The Monday Morning Stimulus

Sci Tech Daily, A Common Stimulant Could Hold the Key to Preventing Sudden Infant Death Syndrome

After years of little progress in lowering the national rate of Sudden Unexpected Infant Death (SUID), which includes sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), researchers at Rutgers Health have introduced a surprising solution: caffeine might help protect infants by preventing dangerous drops in oxygen levels that could lead to death.

This hypothesis, published in the Journal of Perinatology, comes at a time when SUID rates have remained steady at about 3,500 deaths per year for the past 25 years, which is roughly one death per 1,000 live births. Although public education campaigns in the 1990s—such as “Back to Sleep” and other safe sleep guidelines promoted by the American Academy of Pediatrics—initially reduced cases, SIDS is still the leading cause of death for infants between one and twelve months old.

“We’ve been concerned about why the rates haven’t changed,” said Thomas Hegyi, a neonatologist at Rutgers Robert Wood Johnson Medical School who led the research. “So, we wanted to explore new ways of approaching the challenge.”

That approach led Hegyi and Ostfeld to a striking realization. Nearly all known risk factors for SIDS and other sleep-related infant deaths—such as stomach sleeping, maternal smoking, bed-sharing, and preterm birth—share a common link. They are all connected to intermittent hypoxia, which involves short periods when oxygen levels drop below 80 percent.

“I wondered, what can counter intermittent hypoxia?” Hegyi said. “Caffeine.”

The connection is not purely theoretical. Neonatologists already use caffeine to treat apnea in premature infants, where it acts as a respiratory stimulant. The drug has a strong safety record in babies, showing minimal side effects even at high doses.

What makes caffeine especially interesting as a possible preventive measure is the way infants process it. While adults metabolize caffeine in about four hours, newborns can take up to 100 hours. In infants, caffeine stays in the body for weeks instead of hours.

This unique metabolism might explain a long-standing puzzle: why SIDS peaks between two and four months of age. As infants mature, they begin metabolizing caffeine more quickly. The researchers suggest caffeine consumed during pregnancy or passed through breast milk might provide early protection that wanes as metabolism speeds up.

The theory also could explain why breastfeeding appears to protect against SIDS.

I believe both of our boys were born in the era that women generally thought coffee caused, and was avoided. It's a wonder they made it. 

The Wombat has Rule 5 Sunday: Overall Beauty up more or less on time and under budget.

Forget It Jake, It's Baltimore

 Jazz Shaw at Hat Hair hears Baltimore May Pay Couples to Have Babies

There is a ballot initiative currently being considered that would create a program that would pay new mothers $1,000 after the birth of each infant. Could this really work? (CBS News Baltimore) 

An advocacy group wants to give Baltimore City voters a voice in moving a campaign forward that would give a one-time, $1,000 cash infusion to new parents of Baltimore City.

Maryland Child Alliance President Nate Golden said the goal of the proposal is to offer financial support to residents who birth or adopt a baby.

"The Baltimore Baby Bonus started as a campaign where we could go around state legislators, around city legislators and take our message directly to voters," Golden said.

The advocacy group has canvassed for more than a year and said it has collected upwards of 13,000 signatures.

To be clear, the group in question isn't trying to do this to address a decline in birthrates. They're just looking to help families deal with the costs that are associated with bringing a new baby into the world. They also want it to apply to adoptions, which is a nice feature. They have already collected enough signatures to put the measure on the 2024 ballot, assuming the signatures are all validated. It's also interesting to note that there is no income eligibility requirement attached to the "baby bonus" so even more affluent couples could apply for it if they wish.

With all of that said, what if such a program were specifically focused on addressing the nation's declining birthrate and expanded to the national level? Could you really bribe people into having children if they weren't already planning to do so? It seems unlikely if we were to base it on the Baltimore model. A one-time payment of $1,000 dollars would probably be nice for many people and it could certainly help pay for some diapers and baby formula for a time. But it's still not even a drop in the bucket compared to the total cost of delivering and raising a child. Forbes recently estimated that the average cost of hospital bills for having a baby (without insurance) is $18, 865. Raising a child to adulthood costs an average of more than $330,000.

The title says "couples", which would be ideal, since one of the problems with cities like Baltimore is large numbers of unwed wed mothers who immediately go on the dole, but the source article doesn't seem to specify, so I guess it would apply to all births.

In the grand scheme of things, it's probably not a huge incentive, nor is the cost all that high. With 7,000 births a year, it's only $7 million. I'm sure Baltimore has spent far more on far worse.

Sofia Vergara Loses $80 k in Egg Fight

Sofia Vergara Ordered to Pay Ex Nearly $80,000 Amid Frozen Embryos Legal Battle

A Los Angeles judge has ordered Sofia Vergara to pay her ex Nicholas Loeb $76,433 in attorney's fees and $2,959.26 in costs amid their legal battle. This payment, which adds up to $79,392.26, is expected to be made within 30 days of notice of this ruling.

Loeb filed a motion for attorney's fees in June 2019 and asked to obtain $117,590.87 in attorney fees and $2,958.26 in costs. Loeb argued he was successful in his anti-SLAPP motion as it related to a "malicious prosecution claim." However, Vergara argued the motion "should be denied or heavily reduced to the extent it is based on block billing and seeks fees and costs for services not shown to be related to the successful portion of the anti-SLAPP motion."

After evaluating the declarations and billing records, the court determined the records did not justify the full fees sought by Loeb. As a result, it applied a reduction in the fee award of 35 percent.

"The Court finds that there is no alternative method of calculating a fee award that would yield a more accurate or just result, and that a further reduction would be insufficient to compensate Defendant for the attorney's fees and costs incurred in pursuing the anti-SLAPP motion," the documents stated.

As fans will recall, the Modern Family star was previously engaged to Loeb. However, they broke up in 2014. During their time together, the two discussed the possibility of having a child together using in-vitro fertilization and a third-party surrogate. In 2013, they visited the ART Reproductive Center to undergo the IVF process. Before beginning the procedure, both parties signed an agreement, which stated—among other things—that one person could not use the cryopreserved material to create a child without the explicit written consent of the other.

According to court documents, two pre-embryos were created and survived to viability. These embryos were then placed in cryogenic storage at ART's facilities, where they remain today.

After the actress and her former fiancé ended their relationship in 2014, Loeb sought to obtain full custody of the embryos and bring them to term. However, the actress argued this violated their agreement. While the initial filing, dubbed the Santa Monica Action, was dismissed by Loeb, the two have continued to be in a legal battle over other aspects of the case.

The Wombat is on time and under budget with Rule 5 Sunday: Ingrid Pitt at The Other McCain.

Dominion to Pay a Quarter Million for Spilled Baby Oil

Dominion agrees to enforcement action over oil spill in Augusta County

Dominion Virginia Power has agreed to paying civil fees and reimbursement costs to the state Department of Environmental Quality for the discharge of mineral oil onto private property from a transformer just outside Staunton in January.

An official decision on the enforcement action is expected in December. Approximately 9,000 gallons of mineral oil discharged from a transformer on Churchville Avenue onto a tributary of Bells Creek and a farm pond in Augusta County on Jan. 6. Le-Ha Anderson, a spokesperson for Dominion, said the oil escaped a containment area located around the transformer.

Dominion recovered 8,900 gallons of the mineral oil. Anderson said DEQ and the National Response Center were notified of the incident.

Jason Ericson, an environmental projects advisor for Dominion, said booms were used to contain the mineral oil. Cattle were fenced out of the 150-foot area of the stream tributary. Since the spill, Ericson said Dominion has excavated the contaminated soil and is reseeding the affected farm area to grow grass.

By May of 2017, Dominion must demonstrate to DEQ that the soil has been stabilized, Ericson said.

Anderson said mineral oil is a non-hazardous material used to cool transformers.

And mineral oil is the major ingredient of Baby Oil, the other ingredients being mostly things to make it smell like baby oil. And here, I thought it was made out of real babies.

So they spilled 9,000 and recovered 8,900 for a net loss of 100 gallons. What did they cost?

In response to the spill in Augusta County and a January discharge of 13,500 gallons of mineral oil from a transformer in the Crystal City substation of Arlington County, Dominion has proposed to DEQ a civil payment of $259,535 and $5,882 for reimbursement of oil discharge investigative costs.
. . .
Additionally, Dominion has spent $1.5 million for response, remediation and restoration at the West Staunton substation.

So, while the fine seems rather trivial in view of the expense they went to while cleaning up the spills, it seems rather high considering the amount of oil actually spilled, and the apparent environmental damage. However:

Twenty-one birds, mostly Canada geese, died after the oil coated their feathers, and more were treated by a wildlife rescue team. Recreational fishermen were urged not to consume fish they caught in the vicinity during the two-week period when the spill was under investigation by a U.S. Coast Guard-led team.

Well, twenty-one Canada Geese, which may have been worthwhile migratory geese or nuisance "resident" geese, they being indistinguishable in January.

Wombat-socho has "Late Night With Rule 5 Sunday" up at The Other McCain.

Early Exposure to Peanuts Prevents Allergy

Pioneering approach to prevent peanut allergies in children provides ongoing protection, study shows

A pioneering approach to prevent peanut allergies in children offers them ongoing protection after the youngsters stop eating the peanut protein that immunized them against the potentially fatal reaction, according to a study released Friday.

Research last year showed that exposing infants to bits of peanut butter -- rather than keeping peanuts away from them-- offered initial protection for most children at high risk of developing an allergy. The new study, conducted by the same group of scientists and again published in the New England Journal of Medicine, found that the safeguard lasted for a year after the children stopped consuming the small amounts of protein.

And in a second study released Friday, the researchers tried to replicate those results with other foods known to produce allergies in children, including milk, eggs, fish, wheat and sesame. They again produced evidence that the approach might work, but because so few families stuck to the difficult feeding regimen, the outcome cannot be considered conclusive.

Yet collectively, the studies offer more evidence that some medical authorities' long-established infant feeding recommendations may need to be revised. The World Health Organization, for example, recommends only breastfeeding for the first six months of life; following that guideline would keep a parent from introducing foods that might stave off allergies. In the United States, federal guidelines on the diagnosis and management of food allergies already are being reconsidered because of the results announced last year.

Just more support for the idea of letting your children experience things rather than shielding them from the real world. It will even help them stay healthier:

The mega-links from Wombat-socho, "Rule 5 Sunday: Looking Back, All I Did Was Look Away", is up at The Other McCain.

Grandpa

When hanging around with old people as I seem to do more and more, the question often arises "Do have any grandchildren?"

"Not that I know of" I usually answer, only half in jest.

Alex and Kelly have now ruined that answer with the birth of a son:

Graham Robert arrived at 10:14 PM on 1/24. He's 6 lbs, 14 oz and 20 inches long. Mom and Dad are thrilled! He's also exactly 94 years apart from his great-grandpa Robert Mc Neill!

Congratulations and best wishes. I'm sure a trip to Canonsburg is in our near future.

What the Heck is This Stuff?

Swiped from Theo's.