Throughout the world, many countries in some form of lockdown have seen a drastic drop in premature birth as well as SIDS. Denmark reported a 90% decrease in premature births, a 73% drop in Ireland, and a near 50% decrease in Canada. America, Australia, and the Netherlands have also reported reductions in SIDS and premature deaths.

During the 11-week period following the emergency declaration (through May 30) there were 1465 fewer deaths in US children compared to 2019 (5923 vs 7388). The difference is statistically highly significant.

-Striking Decline of Premature Births and SIDS During COVID

Related: Circumcision Linked to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

Doctors have not come to a conclusion as to why premature births and SIDS rates have dropped so much, but they have one theory.

One theory is that pregnant women may have been under less stress than before lockdown. Staying at home may have allowed some pregnant women the opportunity to get more rest and prioritize prenatal care.

Recommended: How to Eliminate IBS, IBD, Leaky Gut 

This seems highly unlikely. Many of the women who are susceptible to premature births and SIDS are women who work lower-income jobs (service industry, or retail jobs, for example) many of these women worked through lockdown and may have been under more stress. Women who were more likely to have time off, and to prioritize prenatal care were likely already doing so before lockdown.

Natural health practitioners tend to feel that conventional medical intervention often does more harm than good. One possibility that seems a likely contributor, but is unlikely to be addressed by the mainstream media, is the drop in vaccines, both prenatal and infant. Childhood vaccine rates have dropped since the beginning of the lockdown. In California childhood vaccine rates decreased 40% weeks after the lockdown began. Most non-emergency medical appointments were canceled during lockdown.

With childhood vaccines dropping it is unconfirmed but not unlikely that maternal vaccines have dropped as well. Some studies have suggested that maternal vaccines can increase the risk of premature birth, with one study saying maternal vaccines could raise premature births on average 14%.

Data has suggested that infant vaccinations could be increasing SIDS rates. America has the highest vaccination rates and the highest SIDS rates of any other comparable developed country. For comparison, Japan has banned vaccines for children under the age of two and has virtually eliminated SIDS. A 2011 study noted that out of 34 nations, those that require the most vaccines have higher infant mortality rates, compared to those who require the fewest vaccines that had the lowest infant mortality rates.

Currently, there is not enough data on recent vaccination rates to draw solid conclusions as to what has caused the sudden drop in SIDS and premature births. However, as is often the case, it is likely a combination of many different causes.

Every year in the United States 2,500 infants die from SIDS, and sixty percent of those are boys. The origin of SIDS is generally treated as a great mystery. Some of the frequently suggested causes are respiratory failure, low birth weight, bed-sharing, vaccines, and/or abnormal brain cells. Boys are sixty percent more likely to be born prematurely, another risk factor, but a new paper from a researcher at the University of Sheffield suggests another reason SIDS disproportionally affects baby boys – neonatal circumcision.

How They’re Linked

Circumcision is trauma. We don’t know exactly how trauma will affect an infant, but we do know that trauma can halt development and interrupt other important processes in the body.

Related: Circumcision, the Primal Cut – A Human Rights Violation

Due to how quickly circumcisions are performed, most doctors opt out of anesthesia for the treatment, leaving the baby traumatized by the pain. The most common complication as a result of circumcision is bleeding, although shock, sepsis, circulatory shock, hemorrhage, and death can occur.

Dr. Eran Elhaik, the researcher behind the paper, addresses the effect of circumcision on the cardiovascular system and SIDS.

For instance, circumcision reduces the heart rate [20] and together with the loss of blood there is a danger of reducing the blood volume, blood pressure, and the amount of oxygen reaching the tissues [5, 77]. A reduced blood pressure has been associated with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), a condition where the walls of the throat relax and narrow during sleep, interrupting normal breathing [77, 78]. Unsurprisingly, SIDS victims experienced significantly more frequent episodes of OSA [79].”

Recommended: How To Heal Your Gut

Culturally Speaking

The U.S. has one of the highest rates of SIDS in the world. We also have one of the highest rates of circumcision in the developed world, establishing a link between neonatal circumcision and SIDS. Once you break things down into further groups, the connection becomes stronger. There is one group in the U.S. that experiences lower rates of SIDS – Latinos like Mexican Americans, who circumcise 44% of boys at birth in comparison to the white rate of 90.8%. Unsurprisingly, rates of SIDS among Hispanic are 39% lower than whites in the U.S.

Related: 10 Circumcision Myths – Let’s Get the Facts Straight

The data in other countries also suggests that circumcision is a risk factor for SIDS. Japan is recognized for its famously low rate of SIDS. Neonatal circumcision is rarely performed there.

Unnecessary Procedure, Avoidable Deaths

This is by no means a comprehensive study. We still don’t know what causes SIDS. It is amazing that years of research have overlooked such a simple factor. Why have scientists considered sleeping arrangements a bigger issue than a life-altering instance of trauma?

Neonatal circumcision is an unnecessary procedure. Many circumcised adult men express regret regarding their circumcision, and science has determined that negative effects from circumcision persist later in life, reducing sexual pleasure and a greater likelihood of infection or cancer. The damage caused by genital mutilation is very much real and likely still not fully understood. There is no good reason to continue it.

Recommended:

• Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Trump’s Administration Is Not A Fan of Breastfeeding
• Galactagogues Foods, Herbs, and other Ways to Increase Breast
• Shaken Baby Syndrome – Child Abuse or Vaccine Injury?
• Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore
• New Study Suggests Women Could, and Maybe Should, Eat While In Labor

Sources:

• Is MGM a contributor to SIDS (Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, “cot death”)? – Justice for Men and Boys
• Adversarial childhood events are associated with Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS): an ecological study – Biorxiv
• Why Is SIDS More Common In Boys? Researchers Don’t Have All The Answers – Romper
• The long and short of male circumcision in Japan – Japan Times

It is not news that the United States has worse infant outcomes than other developed and affluent nations, but a new study has found that to be true even for babies born full term. Recent reports on the state of women’s health care in the U.S. have confirmed again and again that the standard model of care for pregnant women in this country is lacking. Neha Bairoliya of the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies, one of the co-authors of the recent study, identified two factors in the higher infant mortality rates in the U.S., “…congenital malformations, which patients cannot really do much about other than ensuring adequate screening during pregnancy, and high risk of sudden unexpected deaths in infancy, which should largely be preventable through appropriate sleeping arrangements…We also found a shockingly large number of babies dying from suffocation, which suggests that parents either use covers that are not safe, or let children sleep in their own beds.”

These observations highlight what is a big misconception in conventional healthcare in the U.S. – issues from co-sleeping are a symptom, not the problem.

image credit: Mom Loses Custody Of Her Kids Because Of Something You've Probably Done

Cosleeping and Infant Mortality

The most prevalent cause of infant death identified in the study was SUID (Sudden Unexpected Death in Infancy), a categorization of infant deaths where the cause can be Sudden Infant Death Syndrome, accidental deaths like suffocation or strangulation, homicides, and sudden natural deaths. Several studies over the past 5 years have linked cosleeping to SIDS. So why are rates of SIDS and infant mortality so much lower in places notorious for cosleeping?

Related: Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore

Infant Mortality in Other Countries

Cosleeping is widespread in Japan. Often, parents are still sleeping in the same bed with school-age children. Yet, infant mortality rates in the country do not reflect the conventional  U.S. wisdom. In Japan, less than 3 infants per 1000 live births die, compared with around 7 for the United States. Why?

We don’t know for sure. We do know that the Japanese sleep on a harder mattress that’s on the floor, two of the cosleeping best practices. They are also less overweight or obese than Americans, leaving a baby less likely to be suffocated by a parent rolling over in the middle of the night. Maternal smoking is drastically less in Japan, and more than 90% of women initiate breastfeeding. All of these are factors in reducing infant mortality rates.

Related: How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children

The Problem with Cosleeping

The conventional American lifestyle is very much at odds with the safest cosleeping practices. Roughly one-third of adults in the United States are obese, a risk when it comes to cosleeping. Cosleeping literature also cautions against using alcohol and drugs while sleeping with baby, and that warning doesn’t even address the complications that pharmaceuticals could pose. Seven of every ten Americans are on a prescription medication, which disrupts the connection between mom and baby. That connection is a crucial part of successful cosleeping.

The Trade-off

When done safely, cosleeping is hugely beneficial to both parents and baby. Both parties get more sleep, mothers are more likely to breastfeed, and research indicates that children who cosleep are more independent later in life. Touch and closeness are integral to the human experience, especially for babies.

It’s infuriating that this study chose to concentrate on cosleeping as a key reason why the U.S. lags behind other affluent (and some not so affluent) nations when it comes to infant mortality. Cosleeping is the better option for your baby and for you but you have to be healthy enough to safely do it. This is the actual issue here. Why are so many Americans not healthy enough to cosleep safely?

Sources:

• U.S. infant mortality high even for full-term babies – Reuters
• Cosleeping Around The World – The Natural Child Project
• Japanese Parenting: Co-sleeping For Your Baby’s Health and Wellbeing – Well-Being Kid
• Bed-sharing, Co-sleeping, or Separate Sleeping? – Ergo Baby
• The vast majority of American adults are overweight or obese, and weight is a growing problem among US children – IHME

Pro-vaccine rhetoric’s “science” supports today’s vaccines as well as the vaccine schedule. Anyone paying attention knows that far too many of today’s scientific studies reach the conclusions predetermined by the pharmaceutical companies or chemical companies who funded the study. Data is often withheld and manipulated. While results can easily be skewed, the infant mortality rate is a bit more difficult to falsify.

In the article, Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? published in Human and Experimental Toxicology in September of 2011 a clear correlation between infant death and the countries’ respective vaccine schedules was shown.

An analysis was made of the 34 countries with the lowest infant mortality rate. The United States was number 34. (Yes, though we spend the most on medicine, 33 countries had a lower infant mortality than the United States in 2009.) Of these 34 countries, 5 of the nations with the lowest infant death rate required 12 vaccines (the fewest), while the United States required 26 (the highest).

When the results were charted the correlation was clear.  As the authors said,

These findings demonstrate a counter-intuitive relationship: nations that require more vaccine doses tend to have higher infant mortality rates.”

Infant deaths that are a direct result of vaccine injury are sometimes labeled as such, but too often they are categorized as pneumonia, SIDS, suffocation, etc. In addition to deaths that occur within hours or days of vaccination, death may occur in the weeks or months after vaccination due to a weakened immune system.

The Unites States no longer holds the same rank. There are no longer 33 countries with a lower infant mortality rate than ours. Today, there are 56 countries with a lower infant mortality rate. The current U.S. schedule includes 32 vaccines for the first year.

Related Reading:

• Vaccines, Retroviruses, DNA, and the Discovery That Destroyed  Judy Mikovits’ Career
• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Influenza Vaccine – A Comprehensive Overview of the Potential Dangers and Effectiveness of the Flu Shot
• How Plumbing (Not Vaccines) Eradicated Disease
• Doctors Against Vaccines – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research

Sources:

• Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? – PMC
• The World Fact Book – Central Intelligence Agency
• U.S. infant mortality rate worse than other countries – CBS News

SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) or crib death are terms used to denote the unexplained death of a healthy, sleeping infant less than one year old. The CDC reports that in 2014, about 3,500 babies died from Sudden Unexpected Infant Deaths (SUID). The three main types of deaths are:

• SIDS – 44% of the cases – about 1,500 deaths
• Unknown Cause- 31% about 1,085
• Accidental Suffocation and Strangulation in Bed- 25% about 875

Unknown cause is described is differentiated from SIDS by not being consistent with or not meeting the diagnostic criteria.

Risk Factors for SIDS

Statistics show that age, sex, race, family history, birth weight, prematurity, multiple births, and environment can all increase the risk of a SIDS death.

SIDS is the leading cause of death for infants 1 month through 1 year of age, with months 2 and 3 being the most critical. Male babies are more likely to die of SIDS than female babies. African American, American Indian, and Eskimo babies are at higher risk. Premature babies, low birth weight babies, or babies from multiple births (twins, triplets, etc.) are at higher risk, as are those with cousins or siblings who have died from SIDS.

Smoking in the home and mothers smoking during pregnancy elevate risk. Smoking is believed to affect an infant’s serotonin levels, which affects breathing and arousal.

Other maternal risks during pregnancy include the age of the mother (younger than 20), the use of drugs or alcohol, and inadequate prenatal care.

Many experts believe multiple factors combine to result in SIDS deaths such as physical issues (low birth weight, multiple births, genetics), sleep environment, and illness. For example, a child with a low birth weight may be placed in bed on his stomach when suffering from a cold. These three issues combine: underdeveloped breathing and arousal, poor sleep position, and congestion.

Sleeping Positions and Conditions

Researchers report a dramatic decline in SIDS deaths due to the “Back to Sleep” campaign – the campaign that has encouraged parents to place on infants on their backs rather than their stomach or side to sleep. The campaign began in 1992. By the year 2000, the SIDS rate dropped by 50% in what seemed to be a corresponding decline to the rising rates of parents adhering to the back-sleeping practice.

It is interesting to note that around a quarter of U.S. parents do not place their infants on their backs to sleep, while that number among African American parents is around 50%. The SIDS rate for African Americans is double that for Caucasians, raising the question: is the higher incidence is due to a genetic predisposition or is it due to the infant’s sleeping position?

It is more difficult for babies to breathe when they are laid down on their stomachs or on their sides. The difficulty or danger is further increased if the surface is soft or the baby’s head is covered by a blanket. When an infant is lying with his face pressed against a surface, the oxygen level is lower than unobstructed sleep. An infant normally moves, gasps, lifts his head and resettles. If the infant’s brain is defective in regards to either breathing or arousal, the infant will slowly suffocate. Overheating is believed to affect arousal ability as well.

Waterbeds, soft plushy quilts, bumper pads, pillows, and plush toys can add to any difficulty of breathing by obstructing the airway. To ensure unobstructed breathing, babies should be laid on their backs with pillows, toys, and plush blankets completely removed from the area. Once your baby is able to roll over (on both sides), sleep position is no longer an issue. If your baby rolls over onto her stomach, it is safe to leave her in this position.

Parents are warned to instruct caretakers, family members, or anyone caring for their child to follow these guidelines for safe sleeping.

Asphyxiation due to breathing or arousal abnormalities is not the only concern in SIDS cases. Cardiac function, control of inflammatory response, and genetic mutations are some of the concerns being researched.

Researchers do not agree on the association between vaccines and SIDS. While the CDC and a number of  studies claim there is no association, other studies show an arguable association between SIDS and the DTP vaccine. During the 1960s, the national immunization campaign required multiple doses of vaccines for the first time. SIDS became an identified medical term in 1969. SIDS was added to the ICD (The International Statistical Classification of Diseases and Related Health Problems – the medical diagnostic classification manual) in 1973.

Co-Sleeping and SIDS

Read any article on SIDS and safe sleep practices and you will probably find a warning against co-sleeping (adults sharing a bed with their infant). The fear is that the infant will suffocate when the sleeping parent rolls over and puts weight on the infant or obstructs his or her airway. Other concerns are the infant being suffocated by pillows or by becoming wedged between the mattress and the wall or the mattress and the headboard.

Rather than recommending the child sleep in a separate room, the current recommendation by those who denounce co-sleeping is for the infant to sleep in a separate bed in the same room as the parents. Some suggest special cribs that are open to the bed on one side but provide a separate sleeping space.

Not all experts agree that co-sleeping is dangerous. Many studies suggest the opposite – that co-sleeping with a newborn actually helps the child regulate breathing, heart rate and body temperature, making sleep safer.

Both sides agree that parents who smoke, drink, or use drugs should never co-sleep with an infant. The danger of drinking or using drugs and co-sleeping cannot be emphasized enough, and this includes prescriptions drugs, antibiotics, over the counter drugs, and anything that can disrupt or impair the hormones, the brain, or sleep. SIDS deaths are higher on weekends and they spike on New Years Day – a 33% jump.

Another statistic worth noting – breastfed babies are 60% less likely to die from SIDS.

Conclusion

Like many issues, parents must make decisions for the safety of their babies. These decisions begin during gestation. There is clear evidence that smoking during pregnancy increases the risk of SIDS as well as smoking around the baby after birth. Drug and alcohol use greatly increases the risk. Placing a baby on the stomach or side for sleep greatly increases the risk.

Parents must decide whether or not to co-sleep with their babies and whether to vaccinate or whether to follow the vaccine schedule if they do vaccinate. And mothers need to know all the facts before they decide on breast or bottle.

Unfortunately, as we evaluate the risks of vaccination and co-sleeping, conflicting studies will make these decisions more difficult. It is imperative for parents to consider the source as they do their own research and carefully review studies and articles about these issues before making their own decisions.

We at OLM do not recommend well vaccinated or medicated parents to cosleep with children. Cosleeping works when the people doing it are healthy. Anything that can disturb your natural hormones is dangerous with cosleeping. Eat right, don’t take drugs, avoid toxins, and nature works better. On that note, we also recommend non-toxic mattresses and bedding that do not emit harmful gasses, which many suspect can contribute (and possibly even cause) SIDS.

Recommended Reading:

• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Circumcision, the Primal Cut – A Human Rights Violation
• Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore

Sources:

• Rethinking SIDS: Many Deaths No Longer A Mystery – NPR
• SIDS Risk Factors Vary for Older and Younger Babies – Live Science
• SIDS rate has declined, but 2,300 U.S. babies still die annually – The Washington Post
• A perspective on SIDS pathogenesis. The hypotheses: plausibility and evidence – PMC
• Bed sharing when parents do not smoke: is there a risk of SIDS? An individual level analysis of five major case–control studies – PMC
• Why SIDS Skyrockets on New Year’s Day – Yahoo News
• Sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) – Mayo Clinic
• SIDS Statistics – CJ Foundation for SIDS
• Babies sleeping with parents: case-control study of factors influencing the risk of the sudden infant death syndrome. CESDI SUDI research group. – PubMed
• Bed-sharing in the absence of hazardous circumstances: is there a risk of sudden infant death syndrome? An analysis from two case-control studies conducted in the UK. – PubMed
• Benefits of Co-Sleeping – Ask Dr. Sears
• Infant mortality rates regressed against number of vaccine doses routinely given: Is there a biochemical or synergistic toxicity? – HET

For a long time, we have known that organophosphorus (OP) pesticides, like chlorpyrifos and diazinon, are bad for humans, as well as pests. Almost two decades ago, they began to be phased out for residential use due to the risks. Unfortunately, they’re still heavily utilized in agriculture, and researchers in California decided to identify how much of these, and other, harmful pesticides, children are actually ingesting.

The Study Focused on Low-Income Children in Urban and Agricultural Areas

If it feels like you’ve already heard this information, you probably have, but not quite in this way. Previous studies have focused on pesticide levels of children in non-agricultural and suburban areas. As most of us know, these studies have shown that children have lower levels of pesticides when they go organic. The difference with this new study is that children in urban and agricultural areas are exposed to more pesticides in the environment, especially those in low-income families. Therefore, the question was not whether organic diets reduce pesticide levels- we know that they do, but whether children who are exposed to environmental pesticides have reduced levels when they go organic as well. For this reason, the study included participants from the Fruitvale area of Oakland, California, an urban area, and also from Salinas, California, a largely agricultural region.

Children Between the Ages of Three and Six were Analyzed

The study lasted only 16 days, but the results were incredibly apparent. For the first four days, 40 kids between the ages of three and six ate their normal diet, were monitored by an in-home personal trainer before or after extracurricular activities. They then ate an organic diet for seven days and switched back to their regular diet for the remainder of the study. Urine samples were collected every day of the study, and scientists analyzed the samples for pesticide residue and markers.

The Amount of Two Pesticides Reduced By 50% on an Organic Diet

The study revealed that reside for two specific pesticides was cut in half when children went on an organic diet. Levels of a common herbicide also dropped by about one-fourth. Asa Bradman, an author of the study and Associate Director of the Center for Environmental Research and Children’s Health at the University of California, Berkeley, acknowledges, “There’s evidence that diet is one route of exposure to pesticides, and you can reduce your exposure by choosing organic food.” However, she cautions people not to cut regular fruits and vegetables out of their diet, because they both provide health benefits.

Sadly, Levels of Three of the Most-Common Pesticides Did Not Decline

The study showed that pesticides commonly used in residential applications did not decline. So although there is benefit in going organic, it’s only part of the solution to an overall problem. However, the study did uncover another remarkable find. Because food diaries were also kept, researchers noted that kids ate more healthy grains and produce when they were on the organic diet. In other words, choosing to stick with an organic diet can have other unexpected health benefits.

Pesticides are Linked to Childhood Cancer and Low IQ, Among Other Issues

There is a laundry list of issues that scientists have linked to pesticides. Recently, a study published in the October issue of Pediatrics linked pesticides with a higher risk of developing leukemia and lymphoma. Though that particular study focused on children who were exposed to insecticides indoors, a 47% and 43% increase in cancer rates were noted, respectively. Chensheng Lu, of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, who headed up the study, said that instances of other cancers, like bladder and prostate, may also increase with exposure to insecticides. Additional studies link pesticides to low IQ and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, as well as minor conditions like nausea, skin irritation, and headaches. The same issue of Pediatrics that features this study also covers the story of a seven-month-old victim of SIDS. Analysis of her brain tissue revealed high levels of a pesticide known as DBNP, which she may have been exposed to two weeks prior to her death when her father sprayed the house for flies.

These cases are not rare. Pesticide use can cause acute health issues, and the compounds can build up over time undetected, resulting in long-term health consequences. Keeping children on an organic diet is an essential part of limiting exposure to dangerous and deadly chemicals. However, it’s also clear that parents should take steps to limit environmental exposure as well.

• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Five Things You Can Do to Help Your Child Manage ADHD Naturally
• Children, Cell Phones & Health