun for 30 hours before you get burned. However, we all know that, even with sunscreen on, several factors will determine whether or not someone will sunburn (i.e. time of day in sun, whether or not sunscreen is reapplied, exposure to water with sunscreen, etc.).

Typically, chemical sunscreens have protected users from UV-B (the ultraviolet radiation that causes sunburn) but have done little to protect users from UV-A (ultraviolet type a radiation) rays. UVA rays can cause invisible damage to the skin cells deep within the skin, and skin aging. In order to make sure that your sunscreen protects against both UVA and UVB rays, make sure that it is labeled as “Broad Spectrum.”

Do Sunscreens Higher Than SPF30 Really Work?

SPF30 blocks out 97% of the sun’s UVB rays. So anything above SPF30 will not offer any extraordinary amount of protection, just a marginal addition. It is safe to deduce that any sunscreens above SPF30 is purely marketing tactics. Also, the maximum amount of time that you have in the sun with any sunscreen is about 2 hours because after that the sunscreen’s ingredients begin to break down. That’s why most doctors will advise you to reapply every two hours, unless your child is sweating and/or playing in water, in which case you might need to reapply more often.

What Can I Do To Protect My Infant Under 6 Months Old?

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has historically recommended that sunscreen not be applied on infants under 6 months of age. The Australian Cancer Society has come out, though, and said that there is no evidence to suggest that sunscreen on small areas of a baby’s skin has any long-term effects, so the AAP now recommends that when you’re not able to fully protect an infant’s skin with clothing, sunscreen on areas such as the face, neck, and back of the hands is reasonable.

Vitamin A

Recently, the EWG has recommended that people avoid sunscreens containing retinyl palmitate (vitamin A), as a recent FDA study indicated that vitamin A may speed the development of skin tumors and lesions when exposed to sunlight. 30% of sunscreens sold in the U.S. today contain vitamin A. So, try to avoid sunscreens that contain retinyl palmitate/vitamin A.

We will soon publish our 2011 sunscreen picks post after we finish our research, so stay tuned!

What other questions do you have about sunscreens?

Related Articles:
Protecting Your Children’s Delicate Skin from the Sun
Is Your Sunscreen ‘Safe’? Vitamin A Added to Sunscreens May Do More Harm Than Good

Pediatricians Call for Change: Protect Children from Toxic Chemicals

Published on May 5, 2011 in Health & Safety. 8 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , .

Did you know…

  • U.S. companies manufacture and import more than 80,000 chemicals, 3,000 of them at over a million pounds per year.
  • Manufacturers of these chemicals were not required to test them for safety before going to market.
  • Only 12 out of the top 3,000 chemicals have been adequately tested for their effects on the developing brain according to a senior scientist at the NRDC.
  • Concerns about chemicals are permitted to be kept from the public under the auspices of “confidential business information”. Information declared by companies to be confidential is not allowed to be shared by the EPA.
  • In the 35 years since the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) was passed, the act has been used to regulate only 5 chemicals. Even then, it took an act of Congress, literally, to amend the TSCA to regulate 1 of those 5 (asbestos).
  • 63,000 chemicals on the market the day the TSCA was passed were assumed to be relatively safe. The EPA must demonstrate that these chemicals have a high likelihood of causing harm before it can order testing.
  • Between 1979 and 2005, the EPA used its authority to require testing on fewer than 200 chemicals in commerce.

The more I’ve researched health and safety issues, the more concerned I’ve become over the laissez-faire attitude our government has taken toward our health and safety. For years, I’d assumed the government had our backs and that I could assume that the food I consumed and the products my family and I used were safe, yet more and more I find that the government has sacrificed our health as it has bent to industry interests or that its hands are tied and unable to protect us.

As a mother, it is incredibly frustrating, infuriating even. I don’t want to have to wonder about the toy my child puts in her mouth or the food she eats. I don’t want to wonder about what I have been exposed to that may be passing to my children through my breastmilk, or worse yet through the placenta before they’ve even entered this world.

Testing of cord blood samples by the Environmental Working Group in 2005 found more than 200 chemicals on average in each child, most of which are known carcinogens or responsible for birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests.

Several recent studies have indicated that phthalate exposure in the womb disrupts normal testosterone exposure resulting in the possibility of anatomical defects such as undescended testes, impaired sperm quality, and increased risk for testicular cancer in boys. Phthalate exposure has also been linked to premature birth and early puberty in girls in other studies.

And in recent weeks, three separate studies showed that prenatal exposure to pesticides was linked to lower IQs.

Our children should not be guinea pigs.  It should not be left to the public to sound the alarm. Our nation’s pediatricians agree. Last week, the American Academy of Pediatrics issued a policy statement urging the government to change its approach to chemical safety.

Among its recommendations, the AAP wants chemicals to be tested for safety before they enter the market along with post-market surveillance for health problems. Other recommendations include:

  • Regulation of chemicals, both old and new, should be based on evidence and reasonable levels of concern rather than demonstrated negative health effects
  • Any testing of chemicals should consider the impact on pregnant women and children, including potential effects on reproduction and development
  • The EPA must have the authority and means to ban a chemical if needed
  • Companies should provide information to the public in layman’s terms for any new chemicals marketed, and companion documents should be provided with any consumer products containing the chemical

But at the core of any policy decision regarding chemical safety, the AAP wants the government to consider the consequences to children and to recognize that they are not little adults. Children are at higher risk for exposure to toxic chemicals than adults because they eat, drink, and breathe more pound for pound than adults and spend more time on the ground where they come into more contact with contaminants than adults. And the way their bodies break down these chemicals is different too.

Earlier last month, Senator Frank Lautenberg of NJ took action to reform the TCSA and introduced the Safe Chemicals Act of 2011 which addresses many of the AAP’s recommendations. Most importantly, it would require safety testing, empower the EPA, and establish a prioritization system so that the EPA can focus on those chemicals posing the most risk. Furthermore, it would establish a public database for chemical information so that we, as parents, can make informed decisions about the products we use.

Please join us in supporting this legislation. Contact your local senator and urge them to support this bill.

-Jasmine

Related Articles:
The BPA Debate: Politics and Your Health
Bottled Water vs. Tap Water: Making a Healthy, Informed Choice
Non-Stick Cookware: Friend or Foe?
Cadmium: The New Toxic Metal Threat

Get Smart About Antibiotics

Published on November 19, 2010 in Educational and Health & Safety. 8 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , .

Courtesy sparktography, flickr

It is Get Smart About Antiobitics Week, and the CDC and the AAP are teaming up to inform the public that antibiotic use when not needed can cause more harm than good. Widespread inappropriate use of antibiotics has led to an increase in drug-resistant bacteria, cited by the CDC as one of the world’s most pressing public health problems. Over the last decade, almost every type of bacteria has become stronger and less resistant to antibiotic treatment.
Both organizations have expressed particular concern because antibiotics are used all too frequently in children. In fact, children have the highest rates of antibiotic use. They also have the highest rate of infections caused by antibiotic-resistant pathogens.
For ways to reduce antibiotic usage and resistance, the CDC offers the following tips:
  • Talk to your doctor about the best treatment for your child’s illness. Use antibiotics only when your doctor has determined that they are likely to be effective. Antibiotics won’t cure most colds, coughs, sore throats, or runny noses.
  • Don’t expect to get a prescription for antibiotics. A recent study found that doctors prescribed antibiotics 65 percent of the time when they perceived that the parent expected a prescription, and only 12 percent of the time when they did not perceive that they were expected.
  • Antibiotics are powerful medicines and should only be used to treat bacterial infections. If an antibiotic is prescribed, make sure you take the entire course as directed even if symptoms disappear. If treatment stops too soon, some bacteria may survive and re-infect.
  • Do not save any antibiotics for the next time you or your child get sick. Discard any leftover medication once you have completed your prescribed course.
  • Do not take antibiotics prescribed for someone else. The antibiotic may not be appropriate for your illness, and taking the wrong medication can delay proper treatment allowing bacteria to multiply.
If your child suffers from a viral infection, consider these tips for ways to relieve symptoms:
  • Get plenty of rest.
  • Increase fluid intake.
  • Use a clean humidifier or cool mist vaporizer.
  • Avoid smoking, second-hand smoke, and other pollutants.
  • Take acetaminophen or ibuprofen to relieve pain. See here for information regarding what is safe to give your child.
  • For ear pain, put a warm moist cloth over the ear that hurts.

If you enjoy reading PureBebe, please tell your friends and click on “Subscribe to PureBebe!” under “Email Subscription” on the right rail of the screen. By subscribing to our emails, you are telling us that you dig our site and want to read more of our healthy baby news and topics!

CDC Issues Breastfeeding Report Card for 2010

Published on September 14, 2010 in Breastfeeding, Educational and Health & Safety. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , .

 

According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s recently released 2010 Breastfeeding Report Card, 75% of new mothers in the U.S. now start out breastfeeding, but only 43% are still breastfeeding at 6 months and 22% at 12 months. Even fewer are exclusively breastfeeding at 3 and 6 months, 33% and 13%, despite recommendations by the American Academy of Pediatrics and numerous other health organizations who recommend exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months of life.

The AAP policy statement on breastfeeding cites the following reasons why breastfeeding is best:

  • Reduced risk of infectious disease. It decreases the possibility that your child will contract a variety of infectious diseases – bacterial meningitis, respiratory tract infections, ear infections, and diarrhea to name a few.
  • Reduced risk of SIDS. A study in New Zealand revealed that SIDS was three times higher in non-breastfed babies.
  • Reduced incidence in other health outcomes. Some studies also suggest a reduction in the incidence of diabetes, lymphoma, leukemia, Hodgkin disease, overweight and obesity, hypercholesterolemia, and asthma.
  • Enhanced cognitive ability. Children who were breastfed have tested slightly better on tests of cognitive development.
  • Maternal health benefits. Mothers who breastfed experienced less postpartum bleeding, decreased risk of breast and ovarian cancers, and return to pre-pregnancy weight faster.
  • Cost savings for the country and for families. An April study published in the journal of Pediatrics suggested that exclusive breastfeeding in the first 6 months of life could save nearly 1000 lives and up to $13 billion in excess costs because of the reduced risk of illnesses and death. Add to that the savings a family affords from the lack of formula purchased.

The conclusion drawn from the CDC Report Card indicates that most moms don’t disagree. They are making an effort to breastfeed, but a lack of support is believed to be the main culprit behind low breastfeeding rates after birth.

The CDC points to the average levels of support that birthing facilities provide and hospital practices and policies that interfere with breastfeeding. Based on my own experience, I’d have to agree. According to the CDC, too few hospitals in the U.S. participate in the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative, a global program created by UNICEF and the WHO to recognize best practices in supporting breastfeeding. The Initiative promotes breastfeeding through these ten steps:

  1. Have a written breastfeeding policy that is routinely communicated to all health care staff.
  2. Train all health care staff in skills necessary to implement this policy.
  3. Inform all pregnant women about the benefits and management of breastfeeding.
  4. Help mothers initiate breastfeeding within one hour of birth.
  5. Show mothers how to breastfeed and how to maintain lactation, even if they are separated from their infants.
  6. Give newborn infants no food or drink other than breastmilk, unless medically indicated.
  7. Practice “rooming in”– allow mothers and infants to remain together 24 hours a day.
  8. Encourage breastfeeding on demand.
  9. Give no pacifiers or artificial nipples to breastfeeding infants.
  10. Foster the establishment of breastfeeding support groups and refer mothers to them on discharge from the hospital or clinic.

For a list of baby-friendly hospitals recognized by the initiative, visit www.babyfriendlyusa.org.

In addition to birthing facility and hospital support, the CDC recommends additional support through professional lactation consultants and legislative measures. The CDC recognizes that a strong network of professional lactation consultants (International Board Certified) is needed to assist mothers and infants, to create and administer lactation programs, and to educate other health professionals. I can attest to the benefits of a professional lactation consultant and think that every new mother should have access to one during the first few weeks of breastfeeding. I don’t know what I would have done without the wonderful lactation consultant I saw after my first daughter’s birth. To locate a board certified lactation consultant in your area, you can use the “Find a Lactation Consultant” search service provided by the International Lactation Consultant Association.

In terms of legislation, the CDC recommends laws supporting a woman’s right to breastfeed in public as well as laws supporting breastfeeding mothers who return to work. It hasn’t been well-publicized, but working mothers will be pleased to know that the Patient Protection Act passed as part of the health care reform in March requires employers to provide a private space and reasonable break time for nursing mothers to pump breast milk at work. I consider myself incredibly lucky to work for a company that is very working mother-friendly. In fact, just today, I saw an announcement that it was named to the Working Mothers list of 100 Best Companies for 2010. One of the criteria for all of the winning companies on this list was the provision of private lactation rooms, definitely key for a working mom to continue breastfeeding.

Resources and sites for more breastfeeding tips and support, including those discussed in this article:
American Academy of Pediatrics Policy Statement on Breastfeeding
Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative in the US
La Leche League International
kellymom.com
Breastfeeding.com

Please leave us a Comment!

If you enjoy reading PureBebe, please click on “Sign me up!” under “Email Subscription” on the right rail of the screen. By subscribing to our emails, you are telling us that you digg our site and want to read more of our baby news and topics!

-Jasmine

Related Articles
10 Tips for a Successful Start to Breastfeeding
Got Milk? Maintaining Your Milk Supply When Returning to Work
Miracle at Birth: Mom’s Final Goodbye Brings Life to her Child
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) – Reducing Your Risk
Creating a Safe Sleep Environment for Baby

AAP Issues Flu Shot Recommendations for the 2010-2011 Flu Season

Published on August 31, 2010 in Educational, Health & Safety and Vaccines. 11 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Image courtesy epmonthly.com

Yesterday, the American Academy of Pediatrics released its recommendations for this year’s seasonal flu vaccine.  They recommend that all children and adolescents over 6 months of age be vaccinated as well as anyone falling in one of the following high-risk groups (which appear to be consistent with the H1N1 high risk groups from last year):

  1. Children younger than 5 (and according to the CDC especially children younger than 2)
  2. Children with high-risk conditions such as asthma, diabetes, or neurologic disorders
  3. People who live with or care for those at high risk – family members, health care workers, and day care providers
  4. Pregnant women

The seasonal flu vaccine protects against the three flu viruses that scientists expect will be the most common during the upcoming season. This year, the seasonal flu vaccine will protect against the 2009 H1N1 virus, the H3N2 virus, and an influenza B virus and will be available in three forms:

  1. Nasal spray flu vaccine, also referred to as FluMist or “live attenuated influenza vaccine”
  2. Inactivated flu vaccine
  3. Preservative-free inactivated flu vaccine (thimerosal-free)

Thimerosal is a mercury-containing organic compound used as a preservative to prevent bacterial contamination in vaccine vials that contain multiple doses. Some parents have concerns about the use of thimerosal in vaccines, so many pediatric offices offer the thimerosal-free single dose injections for children under 3. Anyone over the age of 3 interested in the preservative-free vaccine should consider the FluMist vaccine assuming they don’t meet any of the criteria below.

According to the CDC, the following people should not receive the FluMist vaccine:

  • People less than 2 years of age
  • People 50 years of age and over
  • People with a medical condition that places them at high risk for complications from influenza, including those with chronic heart or lung disease, such as asthma or reactive airways disease; people with medical conditions such as diabetes or kidney failure; or people with illnesses that weaken the immune system, or who take medications that can weaken the immune system.
  • Children <5 years old with a history of recurrent wheezing
  • Children or adolescents receiving aspirin
  • People with a history of Guillain–Barré Syndrome that occurred after receiving influenza vaccine
  • Pregnant women
  • People who have a severe allergy to chicken eggs or who are allergic to any of the nasal spray vaccine components.

Now, here’s where it gets tricky. The number of doses depends on the child’s age at the time of the first dose and their vaccine history for both seasonal and H1N1 vaccines:

  • Children younger than 6 months are too young to receive influenza vaccine.
  • Children 9 years of age and older need only 1 dose.
  • Children younger than 9 years need a minimum of 2 doses of 2009 pandemic H1N1 vaccine. If they did not receive the H1N1 vaccine during last year’s flu season, they will need two doses of seasonal influenza vaccine this year.
  • Children younger than 9 years who have never received the seasonal flu vaccine before will need 2 doses.
  • Children younger than 9 years who received seasonal flu vaccine before the 2009-2010 flu season need only one dose this year if they received at least 1 dose of the H1N1 vaccine last year. They need 2 doses this year if they did not receive at least 1 dose of the H1N1 vaccine last year.
  • Children younger than 9 years who received seasonal flu vaccine last year for the first time, but only received 1 dose, should receive 2 doses this year.
  • Children younger than 9 years who received a flu vaccine last year, but for whom it is unclear whether it was a seasonal flu vaccine or the H1N1 flu vaccine, should receive 2 doses this year.
  • All children who need 2 doses should receive the second dose at least 4 weeks after the first dose.

Did you catch that?? Sheesh. To attempt to put it in easier terms, children between the ages of 6 months and 9 years will need 2 doses, 4 weeks apart, unless they have received:

  1. at least 1 dose of 2009 H1N1 vaccine last flu season, and
  2. at least 1 dose of seasonal flu vaccine before the 2009-2010 flu season or 2 doses of seasonal flu vaccine last flu season.

So it appears my two year old will need only one dose since she received two doses of the H1N1 vaccine last season and at least 1 dose of seasonal flu vaccine before last season. She only received 1, not 2 doses, of seasonal flu vaccine last year.

Fortunately, the AAP recognizes that this is confusing and says that it has created a concise flow chart to help you determine the required number of doses. The flow chart should be published in the October 2010 issue of Pediatrics with its policy statement on flu vaccination. We’ll plan to post it once we can get our hands on it. In the meantime, it’s probably best to review your child’s vaccination history and consult your pediatrician.

Please leave us a Comment and let us know your thoughts!

If you enjoy reading PureBebe, please click on “Sign me up!” under “Email Subscription” on the right rail of the screen. By subscribing to our emails, you are telling us that you digg our site and want to read more of our baby news and topics!

-Jasmine

Protecting Your Children’s Delicate Skin from the Sun

Published on August 20, 2010 in Educational and Skincare. 0 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Reading Heather’s post on Tuesday regarding sunscreen and Vitamin A additives, I was surprised to learn that a few serious sunburns can increase a child’s risk of skin cancer later in life. In fact, I did a little research and found that just one blistering sunburn in childhood or adolescence will more than double the chances of developing melanoma later in life. The same is true for a person who has had 5 or more sunburns at any age.

Melanoma is a less common form of skin cancer but also the most serious. While episodes like those above are linked to the development of melanoma, cumulative sunlight exposure is linked to the development of the much more common nonmelanoma skin cancers.

I’m sure after hearing the statistics above, you (like me) are now thinking back and recalling bad sunburns or stupid things you’ve done in the quest for a beautiful tan. Personally, I recall literally baking for days in Hawaii without a drop of sunscreen in an attempt to see how dark my Native American skin could get.

Now, I’m a little older and a little wiser…and a parent. My children inherited my husband’s fairer complexion, so I take much more precaution when exposing them to the sun. I get particularly concerned during the first six months when sunscreen is off-limits. The AAP has historically recommended that sunscreen not be applied on infants under 6 months of age. The Australian Cancer Society has come out, though, and said that there is no evidence to suggest that sunscreen on small areas of a baby’s skin has any long-term effects, so the AAP now recommends that when you’re not able to fully protect an infant’s skin with clothing, sunscreen on areas such as the face, neck, and back of the hands is reasonable. Just make sure you select a sunscreen void of Vitamin A, as Heather suggested earlier this week.

Here are some additional tips for choosing a child-friendly sunscreen from the Child Health Advocacy Institute, cited at WebMD:

(1) Choose a sunscreen that contains zinc oxide or titanium dioxide, because the compounds are less irritating than others and do not get absorbed into the skin.
(2) Choose a sunscreen with SPF 30 or higher.
(3) Make sure it’s labeled “broad spectrum,” which means it blocks both UVA and UVB rays. UVA causes sunburn, while UVB is the main cause of wrinkles.
(4) Sunscreen sticks are best for the face because they are sweat proof and less likely to drip.

Always put sunscreen on your child before going outside. In the same article at WebMD, the author suggests the acronym BEENS to help you remember to cover often-forgotten spots: Back of knees, Ears, Eye area, Neck, and Scalp.

In addition to applying sunscreen, consider these tips for sun safety:

(1) Minimize exposure between 10 am and 4 pm when the sun’s rays are strongest. Take advantage of shade when possible, especially when your shadow is shorter than you are tall. Keep in mind that the sun is reflected off of many surfaces including sand, cement, water, and snow.

(2) Cover up. Dress in lightweight clothing that covers the body. Avoid sundresses and tank tops that leave the back and shoulders exposed, areas which receive a lot of sun when kids are playing. Bright or dark-colored clothes that have a tighter weave offer the best protection. You can also buy clothing that is specially treated with chemicals to protect against ultraviolet light or wash your clothes in SunGuard, a laundry additive recommended by the Skin Cancer Foundation that contains a sunscreen. When added to the wash, it gives clothing a UPF of 30 and supposedly lasts for about 20 washings.

(3) Wear a hat and sunglasses. Choose a wide-brimmed hat that shields the face and sunglasses that filter both UVA and UVB rays. UV radiation has been linked to cataracts later in life.

(4) Set an example for your children by practicing sun protection yourself.

Related Posts:
Is Your Sunscreen ‘Safe’? Vitamin A Added to Sunscreens May Do More Harm Than Good
Don’t Get Burned by Unsafe Sunscreens

Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) – Reducing Your Risk

Published on July 29, 2010 in Sleep. 2 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Image courtesy LOLGlitters.com

The most tragic thing for any parent has got to be the loss of a child, and how much more devastating and shocking is it when it comes suddenly and unexplained to their healthy young baby. My heart breaks for any parent who has lost a child to SIDS.

One mother, Mary Best, shared her heart-breaking story in the Back to School 2009 issue of Healthy Children, a magazine published by the American Academy of Pediatrics for parents:

On September 12, I took Will for his four-month checkup and first series of immunizations. Will and our pediatrician were like old friends, and after their usual playtime, Dr. Patel bragged that our little guy was fit as a fiddle.

Two nights later, we followed our regular routine — a bath, grooming, pajamas, prayers, goodnight kisses, and bedtime. I checked on him around 11, and he was sleeping soundly on his back. About 3:45 I woke up to check on him again, like I did every night. When I walked into his room, I sensed something was terribly wrong. Through the darkness, I could see he had rolled over and was face down in his crib. To my horror, he was not breathing. I applied CPR, woke my husband, called 911, and continued CPR. But he was gone.

A few hours after this hellish nightmare began, the police, detectives, EMTs, and coroner took my son away. Along with a part of me. More than two years later, I still suffocate from grief and guilt. Nothing in my life will ever hurt as much as losing my son.

As a mother, this story made me cry. As a mother of a 4 1/2 month old, this story also terrifies me.

Each year in the U.S., about 2,300 babies die from SIDS. SIDS is generally defined as the sudden death of an infant under 1 year of age where the cause remains unexplained after a thorough investigation. 90% of SIDS deaths, however, occur before 6 months of age, with most of them between 2 and 4 months. You can bet I will rest easier when my little girl is out of the danger zone. SIDS occurs during an infant’s sleep, be it naptime or nighttime, but occurs most frequently between 10 p.m. and 10 a.m. with the peak time of death around 5 a.m.

While there are many theories floating out there about the potential causes of SIDS, the prevailing theory is that SIDS results from three overlapping factors:

1. Critical developmental period (i.e. baby’s age). Infants who die of SIDS are in a critical stage of development of their immune, cardiovascular, and respiratory systems.

2. A biological vulnerability resulting from genetics and/or environment in the womb. Researchers are focused on the possibility of a brain defect in the part of the brain that is responsible for arousal. It is believed that these children are unable to arouse themselves when exposed to a lack of oxygen or too much carbon dioxide.

3. An outside stressor. An environmental cause such as stomach sleeping or soft bedding.

Across the spectrum of research, there are a number of factors that have been consistently identified as contributing risk factors for SIDS:

  • Stomach sleeping.
  • Sleeping on a soft surface.
  • Maternal smoking during pregnancy. Accounts for over 60% of SIDS cases among smokers and 20% overall.
  • Overheating.
  • Late or no prenatal care.
  • Young maternal age (i.e. <20)
  • Preterm birth and/or low birth weight.
  • Male gender. SIDS is more common in boys by a ratio of about 3 to 2.
  • Babies born during the fall or winter. More SIDS deaths occur in the colder months, likely due to overdressing and as a result overheating.
  • Siblings of a baby who died of SIDS. It is believed this is the result of a genetic connection; however, an alternative theory exists regarding the potential for toxins emitted from crib mattresses as they age. Given that mattresses are often passed down from one sibling to another, this is believed to be another possible explanation. 
  • Race. It is not known why, but SIDS death rates are highest among American Indians, Alaskan natives, and African Americans.

While some risks cannot be controlled, there are some proactive steps we, as parents, can take to reduce the risk of SIDS. The environment inside and outside of the womb have been identified as contributing to a child’s risk.

For expecting parents, consider these recommendations:

1. Get prenatal care early in and throughout your pregnancy.

2. Practice good nutrition throughout pregnancy to reduce risk of premature birth.

3. Do not smoke and avoid repeat exposure to second-hand smoke when you are pregnant.

For those of us who are now parents of infants, on Monday Heather provided a number of tips for creating a safe sleep environment all of which contribute to reduce a baby’s risk of death from SIDS. I do want to reiterate, though, that placing babies to sleep on their backs is the most important step you can take to reduce the risk of SIDS. Between 1992, when the American Academy of Pediatrics issued the recommendation, and 2001, the SIDS rate decreased by 53% consistent with the decline in the stomach sleeping rate. Heather also highlighted the importance of discussing your baby’s sleeping arrangement with your care provider. Many SIDS deaths in childcare have resulted from children being placed in a sleeping position that they are unaccustomed to. According to the AAP, unaccustomed stomach sleeping increases the risk of SIDS by 18 times.

In addition, consider these recommendations:

1. Choose a separate but nearby sleeping environment. The risk of SIDS has been shown to decrease when the baby is in the same room as the mother. The AAP notes that in Scotland and the UK, the recommendation is that the safest place for an infant is in a crib in the parents’ room for the first 6 months of life.

2. Consider offering your baby a pacifier. It is not known why, but the association of pacifier use with reduced SIDS risk is evident. The SIDS task force recommends pacifier use until 1 year and suggests that you should offer it to your baby when placing him or her down for sleep but do not replace it once your baby is asleep.

3. Do not rely on monitors (i.e. respiratory or cardiac) as a strategy to reduce SIDS. There is no evidence that these reduce risk, and they may promote a sense of false security.

4. Improve room ventilation by using a fan while baby sleeps. A recent study has suggested that using a fan in the room where baby sleeps reduces SIDS risk by 72% compared to no fan in the room.

5. Swaddle your young infant. Some studies have shown that while swaddled babies experience shorter and fewer arousals during sleep, swaddled babies sleeping on their backs are at reduced risk for SIDS. Keep baby’s head and face uncovered and once your baby can roll over, stop swaddling and consider a sleep sack.

6. Practice tummy time to strengthen baby’s muscles.

7. Consider purchasing an organic crib mattress.

For more information on SIDS prevention and research:

American Academy of Pediatrics
CJ Foundation for SIDS
American SIDS Institute
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

Safe sleeping!
-Jasmine

Is Your Baby Ready to Face Forward in the Car?

Published on June 23, 2010 in Health & Safety and Travel. 9 Comments Tags: , , , , , , , .

Ask most parents when is the proper time, and you’ll hear what pediatricians have said for years: when your child reaches the age of 1 year and a minimum of 20 lbs. Surprisingly, though, the American Academy of Pediatrics revised its policy statement on car safety seats in 2002 to add:

“If a car safety seat accommodates children rear facing to higher weights, for optimal protection, the child should remain rear facing until reaching the maximum weight for the car safety seat, as long as the top of the head is below the top of the seat back.”

Yet many parents are still advised only of the one year and 20 lb rule.

More recently, however, the AAP has changed its tune. 2 is the new 1. A commentary published by the AAP in March 2008 recommends that all children under the age of 2 ride in a rear-facing seat. This recommendation is based on the findings in a recent study, most notably:

(1) Children under the age of 2 years are 75% less likely to die or sustain serious injury when in a rear-facing seat.

(2) In children between the age of 12 and 23 months, the odds of severe injury were more than 5 times higher when forward-facing.

Did you hear that? Our babies are 5 times safer and 75% less likely to die in a rear-facing seat! So if your child is not yet 2 and is forward-facing, please turn your baby around.

If you need a little more convincing, check out this video on rear-facing vs forward-facing.

While the AAP’s official policy statement has not yet changed, the President of the AAP, Dr. Dave Tayloe, comments that pediatricians should “encourage parents to keep their children in rear-facing car seats as long as they do not exceed the size limits of the car seats.”

Update: In April 2011, the AAP finally issued an updated policy statement eliminating the minimum requirement.

Now what is also interesting to note: The study cites statistics that motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for children ages 1-4, but the study only analyzed data for children up through age 2. This is because few children in the US use car seats rear facing past their second birthday, so data was not available for older age groups. Because of this, the commentary on the study says that it is not currently possible to determine at what month of age the study’s findings are no longer applicable. However, I think conclusions can be drawn from the fact that children in Sweden have been riding rear-facing until the age of 4 and very low death and injury rates have been reported.

I turned my 2 ½ year old forward-facing at the age of 2 because it seemed her legs were getting a bit cramped, but I’ve just taken her measurements and realized she has not yet maxed the limits of her convertible carseat. So you can bet I’m going out to the car tonight to turn her seat back around.

-Jasmine

Related Articles:

Miracle at Birth: Mom’s Final Goodbye Brings Life to her Child

Sharing Buttons by Linksku