Good sleep, good learning, good life • Hacker News Board

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#121

Post by purephase » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 2:39 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #114

antirez wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is normal, family, doctors, and friends are dangerous: * Hey, you no longer have enough milk! Try giving some more integration with artificial milk. * You'll end killing her because of co-sleeping! * Co-sleeping will increase chances of SIDS! * Let her cry, otherwise you'll always carry her in your arms! * And so forth. My advice is: don't listen to them, they tell you this with good intentions, but the reality…

Some of those are so infuriating. Luckily by now there are also some experts who speak out against the "let her cry" theory. Turns out that feeling safe and cared for actually gives kids more confidence and in the long run than being left alone for long stretches of time. We also had a close shave with the milk thing, but there are also now experts who help with and promote breast feeding. But the "standard docs" are…

The "cry it out" method (or CIO as it's annoying referred to on the baby forums -- acronyms central) does not actually advocate leaving the child for long stretches of time. It is a common misconception based on people not actually reading about the method, or the person who originally advocated it (Ferber).

For us, we had to do it at around 4 months or we would have been in serious trouble. 4 months of averaging 2-3 hours of uninterrupted sleep per week was wreaking havoc on our lives, and no one (including baby) was happy. The only way she would ever sleep is in our bed next to mum, and this was not sustainable, and terrified us every single night.

We read all of the no-cry sleep methods, and ferber. We realized that we were essentially doing all of the no-cry methods already (swaddle, side sleep, white noise, pick-up and soothe immediately, co-sleep, cradle at the side of the bed) and we tried each one for weeks.

None of it worked. At all.

For the Ferber method, you only leave the child for a few minutes at a time and gradually increase it. In our case, she was never left alone for longer than 10 minutes (we couldn't do any longer) and we did it over weeks and as gradually as we could. Now she sleeps in 4+ hours segments regularly which, to us, has been a god send.

To each their own. No one method is foolproof as all babies are different and I've learned through this that I no longer trust "experts" or anecdotal evidence. I will use it as a guideline, but adjust based on my own observations. I don't think any other approach works.

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#122

Post by PuercoPop » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 2:52 PM UTC

PlusSeven wrote: post #36

"Alarm clocks are bad for learning!", but is there any good ways to avoid the alarm clocks? I even feel uncomfortable without the alarms.

There is, it is called sleeping early.

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#123

Post by cloverich » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 5:13 PM UTC

jamesaguilar wrote: post #67

ambler0 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I appreciate the sentiment, but I don't think you're reading the parent's post very charitably. They aren't saying, "things used to be a certain way, therefore it's OK." The way I read it, they're suggesting that, if the behavior really killed that many infants, it would be weeded out by the biocultural evolutionary process. If you actually look into the research instead of offloading your opinions to the experts, yo…

> if the behavior really killed that many infants, it would be weeded out by the biocultural evolutionary process. That would also be a terrible argument. To name just one example, shaken baby syndrome still exists. > If you actually look into the research instead of offloading your opinions to the experts I've briefly looked into the research, and it seems to mesh pretty well with what the experts are saying. Now yo…

> That would also be a terrible argument. To name just one example, shaken baby syndrome still exists.

(Just to play devil's advocate) Yes, but one can surmise an evolutionary reason for that - a colicky child is more likely to be the victim in that scenario; likewise, a colicky child is less likely to be healthy.

A better argument may be that prior to 'modern' medicine, bassinets (or an analog) were spontaneously popularized in various cultures -- (if that's true).

> all the experts are wrong and all the studies that are being done on the issue are defective.

Many doctor's groups positions, when confronted with inconclusive evidence, tend to (rightfully) stand on the side of caution. A great example is caffeiene (as well as many other foods) in pregnancy. Little evidence for harm, but its possible. So its a little less harsh than all experts being dead wrong and studies defective; more likely all experts playing it safe and studies inconclusive (if that is the case).

(/devils advocate)

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#124

Post by buddyp450 » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 5:50 PM UTC

r00fus wrote: post #109

Gustomaximus wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We were worried about this with our first. So we placed her in a low/soft walled inner cot box between us in bed. It gave a boundary you could easily feel when sleeping and seemed to give the best of both worlds. The other strict rule we had was if someone had a few drinks, the baby slept in the cot or you slept on the couch. A nurse told us that largely these smothering baby tragedies occur when someone has had a fe…

...Or sleep pills (ie, ambien,etc). When we coslept with our first kid, I almost rolled over onto my daughter once - she squaked in a way that I would never be able to ignore - unless I had been medicated.

I lol'd, sorry, it was the imagery. Glad everything worked out for the best.

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#125

Post by MDS100 » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 7:10 PM UTC

pstuart wrote: post #79

ahoyhere wrote: post #73

This article looks like a really amazing resource. I haven't read it all but did a little Cmd+Fing to see if it broached the following topic, and it didn't, so I thought I'd chime in in case somebody else was where I was with these particular sleep issues: I used to have no problems sleeping at all, falling asleep whenever I wanted to, staying asleep all night, sleeping through noises… until I had mono for the second…

Trazadone and melatonin have helped tremendously in my sleep as well. For vitamin D you should make sure you get vitamin K in there too: http://www.vitamindcouncil.org/about-vitamin-d/vitamin-d-cof... http://examine.com/supplements/Vitamin+D/#thingstoknow

Yes, this exactly.

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#126

Post by readme » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 10:39 PM UTC

Tichy wrote: post #111

readme wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A person with common sense would look at the mass of a baby, and the mass of an adult human. They'd consider their tendencies to sleep heavily, and perhaps conclude that the adult could easily roll over on the baby, and kill it. Or knock it off the edge of the bed, and kill it. Hell, if you do the research there are plenty instances of people punching their sleeping partner in the face during sleep, because they were…

Incidentally I just read the child rearing chapter of Jared Diamond's latest book about traditional societies. Turns out they all tend to co-sleep, but usually they sleep on the ground or on hard mattresses. As JD points out, it is easier to notice that you have rolled onto your child with a hard mattress.

This is an excellent point.

I just bought a new mattress and I can say for sure, after having slept on a $100 target futon for the past 2 years, that I'd not know if a baby was underneath me on this one...

Re: Good sleep, good learning, good life

#127

Post by readme » Wed, Feb 20, 2013, 10:40 PM UTC

Volpe wrote: post #106

readme wrote: post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A person with common sense would look at the mass of a baby, and the mass of an adult human. They'd consider their tendencies to sleep heavily, and perhaps conclude that the adult could easily roll over on the baby, and kill it. Or knock it off the edge of the bed, and kill it. Hell, if you do the research there are plenty instances of people punching their sleeping partner in the face during sleep, because they were…

> A person with common sense would look at the mass of a baby, and the mass of an adult human. Weight/mass has very little to do with it. The baby is never 'crushed' it is 'smothered'. Also when you smother a baby (accidentally or intentional) it squirms. So common sense would indicate the key factor is how heavily you sleep, and how easily could you role onto the baby. If the babies head is the same level as your he…

I personally would be a horrible co-sleeper.

I can set 5 alarms and hear none. I only wake up at the end of a sleep cycle, no matter what's happening around me.