181–190 of 311 posts
The big difference is that 'real' nappies become extremely uncomfortable when wet (child immediately cries to be changed) so toddlers get a strong incentive to stop wetting whereas with modern disposables they barely even notice when they wee.
For toddlers who are able to communicate, simply add an absorbent layer into the disposable diaper to give them sensory feedback about moisture. Gauze squares from the first aid aisle work well and are very cheap.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> But cloth diapers are obviously much better for the environment What about this is obvious? Water usage, transportation, fabrication factors, different usage patterns; seems like there are many things to tease apart here.
I think as a general rule: a reusable thing is more environmentally friendly than a single-use thing (especially when the reuse cycles are high). Yes, there are exceptions. But you’ve got the bizarre case to make here, if you want to suggest single-use diapers (that also use water, require transportation, are fabricated, packaged, etc.) are a more efficient use of resources.
Cloth diapers are good. We used them for our last kid with a diaper service and are going to do it again washing them ourselves with our next who is due at the end of the month. Regular diapers are useful to have either way. But cloth diapers are obviously much better for the environment and if they're an option for you, you should consider them. Not a hard concept, not worth a big discussion.
> But cloth diapers are obviously much better for the environment It's obvious only if you save and reuse the same set of cloth diapers for 2 or more babies. (Which places some constrains on brand, durability etc.) If you have only one kid, I am not sure which side is environmentally more friendly; growing and processing all that cotton (not to mention the plastic for all the waterproof covers) uses a lot of water an…
We also got a good number of used diapers on Offer Up.
When we're done with our diapers, we will rehome them instead of throwing them out.
How does this change your calculations?
Babies and childcare can cost either a huge amount, or not very much at all.
Modern American middle class norms are that babies cost a fortune. The best nutrition, daycare, early childhood learning, classes, tuition, etc. Extreme expenses. All throughout history, children have been cheap, and if you look back far enough - disposable. And even parents viewed kids as a free source of labor. Kids used to be left to roam the woods, streets, and neighborhoods. Now a lone child will get a call from…
In the past you didn't have to do any of this to be able to have a decent "middle class" living, now if one doesn't do all of that then they are already behind in the "rat race". I forgot where i read it, but basically in society we've removed any "slippage". One mistake (say an arrest record) can result in making it hard to find jobs whereas in the past you would just move. The 20 points on the sat that you might have attained if you had better nutrition in your youth make the difference between breaking into the remaining sliver of the middle class.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What is a diaper service?
A service that comes to pick up dirty cloth diapers and drops off clean cloth diapers. Example: https://www.diaperstork.com
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I submit the cost benefit is closer to neutral with extra washer cycles, setup costs, labor, friction while travelling... This is probably better ROI than "breastfeeding saves money" when formula is so cheap and you avoid pumping, washing, and labor while exhausted.
I'm not sure where you live but formula is not cheap here. We use disposables while traveling. It's just easier.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I submit the cost benefit is closer to neutral with extra washer cycles, setup costs, labor, friction while travelling... This is probably better ROI than "breastfeeding saves money" when formula is so cheap and you avoid pumping, washing, and labor while exhausted.
Exclusive breastfeeding (not bottle feeding breastmilk) is less labor than formula. The problem is potential discomfort, and inability for both parents to split the labor more equally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment conveniently disproves itself. > It is objectively bad to feed your children ultra processed foods It’s not “objectively bad” To feed your children ultra processed foods. Once you do the work of defining what ultra processed food is in the first place (which you cannot because there is no definition and your argument is already lost), you will find that many ultra processed foods are objectively good for…
> It’s not “objectively bad” To feed your children ultra processed foods. It is though, it's in the definition, UPF are distinguished from processed food by having additives of no culinary nor nutritional value. So at best, they aren't better than processed food, at worst, they have additive that increase negative health outcomes. note that if an additive (let's say high-fructose corn syrup) have inferior nutritional…
And I think your comment is wrong. Parent is right in saying that there is no clear definition of what exactly ultra processed food is. However, in general, processed does not mean having additives, it means processed, running through multiple industrial processes to be made.
Parent of 2 kids. Parents receive enough judgement. Do whatever works for you! -cloth diapers? Awesome -train early? Awesome -train later? Awesome There's trade offs for each, and you are going to figure out what works best for you. If you want to train later and the diaper companies make more money, that's how a market is supposed to work. They're providing a product you value. So all good!
I mean... they're pushing diapers for 6-9 year olds, now? What I took away is, by the early 2040s, "potty trained" is going to appear on peoples resumes.