Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old Jun 2nd, 2011, 08:09 AM   1
Kess
Mum (Mom)
Chat Happy BnB Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,332

Mattress wrapping to prevent cot death?


I've come across a theory on cot death prevention, and I wondered if anyone had heard of it or got any input? The theory says that commonly used flame ******ent materials in cot mattresses are consumed by a common household fungus, which then emits gasses which are toxic to the baby. They're heavier than air, which is apparently why putting baby on his/her back to sleep is associated with a reduction in cot death, and in used mattresses the fungus has a headstart, so to speak, which is supposedly why 2nd hand mattresses (or even ones previously used for older siblings) are associated with a 3-fold increase in cot death. It would also explain why overheating is linked to cot death - overheating increases the growth rate of the fungus apparently.

The solution suggested is to buy a BabeSafe mattress cover, which prevents any gasses produced getting through to the baby.

I haven't done enough research yet to have any clue whether this is valid or not, but I wondered if anyone here had heard of it? According to the net (never a completely valid source, I know) it was pushed in New Zealand and they had a reduction in cot death rates, and no cot deaths recorded in over 12 years in babies sleeping on a wrapped mattress.



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 2nd, 2011, 13:14 PM   2
Ouverture
Mum (Mom)
Chat Happy BnB Member
 
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 2,101
Yup, I've heard this too.

I actually believe a lot of it. . .at least as far as the chemicals are concerned, think about it. In most traditional mattresses there are tons of chemicals. . .PVC, plastics, flame proofing, bleaching agents, and so on. Especially with the flame ******ants and emissions from the PVC, that mattress will continue to emit those chemicals. . .and they are silent/odorless once you get past the initial 'off gassing' that should be done with all baby mattresses.

I don't want my baby sleeping anywhere near all those chemicals! Some studies are also indicating that those mattress chemicals may be the cause of the rise of allergies and learning disabilities. . .so whether or not this is 100% proven, I'm taking precaution with it.

We have bought a 100% organic mattress. . .saved money elsewhere (reusing a dresser, cloth diapering, etc.) but spent an extra $100 to get a quality mattress that has no harmful chemicals at all. And imo it was worth every penny.

I can't speak to the covers. . .I can only imagine that it's definitely a solution though!

I'm one of those crunchy people that believes we've introduced WAY too many chemicals into our lives. . .so I like having a more chemical free option in this. . .



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 3rd, 2011, 07:47 AM   3
lynnikins
Mum (Mom)
BnB Elite
 
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: East Midlands
Posts: 15,851
baby will be co-sleeping with us till they are plus of 6 months and i have a wrapped mattress for after that



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 6th, 2011, 17:11 PM   4
Sarahkka
Mum (Mom)
BnB Elite
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 10,146
I looked into this awhile ago, and I believe a lot of that particular researcher's findings are poorly supported scientifically. Also, the government of NZ does not back or advocate his research. And many of his peers have suggested that he isn't helping his theory by also selling a product and making a profit off of the babywrap things.
At the end of the day, do what you need to do for your peace of mind, but I would be careful about that particular research.
Also, the study about the three-fold increase is not widely accepted in the medical field.



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 7th, 2011, 03:36 AM   5
Kess
Mum (Mom)
Chat Happy BnB Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,332
I agree Sarahkka, that the research is a little dodgy, but there is no other theory out there that explains all of the findings, and lay-people like us don't have a hope of knowing exactly what's going on. The wrap is only cheap, so I'll be buying it anyway - DH is paranoid about SIDS, and I'd never forgive myself if I'd not taken steps that can't do any harm even if they may well not do any good, and the worst happened, KWIM?



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 7th, 2011, 09:38 AM   6
Sarahkka
Mum (Mom)
BnB Elite
 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Alberta, Canada
Posts: 10,146
Kess, Sprott's theory doesn't explain SIDS. He has manipulated all sorts of data to make it look he has discovered the cure, as it were, but I am afraid that he has very little to back him up.
Those "studies" done by Sprott and Tappin are VERY unsubstantiated, however, and almost all of them stem from Sprott, and/or are linked back to his organization CotLife. Which is profiting from selling the mattress wraps and his book on the topic.
If mattress-wrapping really had the figures that he is saying it does (100% success rate?? Really? Don't know about you, but my skepticism rate goes way up right there), don't you think that it would be widely practised and recommended?
I agree that it isn't a lot of $$ to spend and if it gives you and your OH peace of mind, then go for it. I just think this Sprott guy and his organization are exploiting people's fears for financial gain. And very possibly providing parents with a false sense of security.



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 7th, 2011, 13:21 PM   7
Kess
Mum (Mom)
Chat Happy BnB Member
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: England
Posts: 2,332
What I meant by "explains SIDS" is that the theory of heavier-than-air gasses coming off the mattress explains the reduced SIDS risk with babies sleeping on their backs, the age of babies most likely to die, the increased risk with second hand mattresses, lower risk with fan use, and the higher SIDS rate amongst low birth weight babies, for instance. The other theories I've read (bacteriological, genetic, brain stem issues, birth trauma, etc) don't seem to do that. I agree the Sprott guy sounds dodgy, but actually the first man who came up with the hypothesis was a British scientist in 1989, Sprott seems to have jumped on the bandwagon, possibly for profit.

I've been trying to find a copy of the Limerick report's research, to no avail. All I can find are summaries, and from those, I'm not convinced against the toxic gas theory either - they seemed to focus only on antimony, neglecting the other two substances in the toxic gas hypothesis, they say some things that agree with the theory (the death rate dropping when PVC covered mattresses started being used and when the chemicals were taken out of PVC), and all there are in the summaries are statements without any hint even of how they came to those conclusions. If I could read the research myself, I could probably trust it and put this hypothesis out of my head. I may make a trip back to my alma mater and see if I can find some of the medical journals referrenced.

It's not a big deal right now anyway, as the mattresses I've got will need covering in something waterproof (FSID recommend a mattress be covered with something waterproof in their SIDS prevention guidelines, and for cleanliness I'd prefer it anyway) and the BabeSafe mattress cover is as good a cover as any. My issue is when baby is too old to be swaddled, and old enough for sleeping bags, I've got some Grobags for him. Conventional SIDS advice says they're good for SIDS prevention, but they contain the flame-******ent chemicals implicated by Barry Richardson and Sprott. SO I've not got long to make up my mind.

If you could point me towards anywhere online that I can read the full text of either the Limerick report studies or any of the other studies on either side of the debate, I'd be really happy.



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 8th, 2011, 00:13 AM   8
ChristinaRN
Mum (Mom)
Chat Happy BnB Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Central Coast, California
Posts: 2,068
Hmmmm.... I haven't heard anything about this theory nor have I seen anyone here in the USA wrap their mattress I do know that here in the USA there is some promising research that has shown these babies tend to have an abnormality in their brain stem which prevents them for waking up when they stop breathing. Brain stems carefully monitor your own O2 and CO2 levels.....when your CO2 level gets too high you take a deep breath (even adults). In these infants this mechanism doesn't work, their CO2 levels continue to climb until they quit breathing all together.....and even then their brain stem doesn't wake them from a deep sleep. This is why they actually recommend pacifiers.....they keep these babies from getting into a very deep sleep and tend to wake easier if needed.



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 9th, 2011, 10:12 AM   9
leannejkl
Pregnant (Expecting)
Active BnB Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Woolwich London
Posts: 551
rubbish its all rubbish, when my son died i was atually emailing this man with a few friends from facebook, its just another thing to buy which 'could' help.

just one point

hey say this stops cotdeath. but they wont make adult one so co sleeping because 'co sleeping increses the risk of cot death' but hold on this cover is meant to stop that i thought they had the cure for cot death...

i have looked into this a lot and have a lot of information on it if anyone wishes to know more i can post all the info i have, i will not be putting money in this mans pocket if i manage to have another baby!!!!!!!!!



 
Status: Offline
 
Old Jun 9th, 2011, 10:14 AM   10
leannejkl
Pregnant (Expecting)
Active BnB Member
 
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Woolwich London
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sarahkka View Post
Kess, Sprott's theory doesn't explain SIDS. He has manipulated all sorts of data to make it look he has discovered the cure, as it were, but I am afraid that he has very little to back him up.
Those "studies" done by Sprott and Tappin are VERY unsubstantiated, however, and almost all of them stem from Sprott, and/or are linked back to his organization CotLife. Which is profiting from selling the mattress wraps and his book on the topic.
If mattress-wrapping really had the figures that he is saying it does (100% success rate?? Really? Don't know about you, but my skepticism rate goes way up right there), don't you think that it would be widely practised and recommended?
I agree that it isn't a lot of $$ to spend and if it gives you and your OH peace of mind, then go for it. I just think this Sprott guy and his organization are exploiting people's fears for financial gain. And very possibly providing parents with a false sense of security.
u said what i wanted to say much better, i am rushing and cant hink straight lol, this man threatened to sue me and two other mums for disagreeing with him and pointing out facts that was not right.



 
Status: Offline
 
Reply



Bookmarks

Tags
cot , death , mattress , prevent , wrapping

featured articles


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search






SEO by vBSEO