Drinking when pregnant - Is it safe?

Drinking when pregnant - Is it safe? - You're three months pregnant and barely showing a bump, when someone pours you half a glass of wine at the restaurant. Why deny yourself?

But look at it this way: If you drink when pregnant, then the unborn baby drinks too. Alcohol quickly enters your bloodstream and crosses into that of the baby via the placenta. But babies are slower at processing alcohol than adults, and so are exposed to its effects for longer.

In view of September 9th, which is Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder Awareness Day, we've compiled a guide to pregnancy and alcohol, to help you make an informed decision.


Heavy drinking

There is no doubt that heavy drinking or binge drinking can permanently damage a baby's health at all stages of pregnancy.

Heavy drinking is six or more units of alcohol a day, while drinking five or more units in one sitting is considered binge drinking.

Heavy drinking during pregnancy puts the baby at risk of Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorders (FASD), an umbrella term used to describe a number of health conditions, ranging from mild to severe, which are all linked to alcohol consumption during pregnancy. These include facial abnormalities, restricted growth and development and learning and behavioural difficulties.

Heavy drinking also increases the risk of having a miscarriage or premature birth and having a stillborn baby.


Light drinking

When it comes to moderate or light drinking during pregnancy, there is much debate about how much alcohol a pregnant woman can consume without risking the health of her baby, and no clear answer.

The Department of Health currently advises pregnant women to avoid drinking alcohol, but also says that if a woman chooses to drink, they should not drink more than one to two units of alcohol once a week, and should not get drunk.

The UK health watchdog, the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE), advises women in the first three months of pregnancy to avoid alcohol altogether, due to an increased risk of miscarriage.

Specifically, NICE states:

• Pregnant women and women planning a pregnancy should be advised to avoid drinking in the first three months of pregnancy if possible because it may be associated with an increased risk of miscarriage.
• If women choose to drink alcohol during pregnancy they should be advised to drink no more than two UK units once or twice a week... Although there is uncertainty regarding a safe level of alcohol consumption in pregnancy, at this low level there is no evidence of harm to the unborn baby.

However, this does not mean that moderate or light drinking during pregnancy is safe, or that the baby is safe from the effects of alcohol after the first three months of pregnancy. It's just that - at this point in time - scientists are unsure about the effects small quantities of alcohol can have on an unborn baby.


What's in a unit?

One UK unit of alcohol is 8g or 10ml of pure alcohol (ethanol). This is the equivalent to:

• Half a pint of ordinary strength lager, beer or cider (3.5% alcohol by volume/ABV)
• One standard measure (25ml) of spirits, such as gin, vodka, whisky or rum (40% ABV)
• Half a standard glass (175ml) of wine (11.5% ABV)

Women who are pregnant therefore need to keep an eye on the strength of their drink, the size of their glass and how full the glass actually is, if they decide to have a drink.

It's also worthwhile remembering that pubs often sell spirits as doubles, wine in large glasses, and friends don't use measures when pouring drinks.

In the end, if you want to be absolutely sure your baby is not affected in any way by alcohol, the only thing to do is not to drink at all. ( yahoo )

READ MORE - Drinking when pregnant - Is it safe?

Air pollution increases risk of premature birth

Air pollution increases risk of premature birth -Traffic fumes worst - Air pollution can increase a woman's risk of giving birth prematurely by up to a third, new research suggests.

A study in California found that air pollutants derived from a number of sources can be harmful to pregnant women, but traffic-related pollution was linked to a 30 per cent increase in risk.

The researchers looked at 100,000 births which took place within a five mile radius of air quality monitoring stations in Los Angeles County, over 22 months, beginning in 2004.

They compared health information about the births and mothers with that of air pollution levels from the same time period.

Overall, the study found that exposure to 'critical pollutants' such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) was linked to a thirty per cent higher risk of giving birth prematurely. PAHs are present in car exhaust fumes.

Other air pollutants, such as benzene and fine particulate matter from diesel fumes were associated with a 10 per cent higher risk of premature birth, while ammonium nitrate fine particles - an agricultural pollutant - were associated with a 21 per cent increase in risk.

The study, published in the journal Environmental Health, also found that pollution levels were higher in winter and lower in coastal areas.

Dr Beate Ritz, who led the study, said: "Air pollution is known to be associated with low birth weight and premature birth.

"Our results show that traffic-related PAH are of special concern as pollutants, and that PAH sources besides traffic contributed to premature birth.

"The increase in premature birth risk due to ammonium nitrate particles suggests secondary pollutants are also negatively impacting the health of unborn babies." ( yahoo )

READ MORE - Air pollution increases risk of premature birth

Stress lowers chances of having baby

Stress lowers chances of having baby - But yoga and meditation can help - Taking it easy may be the offhand advice doctors give to women who cannot conceive, but new scientific evidence confirms that stress does indeed play a role in conception.

Researchers at Oxford University and the US National Institutes of Health measured stress in women trying to get pregnant and found that those who were most stressed were least likely to conceive.

Stress joins other well known pregnancy risk factors such as excessive alcohol consumption, smoking and obesity.

The study measured two stress hormones in healthy women between the ages of 18 and 40 who were trying to conceive. It found that women with high levels of adrenalin had a 12 per cent lower chance of conceiving when fertile as compared to those who were less stressed.

"Irrespective of the day or frequency of sexual intercourse during the fertile window, women with higher concentrations of alpha-amylase were less likely to conceive than women with lower concentrations," the study said, referring to the enzyme that is an indicator of adrenalin levels.

However, women who were found to have a higher level of cortisol, which is a measure of chronic stress, were no less likely to conceive than women with lower levels of the stress hormone.

Dr Cecilia Pyper, of the National Perinatal Epidemiology Unit at the University of Oxford, said: "The findings support the idea that couples should aim to stay as relaxed as they can about trying for a baby.

"In some people's cases, it might be relevant to look at relaxation techniques, counselling and even approaches like yoga and meditation."

The findings are published in the journal Fertility and Sterility. ( yahoo )

READ MORE - Stress lowers chances of having baby

Mozart does not boost IQ - Another myth debunked

Mozart does not boost IQ - Another myth debunked - Listening to Mozart will not boost your intelligence, new research has found. So if you have been playing Eine Kleine Nachtmusic around the clock hoping to improve your child's performance at school, take a break and listen to something else.

The so called "Mozart effect" first came to the public's attention in 1993, when a study published in the prestigious scientific journal Nature reported that listening to Mozart's 1781 sonata for two pianos in D major (KV 488) improved college students cognitive abilities compared with students who listed to other music or none at all.

Since then sales of Mozart CDs for children have become popular, and in 1998 the state of Georgia even gave every mother of a newborn baby a free classical music CD.

However, the findings of the study met with scepticism in the scientific community and other studies failed to achieve the same results.

To determine once and for all whether the Mozart effect really exists, psychologists from the University of Vienna analysed the results of 40 different studies involving over 3000 people worldwide.

The researchers say the findings are clear cut: the Mozart effect is no more than a myth.

"I recommend listening to Mozart to everyone, but it will not meet expectations of boosting cognitive abilities," says Dr Jakob Pietschnig, who led the study.

The Mozart effect was recently ranked sixth in the book '50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology', authored by psychologist Scott E. Lilienfield.

The findings are published in the journal Intelligence. ( yahoo )

READ MORE - Mozart does not boost IQ - Another myth debunked

Giving birth makes mother's brain grow

Giving birth makes mother's brain grow - Increases in areas linked to motivation and behaviour - Popular wisdom has it that when a woman gives birth her brain shrinks - but new research has found that the opposite appears to be true.

In the study the brains of 19 women were measured using magnetic-resonance imaging just after they had given birth, and again 4 months later.

A comparison of the two images showed that grey matter volume increased by a small but significant amount in various parts of the brain. This is an unusual result as in adults the brain rarely changes over such a short period without significant learning, brain injury, illness, or major environmental change.

Brain areas affected by the change support maternal motivation (hypothalamus), reward and emotion processing (substantia nigra and amygdala), sensory integration (parietal lobe), and reasoning and judgement (prefrontal cortex).

Interestingly, those mothers who were the most enthusiastic about their new born baby were significantly more likely to develop bigger mid-brains than the less awestruck mothers in key areas linked to maternal motivation, rewards and the regulation of emotions.

The authors of the study speculated that the intense interactive nature of the mother-baby bond may itself trigger these growth patterns - expansion in the brain's "motivation" area in particular could lead to more nurturing, which would help babies survive and thrive physically, emotionally and mentally.

These results may also provide some insight into the causes of post-natal depression, and perhaps suggest a possible avenue for treatment of the condition.

The study is published in the journal Behavioral Neuroscience. ( yahoo )

READ MORE - Giving birth makes mother's brain grow

Gates Calls for a Final Push to Eradicate Polio

Gates Calls for a Final Push to Eradicate Polio - On Monday, in a Manhattan town house that once belonged to polio’s most famous victim, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Bill Gates made an appeal for one more big push to wipe out world polio.

Although that battle began in 1985 and Mr. Gates started making regular donations to it only in 2005, he has emerged in the last two years both as one of the biggest donors — he has now given $1.3 billion, more than the amount raised over 25 years by Rotary International — and as the loudest voice for eradication.

As new outbreaks create new setbacks each year, he has given ever more money, not only for research but for the grinding work on the ground: paying millions of vaccinators $2 or $3 stipends to get pink polio drops into the mouths of children in villages, slums, markets and train stations.

Altaf Qadri/Associated Press - TAKING UP THE FIGHT A polio awareness campaign poster was posted on the side of a small shop in a village about 110 miles from Patna, India. Bill Gates has emerged as the loudest voice for the eradication of global polio.

He also journeys to remote Indian and Nigerian villages to be photographed giving the drops himself. Though he lacks Angelina Jolie’s pneumatic allure, his lingering “world’s richest man” cologne is just as aphrodisiacal to TV cameras.

He also uses that celebrity to press political leaders. Rich Gulf nations have been criticized for giving little for a disease that now chiefly affects Muslim children; last week in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates, Mr. Gates and Crown Prince Sheik Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan jointly donated $50 million each to vaccinate children in Pakistan and Afghanistan. In Davos, Switzerland, Mr. Gates and the British prime minister, David Cameron, announced that Britain would double its $30 million donation. Last month, when the Pakistani president, Asif Ali Zardari, went to Washington for the diplomat Richard C. Holbrooke’s funeral, Mr. Gates offered him $65 million to initiate a new polio drive. Twelve days later, publicly thanking him, Mr. Zardari did so.

However, even as he presses forward, Mr. Gates faces a hard question from some eradication experts and bioethicists: Is it right to keep trying?

Although caseloads are down more than 99 percent since the campaign began in 1985, getting rid of the last 1 percent has been like trying to squeeze Jell-O to death. As the vaccination fist closes in one country, the virus bursts out in another.

In 1985, Rotary raised $120 million to do the job as its year 2000 “gift to the world.”

The effort has now cost $9 billion, and each year consumes another $1 billion.

By contrast, the 14-year drive to wipe out smallpox, according to Dr. Donald A. Henderson, the former World Health Organization officer who began it, cost only $500 million in today’s dollars.

Dr. Henderson has argued so outspokenly that polio cannot be eradicated that he said in an interview last week: “I’m one of certain people that the W.H.O. doesn’t invite to its experts’ meetings anymore.”

Recently, Richard Horton, editor of The Lancet, the influential British medical journal, said via Twitter that “Bill Gates’s obsession with polio is distorting priorities in other critical BMGF areas. Global health does not depend on polio eradication.” (The initials are for the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation.)

And Arthur L. Caplan, director of the University of Pennsylvania’s bioethics center, who himself spent nine months in a hospital with polio as a child, said in an interview, “We ought to admit that the best we can achieve is control.”

Those arguments infuriate Mr. Gates. “These cynics should do a real paper that says how many kids they’re really talking about,” he said in an interview. “If you don’t keep up the pressure on polio, you’re accepting 100,000 to 200,000 crippled or dead children a year.”

Right now, there are fewer than 2,000. The skeptics acknowledge that they are arguing for accepting more paralysis and death as the price of shifting that $1 billion to vaccines and other measures that prevent millions of deaths from pneumonia, diarrhea, measles, meningitis and malaria.

“And think of all the money that would be saved,” Mr. Gates went on, turning sarcastic. “It’d be like 5 percent of the dog food market in the United States.”

(Americans spend about $18 billion a year on pet food, according to the American Pet Products Association.)

Both he and the skeptics agree that polio is far harder to beat than smallpox was.

One injection stops smallpox, but in countries with open sewers, children need polio drops up to 10 times.

Only one victim in every 200 shows symptoms, so when there are 500 paralysis cases, as in the recent Congo Republic outbreak, there are 100,000 more silent carriers.

Other causes of paralysis, from food poisoning to Epstein-Barr virus, complicate surveillance.

Also, in roughly one of every two million vaccinations, the live vaccine strain can mutate and paralyze the child getting it. And many poor families whose children are dying of other diseases are fed up with polio drives.

“Fighting polio has always had an emotional factor — the children in braces, the March of Dimes posters,” Dr. Henderson said. “But it doesn’t kill as many as measles. It’s not in the top 20.”

Also, the effort is hurt by persistent rumors that it is a Western plot to sterilize Muslim girls. The Afghan Taliban, under orders from their chief, Mullah Muhammad Omar, tolerate vaccination teams, but the Pakistani Taliban have killed some vaccinators.

Victory may have been closest in 2006, when only four countries that had never beaten polio were left: Nigeria, India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

Those four have still not conquered it, although India and Nigeria are doing much better. Now four more — Angola, Chad, the Democratic Republic of Congo and Sudan — have had yearlong outbreaks, and another 13 have had recent ones: eight in Africa, along with Nepal, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Russia.

And polio migrates. In 2005, it briefly hit both an Amish community in Minnesota and Indonesia, the world’s fourth most populous country. Both outbreaks were stopped by vaccination.

Proponents of eradication argue that it would be terrible to waste the $9 billion already spent, and a new analysis concluded that eradication, if successful, would save up to $50 billion by 2035.

The United States is still committed.

“If we fail, we’ll be consigned to continuing expensive control measures for the indefinite future,” said Dr. Thomas R. Frieden, director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which leads the country’s effort.

Dr. Ezekiel J. Emanuel, chief bioethicist for the National Institutes of Health, who is seen as a powerful influence within the Obama administration, said he had “not seen enough data to have a definitive opinion.”

“But my intuition is that eradication is probably worth it,” he added. “As with smallpox, the last mile is tough, but we’ve gotten huge benefits from it. But without the data, I defer to people who’ve really studied the issue, like Bill Gates.”

The W.H.O. recently created a panel of nine scientists meant to be independent of all sides in the debate to monitor progress through 2012 and make recommendations.

Dr. David L. Heymann, a former W.H.O. chief of polio eradication, said he was still “very optimistic” that eradication could be achieved.

But if there is another big setback, he said — if, for example, cases surge again in India’s hot season — he might favor moving back the eradication goal again to spend more on fixing health systems until vaccination of infants for all diseases is better.

“When routine coverage is good, it’s no problem to get rid of polio,” he said.

Asked about that, Mr. Gates said, “We’re already doing that.” ( nytimes.com )

READ MORE - Gates Calls for a Final Push to Eradicate Polio

No higher mental health risk after abortion

No higher mental health risk after abortion – Having an abortion does not increase the risk of mental health problems, but having a baby does, one of the largest studies to compare the aftermath of both decisions suggests.

The research by Danish scientists further debunks the notion that terminating a pregnancy can trigger mental illness and shows postpartum depression to be much more of a factor.

Abortion in Denmark has been legal since 1973 — the same year the U.S. Supreme Court ruled on Roe v. Wade, which established a right to abortion.

The Danish study included 365,550 teenagers and women who had an abortion or first-time delivery between 1995 and 2007. None had a history of psychiatric problems that required hospitalization. Through various national registries, researchers were able to track mental health counseling at a hospital or outpatient facility before and after an abortion or delivery.

During the study period, 84,620 had an abortion while 280,930 gave birth.

Researchers compared the rate of mental health treatment among women before and after a first abortion. Within the first year after an abortion, 15 per 1,000 women needed psychiatric counseling — similar to the rate seeking help nine months before an abortion.

Researchers say women who seek abortions come from a demographic group more likely to have emotional problems to begin with. Statistics show that a large percentage struggle economically and they have above-average rates of unintended pregnancies.

While first-time mothers had a lower rate of mental problems overall, the proportion of those seeking help after giving birth was dramatically higher. About 7 per 1,000 women got mental health help within a year of giving birth compared with 4 per 1,000 women pre-delivery.

The most common problems among women in both the abortion and the delivery groups were debilitating anxiety, severe stress and depression.

"A woman should know that her risk of having a psychiatric episode is not increased" after an abortion, said Trine Munk-Olsen of Aarhus University, who led the study.

Results were published in Thursday's New England Journal of Medicine. The study was funded by grants from the Danish Medical Research Council and the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which supports abortion rights organizations and projects.

The study did not examine why a pregnancy was terminated. Researchers also only studied mental problems serious enough to warrant admission to a hospital or outpatient clinic and did not look into the role of mild depression and other lesser symptoms.

In a previous study, published in 2006, Munk-Olsen found new mothers faced increased risks for a host of mental problems, not just postpartum depression.

Changes in hormone levels, sleep deprivation and other demands associated with having a baby could trigger mental problems, experts say. By contrast, women who have an abortion don't experience similar changes.

"Anyone who's ever had a baby knows it's stressful. That stress doesn't go away in a week or two" after delivery, said Dr. Robert Blum, who heads the department of population, family and reproductive health at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.

The latest findings echo an extensive review by the American Psychological Association in 2008 that found no evidence that ending an unwanted pregnancy threatens women's mental health.

A separate review by Blum and his colleagues found that the most rigorous research on the topic did not find a relationship between abortion and long-term mental health problems. Previous studies that suggested such a connection were often poorly designed, had dropout rates or did not control for factors that could affect the conclusion.

Though the latest study was done in Denmark, Blum said it's comparable to the U.S. Access to abortion is similar in both countries though Denmark tends to be more conservative.

Abortion rates are lower in Denmark — about 13 abortions per 1,000 women in 2008, compared to almost 20 per 1,000 U.S. women that same year, according to the Guttmacher Institute, which studies reproductive-rights issues. ( Associated Press )

READ MORE - No higher mental health risk after abortion

Teach your child gently

Teach your child gently - Kids react positively to tender methods of disciplining than to constant shouting and threatening.

Scolding or beating your child for every little mistake will only serve to make them more rebellious. Disciplining a child is something that needs to be handled carefully, delicately and with plenty of love.

Here's how to discipline your child:

Teach your child gently (Getty Images)

- Set examples for them to follow.

Kids tend to ape the behaviour of elders. If you want them to get habituated to doing something, you should do it too. For example, throw the garbage in the bin or straighten out your bed when you wake up or eat without chomping on your food, your kid will automatically learn and follow.


- If kids are unruly in a public place, be patient and try reasoning out with them first.

If they still don't pay heed to you, resort to some stern words. If the behaviour continues, walk away from them. However, remember to not raise your voice or slap them, this will result in them throwing tantrums to gain attention — negative or positive.


- Always treat your kids as grown-ups.

They too look for respect and importance from parents. Compliment them on a task well done, include them in decision making like choosing their clothes or shoes or the colour for their room, etc.


- Try not to scold your child. If you lose your temper, it will only reveal your weak spot and kids are quick to pick on those and use them effectively. Also, follow the manners you're trying to teach your child. For example, say please or sorry or excuse me instead of pushing people out of your way.


- If your kid is misbehaving in front of guests, don't scream at them.

Wait till you get back home and then explain strictly that this kind of behaviour is unacceptable. Also, warn them that if they repeat this behaviour, you will have to take stern action. ( indiatimes.com )

READ MORE - Teach your child gently

Your best position for sex?

Your best position for sex? - According to the Kamasutra, there are 64 types of sexual acts one can try during lovemaking. They vary, of course, from being complex muscle movements to soft, sexy postures. Have you ever wanted to try all of them, and wondered, at the same time, if there is one meant specially for you?

Technically speaking, sex is a weird peculiar thing: we have two people sitting in positions that seem to defy the gravitational laws, puffing and moving rapidly while they are exchanging fluids. Sex can, in fact, become fatiguing and unpleasant as it equally is satisfying and beneficial.

The more creative you are and the more you try to create a pleasant atmosphere in bed, the better you will feel, because you will be able to communicate positive feelings to your partner. If you count among those who have sex for pleasure and if everything happens naturally and thanks to your body anatomy, good for you! But if you or her have certain weight issues and you cannot really afford to try any wild stuff in bed, here are some of your options: some sexual positions for different types of silhouettes:

What position suits you best in bed? (Indiapicture)

Position #1

If you are both confronting some unwanted kilos, you can try the following: she lays on her back and easily bends her knees, and you stand between her legs and raise them during penetration. Another suitable position for you is the doggy style, which in general is a pleasant one for both partners.

Position # 2

If you have an optimal weight, and your partner is very voluptuous, she will stand on a side, while you raise her leg to the chest level or as much as her flexibility allows her to. Then gently slide towards her and hold her leg while penetrating her. Also, you can stand in front of your partner, whose legs dangle over the edge of a bed or some other platform like a table; with your partner's legs lifted towards the ceiling and resting against you, this is sometimes called the "butterfly position". It can also be done as a kneeling position.

Position # 3

If she has the optimal weight, and you are overweight, sit on your back, while she stands above you with her face oriented towards your legs. Bend your knees, while she moves standing on your knees. This position is called the "reversed cowgirl".

Position # 4

If you are very different in terms of height, the "spoon position" is the ideal one for you. You both have to sit on a side, with you being behind her. You will enjoy some rather cool moves as this position is extremely intimate, pleasant and suitable to any body type.

Nevertheless, the most important thing you and your partner should keep in mind is that there are no strict rules in bed; you should give yourself to your partner and receive her affection as you please, letting your imagination run wild. There is no similar feeling to that of giving and equally receiving pleasure from the person you love. ( indiatimes.com )

READ MORE - Your best position for sex?

Younger mothers at greater risk of depression during pregnancy

Younger mothers at greater risk of depression during pregnancy, study claims. Younger mothers are at greater risk of suffering depression, both when they are pregnant and after they give birth, according to a study.

Young mothers need greater support, the study found. Photo Jonathan Lodge

Researchers warn that maternal mental illness will also affect their babies and put them in danger of developing emotional difficulties.

It is feared the problem could be particularly bad in Britain, which has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in Western Europe with more than 40 in every 1,000 girls under 18 conceiving.

Lead author Cerith Waters, a researcher at the School of Psychology at Cardiff University, said: "Young mums can be very vulnerable and it is clear from these results that they need much more support, not only after the birth, but before as well.

"Programmes aimed at helping young mothers need to be multifaceted, and they need to begin during pregnancy in order to address both the mothers and the child's needs."

His research, presented at a British Psychological Society conference at Alder Hey Hospital in Liverpool, analysed figures from the South London Child Development Study.

In total 180 families took part in interviews and psychological assessments over 16 years to determine the prevalence of maternal mental illness and its effects on children.

The study found that women who gave birth in their teenage years or their early 20s were more likely to suffer from depression during and after pregnancy than those who became mothers later in life.

It concluded that this difference partly accounted for the higher rates of emotional problems and cognitive deficits in their children. ( telegraph.co.uk )

READ MORE - Younger mothers at greater risk of depression during pregnancy