Twitter Facebook RSS Feed Print
Your Baby

Recall: Otteroo Baby Floats Due to Drowning Risks

1:00

Babies and young children can drown in less than 2 inches of water.  That’s why it is  vital that parents and caregivers never leave a baby or young child unattended while they are near or in water.

When bathing their infant, parents will sometimes attach a bath float to their child to help keep his or her head above water. While the float may offer some assistance, critics warn that the device can give parents a false sense of security that their child is protected from drowning.

Otteroo Corporation makes inflatable baby floats that are specifically designed for babies 8 weeks and up.

The company is recalling about 3000 units of their inflatable Baby Floats after receiving 54 reports of broken seems on the product. No injuries have been reported.

The Otteroo Inflatable Baby Float is an inflatable round ring made of clear and blue plastic material. It has two air chambers that fasten around a baby’s neck with a white buckle. The floats have a chin rest, two handles and two circular openings on the back of the ring to allow the device to expand as the child grows with age. There are three colorful balls that move freely around inside the ring.  The name “Otteroo” is imprinted on the top of the float in large, orange letters with an Otter logo.

Consumers should immediately stop using the recalled inflatable baby floats and contact the firm to receive a free replacement.

The floats were sold online at Otteroo.com and Amazon.com and Zulily.com from January 2014 through July 2014 for about $35.

Consumers can contact Otteroo Corporation at (415) 236-5388 from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. PT Monday through Friday or online www.otteroo.com and click on “Safety” at the bottom of the page for more information.

According to their website, Otteroo is offering a free replacement for those who purchased the product manufactured in 2014 (NO: 002013001).

Sources: http://www.cpsc.gov/en/Recalls/Recall-Alerts/2015/Otteroo-Corp-Recalls-Inflatable-Baby-Floats/

http://otteroo.com/pages/safety-info

Your Baby

Eating During Labor May Speed Up Delivery

1:45

In many hospitals, when a woman is in labor, all she is allowed to eat are a few ice chips. That rule may need updating, according to a new study that finds women who were allowed to eat before delivery had a slightly shorter labor than those who were restricted to ice chips or sips of water - although the study can't prove that eating caused deliveries to happen sooner.

The practice of limiting food during labor goes back a study in the 1940s in which women who delivered under general anesthesia were at risk of inhaling their stomach contents and choking in it, writes senior author, Dr. Vincenzo Berghella, of Thomas Jefferson University in Philadelphia, and his colleagues in Obstetrics and Gynecology.

“We really don’t know how much if anything people can eat or drink in labor," said Berghella,.

Whether women can have more than water or ice chips as they labor to give birth is a common discussion among healthcare providers, he told Reuters Health.

General anesthesia is not commonly used during delivery these days, but the old guidelines are still in use.

For the new study, the researchers compiled data from randomized controlled trials that compared the labor outcomes of women who were allowed to eat only ice chips or water and those who were allowed to eat or drink a bit more.

For example, one study allowed women to drink a mixture of honey and date syrup. Another study allowed all types of food and drinks. A few others allowed women to drink liquids with carbohydrates.

Overall, the researchers analyzed 10 trials that included 3,982 women in labor. All were only delivering one child - not twins or triplets - and were not at risk for cesarean delivery.

The women with the less restrictive diets were not at increased risk for other complications, including vomiting or choking, during the use of general anesthesia.

And women who were allowed to eat and drink more than the traditional ice chips and water had labors that were shorter, by an average of 16 minutes, compared to women with the more restrictive diets.

Speaking from experience, 16 minutes less of labor pains is a real bonus. How does adding more liquid or food during delivery help reduce the time before delivery? The researchers presented some ideas.

"If we’re well hydrated and have adequate carbohydrate in our body, our muscles work better," said Berghella. A woman's uterus is largely made of muscle.

Another of his studies, which found women who received more fluid than normal delivered faster than other women, reinforces the finding.

Berghella said it's still common practice for women with uncomplicated births to be restricted to water or ice chips during labor.

"The evidence from well-done studies is they can have more than that," he said.

Do women really want to eat much during labor? Probably not, there’s a lot going on in the body as labor progresses.  But more liquids and some light carbohydrates during the early part of labor may be welcomed – especially if they shorten the time between labor and when baby enters the world.

Story source: Andrew M. Seaman, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-pregnancy-labor-food-idUSKBN15O2ZR

 

Your Baby

Recall: Britax B-Agile and BOB Motion Strollers

2:00

About 676,000 Britax B-Agile and BOB Motion Strollers with Click & Go receivers have been recalled. A damaged receiver mount on the stroller can cause the car seat to disengage and fall unexpectedly, posing a fall hazard to infants in the car seat.

Britax has received 33 reports of car seats unexpectedly disconnecting from the strollers and falling to the ground, resulting in 26 reports of injuries to children, including scratches, bruises, cuts and bumps to the head. In addition, Britax is aware of 1,337 reports of strollers with damaged Click & Go receiver mounts.

This recall involves Britax B-Agile and BOB Motion strollers (when used as a travel system with a car seat carrier attached). All models are folding, single or double occupant strollers and have Click & Go receiver mounts that attach the car seat carrier to the stroller frame. All colors of the stroller are included. The model number can be found on the inside of the stroller’s metal frame near the right rear wheel for single strollers and in the front middle underside of the frame on double strollers.

Consumers should immediately stop using their Click & Go receiver mounts and contact Britax for a free repair kit for single strollers.  Owners of the recalled double strollers should stop using them with car seats attached. Consumers can continue to use their stroller or car seat independently without the car seat attached to the stroller.

Consumers can contact Britax online at www.us.britax.com and click on the Safety Notice on the homepage or visit us.britax.com/recall, call toll-free at 844-227-0300 from 8:30 a.m.to 7 p.m. ET Monday through Friday and from 9 a.m. to 3 p.m. ET Saturday or email Britax at stroller.recall@britax.com.

Recalled models numbers include:

B-Agile:

S01298600, S01298700, S01635200, S02063600, S02063700, S02063800, S02063900, S02064000, S03803400, S03803500, S03803700, S03803800, S03803900, S04144400, S04144500, S04144600, S04144700, S04144800, S04144900, S04145000, S04183700, S04183800, S04184000, S04281200, S04281300, S04402800, S04437700, S04628500, S04884200, S04884300, S04884400, S04884500, S04975600, S04978900, S05060600, S05260200, S05511600, S05511700, S865800, S865900, S874300, S874400, S874500, S877200, S890100, S896000, S896200, S896600, S907200, S907300, S907400, S907500, S907600, S910200, S910300, S910400, S910500, S912300, S914300, S914500, S914700, S914900, S915200, S915400, S917400, S921800, S921900, S923700, U341763, U341764, U341782, U341783, U341825, U341826, U341828, U341X82, U34X782, U361763, U361818, U361819, U361825, U391875, U451835, U451837, U451841, U461763, U461764, U461782, U461783, U461825, U461826, U461828, U471818, U471819, U491842, U491843, U491844, U491908, U491909, U491910, U511875, U511877, U551835, U551837, U551841, U551861, U551862, U551863, U551864, U551865, U551905, U551906, U691878, U691879, U691881, U691882, U691884, U691904, U691905, U721895, U721896

BOB Motion:

S888600, S890200, S890300, S890400, S890500, S909700, S910600, S910700, S910800, S910900, S912600, U391820, U391821, U391822, U481820, U481821, U481822, U501820, U501821, U501822, U501907

Images of the strollers can be seen below.

Story Source: https://www.cpsc.gov/Recalls/2017/Britax-Recalls-Strollers

Your Baby

Mom’s Blood Pressure May Determine Sex of Baby

1:45

Parents-to-be have been looking for signs that predict the sex of their baby for thousands of years.  Carrying high? You’re having a girl! Is your baby bump round like a basketball? Congratulations, you’re having a boy! While these “old wives tales” have never been reliable, scientists can now make an educated guess at about four and half months, during pregnancy, with an ultrasound. Another test, amniocentesis, can be used to check the baby’s chromosomes. This tests is usually reserved for older mothers to identify possible genetic problems.

A new study from China, may offer another alternative for determining the sex of a pre-born baby  - tracking the mother’s blood pressure.

Researchers began their study in 2009, with just over 1,400 newly married women in Liuyang, China. All the women had the intention of becoming pregnant within 6 months.

Before becoming pregnant, all the women underwent full lab tests to record their blood pressure, cholesterol, triglycerides and glucose levels.

Once the women became pregnant, their health was tracked. All received routine obstetric care, including continual monitoring of blood pressure shifts, as well as the diagnosis of any complications throughout their pregnancies.

Ultimately, the study participants gave birth to 739 boys and 672 girls.

Researchers found that women who gave birth to boys had registered a higher pre-pregnancy systolic blood pressure (the upper number in a blood pressure reading) than women who gave birth to girls. Mothers of boys averaged about 113 mm Hg, versus mothers of girls who had an average near 110 mm Hg.

After making adjustments for maternal age, educational background, smoking history, obesity and blood labs, they found the blood pressure numbers still held up.

"The only thing that was related was blood pressure, but blood pressure was strongly related," said study co-author Ravi Retnakaran, M.D., an endocrinologist at Mount Sinai Hospital in Toronto.

The findings add another link in the mystery of what determines the sex of a fetus in utero; however, researchers say more studies are needed to prove a mother’s blood pressure determines the sex of her child.

"One of the things we don't want is for people to look at this and think, 'Oh, we can manipulate the blood pressure before pregnancy and thereby change the chances of having a boy or a girl.' We definitely are not saying that, because we are not showing cause and effect," Retnakaran said. "I think the way to look at this is that it may be telling us something very new about [our] physiology."

The study was published in the American Journal of Hypertension.

Story sources: Alan Mozes, http://www.webmd.com/baby/news/20170112/could-moms-pre-pregnancy-blood-pressure-predict-babys-gender#1

Jessica Mattern, http://www.womansday.com/health-fitness/womens-health/news/a57553/blood-pressure-sex-of-baby/

Your Baby

Which Fish is Healthier for Pregnant Women?

1:45

New federal nutrition guidelines say that pregnant and breastfeeding women should eat 2 to 3 servings of fish every week. However, there are certain fish that should be eaten only once per week and other fish that should be avoided entirely by pregnant and nursing women.

One reason for the differentiation between certain types of fish is its likelihood of containing either very low or high levels of mercury.

Nearly all fish and shellfish contain traces of mercury. But some contain high levels.  A type of mercury called methylmercury is most easily accumulated in the body and is particularly dangerous.

Eating large amounts of these fish and shellfish can result in high levels of mercury in the human body. In a fetus or young child, this can damage the brain and nervous system.

The highest mercury concentration belongs to fish that typically live a long time. Pregnant and breastfeeding women should avoid King mackerel, Marlin, Orange roughy, Shark, Swordfish, Tilefish from the Gulf of Mexico and Bigeye Tuna. These are fish that usually contain high levels of mercury.

The new guidelines come with a handy chart that gives you the best choices of fish, good choices and fish to avoid.

Naturally, many pregnant women are concerned about eating fish after hearing about the possibility of consuming any mercury whatsoever. It’s important to remember that most of the fish consumed by Americans falls into the safe category.

Studies show that fish provide an array of nutrients that are important for your baby's early development. Most experts agree that the key nutrients are two omega-3 fatty acids – DHA and EPA – that are difficult to find in other foods. Fish is also low in saturated fat and high in protein, vitamin D, and other nutrients that are crucial for a developing baby and a healthy pregnancy.

How do fish end up consuming mercury? Some of the sources (such as volcanoes and forest fires) are natural. It's also released into the air by power plants, cement plants, and certain chemical and industrial manufacturers, landfills and farming runoff.

When mercury settles into water, bacteria convert it into a form called methylmercury. Fish absorb methylmercury from the water they swim in and the organisms they eat. Methylmercury binds tightly to the proteins in fish muscle and remains there even after the fish is cooked. Fish that live a long time consume more mercury.

There are many benefits to eating fish; you just need to be aware of the kinds of fish you eat. To help you make the best choices, the new chart released by the FDA and EPA is shown below.

Story sources: Megan Thielking, https://www.statnews.com/2017/01/19/fda-guidelines-fish/

http://www.babycenter.com/0_eating-fish-during-pregnancy-how-to-avoid-mercury-and-still_10319861.bc

http://www.fda.gov/downloads/Food/FoodborneIllnessContaminants/Metals/UCM536321.pdf

Your Baby

Ditch the Smartphone Apps to Monitor Baby’s Health

1:45

If you use a smartphone app to monitor your baby’s vital signs, a new research paper suggests that you may want to send those apps to trash.

The apps are linked to sensors in a baby’s clothing and are marketed as a way to help parents be aware of things like breathing, pulse rate and oxygen levels in the blood and sound alarms when infants are in distress. But they aren't tested or approved for U.S. sale like medical devices and there's little evidence to suggest these monitors are safe or effective, said Dr. Christopher Bonafide, lead author of the opinion piece in JAMA; an international peer-reviewed medical journal.

"I’ve been there myself, peeking in the door of my son’s room late at night, making sure I could hear him breathing," Bonafide, a pediatrics researcher at the University of Pennsylvania and Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, said by email to Reuters.

Marketing ads of the monitors stop short of saying they can diagnose, treat or prevent illnesses, however, they do promise parents peace of mind that comes from an early warning system when something is wrong with babies' health, the study authors write.

Promotions for some apps also play into parents’ fear of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome), suggesting that parents can have peace of mind that their baby is just sleeping,

The AAP advises parents not to use monitors like the ones paired with smartphone apps for home use because there's no evidence this reduces the risk of SIDS.

Instead, parents should rely on prevention efforts proven to work, like breastfeeding and sleeping in the same room with their babies, the AAP recommends.

"Perhaps in the future there may be a technology that is in development to lower the risk of SIDS," said Dr. Lori Feldman-Winter, a co-author of the AAP guidelines and pediatrics researcher at Cooper Medical School of Rowan University in Camden, New Jersey.

"However, we are not there yet," Feldman-Winter - who wasn't involved in the paper, - added in an email to Reuters.

Sometimes, we as consumers, assume that if something is for sale- particularly a health related item- that it has been approved or tested by a U.S. governmental agency. That’s not always the case. Smartphone applications can be created and sold relatively easily these days without any assurance the app actually performs as promoted. Parents of newborns are a good market for anything that promises to keep their baby safe.

New smartphone-integrated monitors currently available in the U.S. or expected to debut soon include Baby Vida, MonBaby, Owlet, Snuza Pico and Sproutling.

Some pediatric health experts express concern that using apps to monitor a baby’s health actually reduces the parent’s ability to know their own baby’s unique habits, body and cues that he or she may be in distress.

"We have lost sight of what babies need in order to keep them safe, and many parents and grandparents today do not realize that it is the presence of a responsive and vigilant caregiver that keeps a baby safe, but believe the job can be outsourced to a smartphone/video-monitor/technomattress etc," said Helen Ball, director of the Parent-Infant Sleep Lab at Durham University in the UK, in an email. Ball was not involved in the paper.

Ball believes that the best way to keep our babies’ safe is to use our eyes, ears and touch to respond to and monitor for any health concerns.

Story source: Lisa Rapaport, http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-safety-baby-monitors-idUSKBN1582RA

http://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/2598780

Your Baby

Homemade or Commercial Baby Food- Which is Best?

1:45

A new study from the U.K. looked at homemade baby food versus commercial baby food bought in grocery stores. They both come up winners in some categories and losers in others.

The researchers wanted to assess how well homemade and commercially available readymade meals designed for infants and young children met age specific national dietary recommendations.

Once thought to be the ideal baby food, homemade meals turned out to be higher in calories and fat and more time-consuming to prepare, but less expensive and higher in nutrients and variety. Commercial baby food came in more convenient, lower in calories, total fats and salt but was more expensive and lacked variety. Sugar content was about the same in both foods.

Each option had upsides and downsides. For example, home-cooked food had higher nutritional content, but 50% of homemade meals also exceed calorie recommendations, and 37% exceeded the recommendations for calories from fat, reported a research team led by Sharon Carstairs, a PhD student at the University of Aberdeen in Scotland.

Only 7% of the commercial baby food evaluated exceeded calorie recommendations, and less than 1% exceeded recommendations for calories from fat, Carstairs and colleagues reported in Archives of Disease in Childhood.

Researchers compared the store-bought meals with 408 recipes for home-cooked infant meals obtained from best-selling published cookbooks. The investigators entered the recipe ingredients into dietary analysis software to calculate the nutritional composition of the recipes per 100 grams.

A chief limitation of the study was that it only analyzed the recipes for homemade meals and did not take into account how these meals might be prepared in "real life."

"Parents may use cookbooks prescriptively or only as guidance, and thus the nutritional content of home-cooked recipes can vary greatly, and this can be augmented further by natural variations in the nutritional composition of raw ingredients," Carstairs and colleagues noted.

In addition, "the authors may have overestimated the values for salt within home-cooked recipes as it was often cited as optional; these results should thus be considered with caution."

The study reassures parents that it is okay to give homemade food to babies being weaned from breast milk or formula, Lauri Wright, PhD, of the University of South Florida College of Public Health and a spokesperson for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, told MedPage Today.

"This is an important study, because in the United States parents think they have to do the commercial foods. Parents are afraid their child will miss out on nutrients if they don't give the specialized baby food."

The greater variety offered by homemade food may result in healthier taste preferences later in life, Wright added. "We used to think that taste preference developed at age 4 or 5, but we now know that taste preferences develop with the introduction of these first solid foods."

The bottom line from this study is that both types of baby food are acceptable; each comes with its own pros and cons. Just like with any other meal, how your homemade baby food is prepared is the key to whether it’s going to be healthy or not for baby. Understanding the guidelines for nourishing infant food and knowing the nutritional values of the foods you use, can help you prepare a wholesome meal for baby. Commercial baby foods also offer convenience and lower calories and fats. A mix of both will probably suit most families very well.

Story source: Medpage Today staff, http://www.medpagetoday.com/pediatrics/generalpediatrics/59228

 

 

Your Baby

FDA Approves Newborn Screening Tests for 4 Rare Disorders

1:45

Depending on which state you live in, your newborn may be screened for a series of harmful or potentially fatal disorders when he or she is born.

With a simple blood test, doctors are often able to detect whether a newborn has certain unseen conditions that may cause problems later in life. Although these conditions are rare and most babies are given a clean bill of health, early diagnosis and proper treatment sometimes can make the difference between lifelong impairment and healthy development.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) recently permitted marketing of the “Seeker System,” for the screening of four rare inherited metabolic disorders. It is the first newborn screening test permitted for marketing by the FDA, for these disorders. The conditions are: Mucopolysaccharidosis Type 1 (MPS 1), Pompe, Gaucher and Fabry disease.

All of these disorders are inherited and involve deficiencies of different metabolic enzymes.  

The disorders occur in as few as 1 in 185,000 births, or as many as 1 in 1,500 births, depending on the disease, the agency said. The conditions collectively, are called Lysosomal Storage Disorders (LSDs), and can lead to organ damage and death if not treated in a timely way, the FDA added.

“The Secretary of HHS [U.S. Department of Health and Human Services] recently added Pompe and MPS I to the list of routine recommended newborn screening programs and it is anticipated that additional states will begin requiring use of screening tests to detect these disorders,” said Alberto Gutierrez, Ph.D., director of the Office of In Vitro Diagnostics and Radiological Health in the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. “Accurate screening tests will help with early detection, treatment and control of these rare disorders in newborns, before permanent damage occurs. That’s why availability of LSD screening methods that have been assessed for accuracy and reliability by the FDA are so important.”

Some states now require screening of these disorders, the FDA said, including Arizona, Illinois, Kentucky, Michigan, Missouri, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Ohio, Pennsylvania and Tennessee.

The newly approved tests require blood samples collected from the prick of a newborn's heel within 48 hours of birth. The agency said it reviewed data from a clinical study of more than 154,000 infants in Missouri. The system identified at least one of the four disorders in 73 of the screened newborns, the agency said.

While some parents may be aware that they could be a carrier of a particular disease, many are not. Also, parents that have adopted an infant may not have a complete family medical history. Infant screenings can help bring parents peace of mind about their baby’s health or give them an early start on treatment for their child.

Story sources: HealthDay,  https://medicalxpress.com/news/2017-02-newborn-screening.html

http://kidshealth.org/en/parents/newborn-screening-tests.html

http://www.fda.gov/NewsEvents/Newsroom/PressAnnouncements/ucm539893.htm

Your Baby

Special Baby Formulas Don’t Prevent Asthma, Allergies

2:00

Parents that have a baby at risk or allergies, asthma or type-1 Diabetes sometimes turn to hydrolyzed milk formulas in hopes of lowering their infant’s risk of developing these problems.

A new review of the data on hydrolyzed formulas finds that there is no evidence that they actually protect children from these types of autoimmune disorders.

"We found no consistent evidence to support a protective role for partially or extensively hydrolyzed formula," concluded a team led by Robert Boyle of Imperial College London in England.

"Our findings conflict with current international guidelines, in which hydrolyzed formula is widely recommended for young formula-fed infants with a family history of allergic disease," the study authors added.

In the study, Boyle's team looked at data from 37 studies that together included more than 19,000 participants and were conducted between 1946 and 2015.

The investigators found that infants who received hydrolyzed cow's milk formula did not have a lower risk of asthma, allergies (such as eczema, hay fever, food allergies) or type 1 diabetes compared to those who received human breast milk or a standard cow's milk formula.

The researchers also found no evidence to support an FDA-approved claim that a partially hydrolyzed formula could reduce the risk of the skin disorder eczema, or another conclusion that hydrolyzed formula could prevent an allergy to cow's milk.

Other experts in the United States said that the finding casts doubt on the usefulness of these kinds of specialized products.

"Allergies and autoimmune diseases [such as asthma, and type 1 diabetes] are on the rise and it would be nice if we did have a clear route to preventing them," said Dr. Ron Marino, associate chair of pediatrics at Winthrop-University Hospital in Mineola, N.Y.

"Unfortunately, despite U.S. Food and Drug Administration support [for hydrolyzed formula], the data are not compelling," he said.

Dr. Punita Ponda is assistant chief of allergy and immunology at Northwell Health in Great Neck, N.Y. She stressed that when it comes to infant feeding, breast milk is by far the healthiest option.

However, "current mainstream guidelines for infant formula do recommend that parents consider using hypoallergenic formula if a close family member -- like an older brother or sister -- has a food allergy," she said. That was based on prior studies supporting some kind of protective effect, Ponda said.

Protein hydrolysate formulas were first introduced in the 1940s for babies who could not tolerate the milk protein in cow’s milk.

Protein hydrolyzed formulas are formulas composed of proteins that are partially broken down or “hydrolyzed.” They are also called hydrolysates.

There are two broad categories of protein hydrolysates:

•       Partially hydrolyzed formulas (pHF)

•       Extensively hydrolyzed formulas (eHF)

Both partially and extensively hydrolyzed protein formulas are based on casein or whey, which are proteins found in milk.  

Hydrolyzed formulas have had the protein chains broken down into shorter and more easy-to -digest chains. The more extensively hydrolyzed the formula, the fewer potentially allergenic compounds remain.

Hydrolyzed formulas are also more expensive than regular cow’s milk formulas and often harder to find.

The researchers review was published March 08, 2016 in the BMJ.

Story sources: Robert Preidt, http://www.webmd.com/parenting/baby/news/20160308/special-infant-formulas-dont-shield-against-asthma-allergies-study

Victoria Groce, http://foodallergies.about.com/od/adultfoodallergies/p/hypoallergenic.htm

 

Pages

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.

 

DR SUE'S DAILY DOSE

Should Omega-3 be in your child's diet?

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.

 

Please fill in your e-mail address to be included in our newsletter.
You may opt out at any time.