Researchers Find Clue to SIDS Early Detection

SpaceAdmiral writes "The Globe and Mail is reporting that scientists have found babies who die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS) tend to have an abnormality in their brain stem. By linking SIDS to a biological cause, it may now be possible to test for the abnormality and treat babies at risk of SIDS."

Comments

Nope...

[Junta]

Natural selection is, in the most basic form, eliminating those traits that do not survive in whatever the current environment is. In this case, assuming that a defect transforms from near certain fatality to usually treatable, even if through human advancement of the 'environment', the environment simply has changed to not weed out that attribute, one way or another.

Really, if you want to have the heartiest gene pool with respect to the whole natural selection scheme of things, you keep everyone alive you can within reason, even if no apparent benefit can be objectively realized for their apparent defect. The whole deal is that when the environment changes, bizarre things can happen and the more genetic diversity your population has, the more able it is to survive radical changes.

An example is sickle-cell anemia, most common people with an incomplete grasp of natural selection would think 'that sucks, let nature eliminate that gene from the pool!'. However in the incomplete dominance model it happens to behave, a person heterozygous for sickle cell anemia happens to be much more resistant to malaria.

In the case of this article, let's assume some neurological pathogen suddenly becomes ubiquitous to the human environment, and somehow the brain stem 'defect' shields those with the trait. Assume this preliminary research is correct and leads to a cure for SIDS, for the sake of discussion. You have a hearty population with a now harmless defect that would be the only survivors. If SIDS wipes out that 'defect' and such a weird pathogen came, the species goes extinct.

To be trekkie for a moment, a good demonstration is when the TNG crew came upon a planet that eliminated all defective conceptions to not deal with the associated problems. However, their planet was saved from obliteration based on technology in Geordi's visor, which never would have come about in a society where they avoided having to make such a device. The principle is interesting fodder for science fiction, and that I think illustrates well the pitfall of 'let only the best go on'. Best is always relative to the current status quo, which is never unchangeable.

Re:A promising theory

[Ironica]

Look; I have no problems if mom and dad want to keep the little one in their bed. Different people, different cultures have different ideas and I'm all for that. I've never heard any credible suggestion about aural therapy to teach kids breathing techniques before - but maybe there's something to it. (and seriously; as a parent, if you've got anything scientific to back that up I'd be genuinely interested.)

Dr. James McKenna is the leading researcher on this issue. Here's an article that discusses his findings on the effects of parental proximity on infant sleep breathing. (For more info about him and his work in general, check out this page.)

Also, I don't think it's mentioned in that article, but most of the recommendations against co-sleeping as SIDS prevention stem from one big New Zealand study (the kiwis have traditionally kept the best statistics on SIDS, so a lot of info comes from their data). That study initially found a statistically significant correlation between co-sleeping and SIDS deaths. However, later re-examination of the data found that, when controlling for maternal smoking (a factor that has been linked to SIDS by several studies), the correlation between co-sleeping and SIDS disappeared. New Zealand has a fairly large Maori population, which both is more likely to smoke and is more likely to co-sleep, and that caused the cross-correlation.

So yes, unless parents have particular health issues which make it unsafe (such as alcohol or drug use, extreme obesity, or certain sleep disorders) co-sleeping is safer than crib-sleeping. Dr. McKenna has found that the beneficial effects of sleeping near Mom extend even to kids in a crib in the same room as their parents, too, so for those with problems that prevent bed-sharing, modified co-sleeping is another way to keep baby safe. The cultural notion that sleep is an intensely private activity that should only be shared with your spouse does interfere with the safety of young children (and not just with SIDS; I remember hearing a story about a two-year-old who woke up in the middle of the night, decided to climb up her dresser, and was found dead in the morning after it toppled onto her... I can't imagine that happening to my two-year-old, since he still sleeps next to us!).