I sincerely hope that pediatricians will start to consider all of this, rather than blindly following the p/c practice of scaring new mothers into thinking that, if they let their baby sleep on their tummy, it could result in SIDS. The recent reduction in the rate of such deaths is attributable to many other things than sleeping position, and a generation of babies has been adversely affected by this practice.
I understand that there is no credible research indicating that back-sleeping babies are less vulnerable to SIDS, or that tummy-sleeping babies are more vulnerable. So why has this continued?

7 October 2008
MEDIA RELEASE FOR PUBLICATION
NEW RESEARCH CONFIRMS TOXIC GAS THEORY FOR COT DEATH (SIDS)

New US research confirms the toxic gas theory for the cause of cot death, stated New Zealand cot death prevention expert Dr Jim Sprott OBE today.

Research published in the October 2008 issue of Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine (1) found that having a fan on during sleep was associated with a 72% decreased risk of cot death among babies, as compared with sleeping without a fan in operation. The reduction in risk was greatest for babies sleeping in warm rooms (temperature above 21 degrees Celsius); and fan use also decreased cot death risk among babies who slept on their stomachs or sides.

“These findings are very strong confirmation of the toxic gas theory for cot death”, stated Dr Sprott. “An operating fan dissipates gases generated in the baby’s sleeping environment. In particular, the highly toxic gas phosphine (generated from phosphorus, which is very common in bedding) is likely to remain around a baby in the cot owing to the density of this gas, so it is no surprise that research has found that fan use greatly reduces cot death risk.

“The finding that fan use reduces the risk even more in warmer rooms is also consistent with the toxic gas theory for cot death”, stated Dr Sprott. “If a baby’s bedding is capable of toxic gas generation, overheating in the cot greatly increases the likelihood of fungal generation of the gases in question.”

“Crucially, the fact that fan use greatly reduces cot death risk among babies sleeping face-down or on their sides demonstrates that the partial protective effect of face-up sleeping against cot death is not related to any medical condition or physical defect in the baby. So once again we have further demonstration that cot death does not have a medical or physiological cause.

“Face-up sleeping reduces cot death risk because the toxic gases which cause cot death are all more dense than air. They diffuse away from a baby’s face, and therefore a baby sleeping face-up is less likely to ingest them.”

The researchers’ suggestion that fan use may reduce cot death risk by preventing a baby from re-breathing exhaled carbon dioxide is already disproved, stated Dr Sprott. “Longstanding epidemiology demonstrates that cot death is not caused by babies re-breathing exhaled air in the cot.”

Dr Sprott called on the New Zealand Ministry of Health to immediately endorse mattress-wrapping for cot death prevention.

Since 1995 a mattress-wrapping protocol for cot death prevention has been publicised nationwide in New Zealand. On the basis of three studies into the incidence of mattress-wrapping (2), it is calculated that at least 170,000 New Zealand babies have slept on “wrapped mattresses”. There has been no reported cot death among those babies.

Since the commencement of mattress-wrapping the New Zealand cot death rate has fallen by 68%; and the cot death rate of the population group most likely to wrap babies’ mattresses (European/Paheka) has fallen by around 85%. (3)

Notes:
1. Coleman-Phox, K, et al, “Use of a fan during sleep and the risk of sudden infant death syndrome”, Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2008; 162: 963-968.
2. NZ Med J 2000; 113: 8-10; NZ Med J 2000; 113: 326-327; Eur J Pediatrics 2008; 167(2): 251-252 (Short Report).
3. Source of statistics: New Zealand Ministry of Health.

Found this online: Do you know if this is accurate; may be the solution to our autism/back to sleep issue. also questioning if new zealand’s rate of autism matches the u.s.

Media release issued by:
T J Sprott OBE MSc PhD FNZIC
Consulting chemist & forensic scientist
10 Combes Road
Remuera
Auckland 1050
NEW ZEALAND
Phone/fax: +64-9-5231150
e-mail: sprott@iconz.co.nz
Content copyright 2009-2011. Averysagenotion. All rights reserved.
Web Hosting Companies

Absolutely! Whether it’s lack of quality or quantity of sleep, it can negatively affect a child’s brain development.

There was a study that stated that if a child does not get enough sleep in the first 3 years of life, the child will have more risk of having ADHD when he was 6, even if he got enough sleep from ages 3 to 6. If lack of sufficient sleep can effect the risk of getting ADHD, couldn’t it also effect the risk of having autism?

I also have a small part-time private practice. Everyone of my ADHD and autism referrals gets an inquiry about sleep. Did you hear about the treatment of premies having apnea using vanilla extract (inhaled) rather than caffeine? That was cited in an issue of “Pediatrics” (April 1997 if memory serves).

I have been a major care giver to my two newest grandchildren, now 3 1/2 and 21 months. Both were made to sleep on their backs (foam buffers in their cribs so they couldn’t roll to their sides or stomachs), and they are both alert, highly intelligent and very social and sociable. But in early infancy each exhibited what I deemed to be dissatisfaction with back sleeping. In their playpens they would thrash and fuss when laid on their backs to nap — despite a setup similar to their cribs, bumpers, etc. I started putting them on their stomachs so they would fall asleep more easily (I watched them LIKE A HAWK!), then turning them to their backs when they were well asleep.

It was particularly distressing for me when the elder child was an infant. She had digestive problems and projectile vomiting despite being breast fed. I was always afraid of the possibility of her choking, and lying on her tummy seemed to ease the gas and pain that she felt. The “proof” is that she slept quietly and for longer periods on her tummy than when she slept on her back.

Thank you for permitting me to offer these comments. I always appreciate your insightful comments when I see them on NYT blogs and articles.

A recent survey (England) supports that if you look at all ages and account for those having been diagnosed, still having the diagnosis or who now meet criteria that the rate is right around 1%. This study must be replicated, but it fits with other data showing that as the numbers of those diagnosed with ASD increases that there is a reduction in the diagnosis with other conditions. We really need to understand whether the rate is increasing or not before we more forward with a change in the care of children that might lead to an outcome that is far worse than Autism (i.e., death from SIDS).

There are many more positive and negative observations about the back to sleep campaign, including more parental vigilance (what Anna mentioned), underreporting by physicians and medical examiners, etc. There are definitely more cases of skull deformities and torticollis as a results with developmental delays as a result of this campaign. Even with more tummy time when awake, it’s probably not good enough. The main problem occurs when sleeping on infant’s back.

I can’t yet commit to recommended going back to allowing infants to go back to tummy sleeping, but this is an important issue that needs to be reinvestigated. With my second son, he had a flat area in the back of the head and was recommended to see a neurosurgeon to make sure there wasn’t any cranial deformities. The neurosurgeon said it was from sleeping on his back. With my third son, Brennan, he had severe torticollis until he was able to turn himself to his side on his own.

Perhaps there can be a compromise where only infants at high risk can be recommended to sleep supine, whereas other can sleep on whatever position the parents want.

Sara, UARS is a HUGE problem and hopefully, people reading the material on this site can be much better educated. It’s poorly understood even by most sleep doctors.