20 ms·

What to do with a screaming baby: the history of handbooks on motherhood

75 points by diodorus 8y ago

sundvor 8y ago
Speaking as a father of a newborn, I feel that parenthood would be more inclusive. But hey, I'm used to looking at nappies where "mothers know best" (I will pick different brand), so this is still well entrenched.
- davegauer 8y ago
  It seems to be one of those double standards that a lot of people are still okay with for some reason. The one that still gets me is "women having it all" (children and a career). Why can't this be "parents" instead? We're not all living in the 1950s anymore.
  - gascan 8y ago
    still okay with for some reason Sometimes reality gets in the way of ideals. Men, for example, are pitifully bad at lactating. Given initial conditions like that- things quickly fall into the familiar pattern.
    - sundvor 8y ago
      BS. I can't produce milk but I can do everything else. So in the middle of the night when the breast is done if baby is unsettled I can take care of this, which can take ages. Sharing this exhausting and sometimes excruciating workload is a big part of parenthood here. It is also ultimately highly rewarding; editing this as she's just about fallen asleep in my arms, gorgeous thing.
      - Retric 8y ago
        I am all for a 50/50 split if both parents want to work or even a stay at home dad. But, it's more than just breastfeeding. Giving birth is hard from a few weeks and arguably months before to a few weeks and or months after. That naturally tends to taking a few months off and hey infant needs a lot of care so when not extend that a little. Add a second pregnancy at 1-3 years after the fist and it's easy to end up with a stay at home mom. Now, this is far from the only pattern, but it is common for real biological reasons.
        sundvor 8y ago
        I'm not even saying it's a 50/50 split because unless you're exceedingly well off, or perhaps consulting from home, it is not going to be that initially - if you want baby to be breastfed, which is ideal whenever possible, someone's got to bring in the income. I merely took objection to the exclusionary term that is motherhood, because in this context I deal with screaming babies a lot - as a father. That is not "motherhood", it is "parenthood". Unless it's all about single women bringing their babies up alone? I saw no reference to that in TFA. It's a bit like craftsman vs craftsperson, not that I really wanted to go there. But there are real reasons for using more inclusionary terms even when the traditional "feel more natural" (to the speaker / author) or whatever.
        brownbat 8y ago
        > breastfed... is ideal whenever possible The AAP and WHO both endorse this position, and I can't find a reputable leading health org that argues otherwise. The more I read about the basis of the claim though the more confused I get. Parenting advice sites all point out that it helps child immunity. But the underlying studies are based on the ingestion of immunoglobulin, which doesn't even survive digestion. So essentially it protects the esophagus against waterborne illnesses, ie, mainly those no longer common in the developed world. That definitely makes sense in terms of evolutionarily-relevant child mortality threats, but that context is always omitted. Or you get claims of improved cognition, then find meta-analysis that can't reproduce any results after five years. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-case-against-breast-feeding/307311/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-cas... Parenting guidance seems full of replication crisis issues, even in the medical literature. That's been the most eye opening thing about becoming a parent... people's strong interest in parenting makes it hard to explain the poor state of the data on the topic.
        kaitai 8y ago
        That's not the whole story (re: immunoglobulin). You're right in broad-brush strokes. The abstract at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 has some quick notes on the broader context. For immunoglobulin in particular, when you say "doesn't survive digestion," you're missing the substantial amounts of IgA (ok, milk sIgA) in the intestine. There it will bind with lots of bad stuff, preventing said bad stuff from causing an immune response. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ is one place to read about this.) You also must consider all the leukocytes in breast milk. Both maternal and infant infections cause huge increases in leukocyte production. There is a theory (hard to test) that babies like to stick their hands in mom's mouth while breastfeeding so that mom gets baby germs, and then mom will make appropriate leukocytes. Bizarrely, baby backwash (into the breast! while feeding!) also leads to maternal immunological response. Fun fact: breast milk from the same mom can vary in color dramatically (from blue to white to yellow) and a lot of that has to do with the contents, with yellow in particular generally having a high leukocyte content.
    - hueving 8y ago
      I don't need to lactate to take my kid to the park without judgment.
    - andrepd 8y ago
      Name one thing, apart from breastfeeding, that men can't do that women can, when it comes to taking care of a child. Why is it, then, that it's still "unmanly" to change diapers, or god forbid, even be a stay-at-home dad?
      - kaitai 8y ago
        I have to add that because dad can't lactate, he's developed more sophisticated strategies for dealing with infant discontent than this mom :)
      - Retric 8y ago
        Take care of an infant while recovering from birth without taking extra time of. That's not a huge difference, but it is economically significant for many couples especially when they have physically demanding jobs.
        watwut 8y ago
        The recovery period after birth is not that long. It can be anything between few days and two months, but not much more.
    - zasz 8y ago
      Nonsense. My sister-in-law is a professor and my brother is the stay-at-home dad, for the sake of her career. They're on kid #2 now. He does all the nighttime stuff so she can sleep and be refreshed for work.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
  - kolpa 8y ago
    Who is saying "women having it all" and not "men having it all" ?
    - girvo 8y ago
      The bulk of mainstream media. A quick google will show that, though interestingly it also shows some newer articles raising the same point as the GP there.
  - bonniemuffin 8y ago
    I think it's mostly because, in a very real sense, men have always been able to have it all. Men have always been able to have children and a career (because their wives stayed home to raise them!), so the quote isn't as poignant for them. BUT -- I do think it's actually useful to talk about "parents having it all", because all those breadwinner men with stay-at-home wives missed out on a lot of quality bonding time with their kids. They may have thought they had it all, but they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids.
    - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
      It sounds like you've completely misunderstood the aphorism "raising kids and a having a career". It's not the state of being a biological parent that's sought after (which yes parents have automatically) but of _raising_ children. You can't raise children in absentia. If you're concentrating on your career you simply can't dedicate yourself to raising children. So, no fathers haven't always had it all because having it all is a practical impossibility in almost all walks of life.
      - bonniemuffin 8y ago
        I think you and I are saying exactly the same thing here. That's exactly what I meant by "they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids."
- Avshalom 8y ago
  Did you read the article? because it is very clearly about historical books explicitly about mothers. If you want ~100CE greek doctors to be more inclusive you're gonna need a time machine.
  - craftyguy 8y ago
    I think GP would like that to change, hence his comment.. You don't have to change history (lol) like you suggest to do that.
    - sundvor 8y ago
      Precisely, thanks.
- iends 8y ago
  Reminds me of the onsies that have arrows for head, arms, etc and say “You can do this Dad”
- xevb3k 8y ago
  Parenthood, particularly in some communities is like entering some kind of twilight zone. In particular I’ve been shocked at how many fathers do almost nothing in terms of childcare. It’s a shame that there isn’t a more general expectation on fathers to look after their kids at least to some extent, and that not looking after your kids isn’t considered socially unacceptable. I don’t believe this is just the fault of “men”, but I think it comes from a surprising lack on understanding in terms of how much work looking after kids is. It’s pretty much a 16 hour a day job for the first few years. If you don’t have someone to help it’s almost unbearable.
  - darkerside 8y ago
    It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. That said, I agree it's a shame when it actually plays out that way and our society as a whole (and even fathers in modern society) lose out.
    - rdlecler1 8y ago
      There’s an evolutionary underpinning driving a statistical difference in rearing behavior of males and females. You’d expect mothers to always commit more resources to their children because (1) eggs are expensive and spermm is cheap and the number or progeny is limited (2) high cuckolding rates also imply that men will hedge by spending less resources on their family. (3) Males may take a different strategy that contributes to the family which involve risk taking and high mortality rates (there’s no free lunch).
    - KirinDave 8y ago
      > It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. Fathers have multiple physical adaptations for fatherhood that are very important. The idea that fathers experience no hormonal or physical changes is not scientific. Much like mothers, though, if they remove themselves from the proximity of their children these effects cease.
gerdesj 8y ago
No idea why this got posted here but I should point out that Mary Beard is well respected around these parts and is a mother. The TLS is not generally considered a rag either. Now, the article itself does start off with a pretty confrontational style. I humbly suggest you get over it.
polotics 8y ago
So it says: "some pseudo-science which claimed that the stress of crying would prevent the proper development of the baby’s brain" ... But cortisol levels have been tested I believe, and the effects of cortisol are well known.
- dgut 8y ago
  It has become more or less accepted (at least in Scandinavia) that small children crying is just a form of misbehavior that shouldn't be given any attention. Coming from South Europe, I found that very strange. But they've become as good at reading a child's cues as they themselves are at socializing.
Salamat 8y ago
Grandmother used to say babies cry because of three things: need for sleep, need for food, and temreture issues (cold or hot causing colic and gases)
- Moru 8y ago
  Our baby cried because of cow milk protein allergy. The milk protein came from the mother drinking cow milk and breastfeeding. When we figured that out it took a few weeks and then she got happier and quiet and could sleep again. Also the dry spots on the skin vanished.
  - crispyporkbites 8y ago
    Could it not have been something else, or a combination? There are so many factors with a baby it seems unlikely to be one specific element
    - Moru 8y ago
      Sorry, didn't write the whole story: We were told to try feeding her some milk formula to see if she just was hungry. Maybe not getting enough out of the breast. Her skin directly turned red with white dots. Since I'm allergic myself but for other things I know what that means. We also took her to hospital for a complete test and that was also positive. She has now outgrown it and can eat milk normally if she wants to but she finds most milk products taste awful.
  - dgut 8y ago
    I remember reading a Dutch study where nearly all "child is allergic to milk" diagnosis by parents turned out to be false. Unfortunately, I can't find the study.
    - cdjk 8y ago
      Here's a counter-example. We accidentally fed formula with cow milk protein in the middle of the night once after switching to a different formula (it was the middle of the night, we were sleep deprived, the bottles looked the same in the dark, and we hadn't purged all the old formula yet). His symptoms returned immediately for a couple days until it cleared his system. I know this is anecdata but seeing the immediate change and having a very easy experiment to test it with if the child is eating formula makes me question the study.
jimnotgym 8y ago
The ancients did not know this, but for some reason a trip in the car has always made my kids sleep. Once you have fed and changed them of course. Anecdotally formula milk from a bottle seems to help them fill up quicker than breast feeding, and stay quiet for longer. Although I seem to remember that may have the bad side effect of increasing the likelyhood of cot-death, presumably because they are sleeping more deeply and for longer
- rangibaby 8y ago
  The ancients did know it. I think babies would have gone to work with mom and dad (=movement) instead of hanging out at the cave on their own
  - se6 8y ago
    The noise is very important. Any kind of white noise is soothing for a baby... noise from water, car or even vacuum cleaner.. I used to generate a noise with: sox -n soothingnoise-3mn.wav synth 3:0 pinknoise tremolo 0.5 30 fade q 5 3:0 30 Worked a treat to make my son sleep.
    - Odenwaelder 8y ago
      Awesome! You could do an iterative approach with a grid search to find the most-soothing parameter set!
    - TeMPOraL 8y ago
      You're using pink noise, right? I wish it would be less common to kind any kind of noise "white noise", as people might instinctively search for / generate actual white noise, dislike it, and abandon the concept. Pink noise is a particular kind of noise that's much nicer to listen to than white noise. I used it from time to time to block my cow-orkers off.
- jacquesm 8y ago
  Ford is on to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic6vWoSd8Fk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic6vWoSd8Fk
wst_ 8y ago
For some time already there are studies suggesting that infant colic is not actually a colic but the process of early brain development. In face of this, looks like there's not much we can do. As much as it is heartbreaking, most parents and babies just have to walk through it. https://journals.lww.com/jpgn/Fulltext/2013/12001/Brain_Maturation,_Early_Sensory_Processing,_and.8.aspx https://journals.lww.com/jpgn/Fulltext/2013/12001/Brain_Matu...
- brazzy 8y ago
  "Suggesting"? It's pretty obvious to everyone with half a brain that "colic" is just a label applied (specifically in the English-speaking world) to a baby that keeps crying despite all obvious causes of distress being taken care of, and has nothing whatsoever to do with digestion. I mean, the official definition is based exclusively on the amount of crying and nothing else, how could it possibly be a diagnosis of an underlying cause?

75 points by diodorus 8y ago

Speaking as a father of a newborn, I feel that parenthood would be more inclusive. But hey, I'm used to looking at nappies where "mothers know best" (I will pick different brand), so this is still well entrenched.

davegauer 8y ago
It seems to be one of those double standards that a lot of people are still okay with for some reason. The one that still gets me is "women having it all" (children and a career). Why can't this be "parents" instead? We're not all living in the 1950s anymore.
- gascan 8y ago
  still okay with for some reason Sometimes reality gets in the way of ideals. Men, for example, are pitifully bad at lactating. Given initial conditions like that- things quickly fall into the familiar pattern.
  - sundvor 8y ago
    BS. I can't produce milk but I can do everything else. So in the middle of the night when the breast is done if baby is unsettled I can take care of this, which can take ages. Sharing this exhausting and sometimes excruciating workload is a big part of parenthood here. It is also ultimately highly rewarding; editing this as she's just about fallen asleep in my arms, gorgeous thing.
    - Retric 8y ago
      I am all for a 50/50 split if both parents want to work or even a stay at home dad. But, it's more than just breastfeeding. Giving birth is hard from a few weeks and arguably months before to a few weeks and or months after. That naturally tends to taking a few months off and hey infant needs a lot of care so when not extend that a little. Add a second pregnancy at 1-3 years after the fist and it's easy to end up with a stay at home mom. Now, this is far from the only pattern, but it is common for real biological reasons.
      - sundvor 8y ago
        I'm not even saying it's a 50/50 split because unless you're exceedingly well off, or perhaps consulting from home, it is not going to be that initially - if you want baby to be breastfed, which is ideal whenever possible, someone's got to bring in the income. I merely took objection to the exclusionary term that is motherhood, because in this context I deal with screaming babies a lot - as a father. That is not "motherhood", it is "parenthood". Unless it's all about single women bringing their babies up alone? I saw no reference to that in TFA. It's a bit like craftsman vs craftsperson, not that I really wanted to go there. But there are real reasons for using more inclusionary terms even when the traditional "feel more natural" (to the speaker / author) or whatever.
        brownbat 8y ago
        > breastfed... is ideal whenever possible The AAP and WHO both endorse this position, and I can't find a reputable leading health org that argues otherwise. The more I read about the basis of the claim though the more confused I get. Parenting advice sites all point out that it helps child immunity. But the underlying studies are based on the ingestion of immunoglobulin, which doesn't even survive digestion. So essentially it protects the esophagus against waterborne illnesses, ie, mainly those no longer common in the developed world. That definitely makes sense in terms of evolutionarily-relevant child mortality threats, but that context is always omitted. Or you get claims of improved cognition, then find meta-analysis that can't reproduce any results after five years. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/... https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-case-against-breast-feeding/307311/ https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2009/04/the-cas... Parenting guidance seems full of replication crisis issues, even in the medical literature. That's been the most eye opening thing about becoming a parent... people's strong interest in parenting makes it hard to explain the poor state of the data on the topic.
        kaitai 8y ago
        That's not the whole story (re: immunoglobulin). You're right in broad-brush strokes. The abstract at https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12850343 has some quick notes on the broader context. For immunoglobulin in particular, when you say "doesn't survive digestion," you're missing the substantial amounts of IgA (ok, milk sIgA) in the intestine. There it will bind with lots of bad stuff, preventing said bad stuff from causing an immune response. (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3257684/ is one place to read about this.) You also must consider all the leukocytes in breast milk. Both maternal and infant infections cause huge increases in leukocyte production. There is a theory (hard to test) that babies like to stick their hands in mom's mouth while breastfeeding so that mom gets baby germs, and then mom will make appropriate leukocytes. Bizarrely, baby backwash (into the breast! while feeding!) also leads to maternal immunological response. Fun fact: breast milk from the same mom can vary in color dramatically (from blue to white to yellow) and a lot of that has to do with the contents, with yellow in particular generally having a high leukocyte content.
  - hueving 8y ago
    I don't need to lactate to take my kid to the park without judgment.
  - andrepd 8y ago
    Name one thing, apart from breastfeeding, that men can't do that women can, when it comes to taking care of a child. Why is it, then, that it's still "unmanly" to change diapers, or god forbid, even be a stay-at-home dad?
    - kaitai 8y ago
      I have to add that because dad can't lactate, he's developed more sophisticated strategies for dealing with infant discontent than this mom :)
    - Retric 8y ago
      Take care of an infant while recovering from birth without taking extra time of. That's not a huge difference, but it is economically significant for many couples especially when they have physically demanding jobs.
      - watwut 8y ago
        The recovery period after birth is not that long. It can be anything between few days and two months, but not much more.
  - zasz 8y ago
    Nonsense. My sister-in-law is a professor and my brother is the stay-at-home dad, for the sake of her career. They're on kid #2 now. He does all the nighttime stuff so she can sleep and be refreshed for work.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
- kolpa 8y ago
  Who is saying "women having it all" and not "men having it all" ?
  - girvo 8y ago
    The bulk of mainstream media. A quick google will show that, though interestingly it also shows some newer articles raising the same point as the GP there.
- bonniemuffin 8y ago
  I think it's mostly because, in a very real sense, men have always been able to have it all. Men have always been able to have children and a career (because their wives stayed home to raise them!), so the quote isn't as poignant for them. BUT -- I do think it's actually useful to talk about "parents having it all", because all those breadwinner men with stay-at-home wives missed out on a lot of quality bonding time with their kids. They may have thought they had it all, but they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids.
  - pbhjpbhj 8y ago
    It sounds like you've completely misunderstood the aphorism "raising kids and a having a career". It's not the state of being a biological parent that's sought after (which yes parents have automatically) but of _raising_ children. You can't raise children in absentia. If you're concentrating on your career you simply can't dedicate yourself to raising children. So, no fathers haven't always had it all because having it all is a practical impossibility in almost all walks of life.
    - bonniemuffin 8y ago
      I think you and I are saying exactly the same thing here. That's exactly what I meant by "they actually missed out on developing real, meaningful relationships with their kids."
Avshalom 8y ago
Did you read the article? because it is very clearly about historical books explicitly about mothers. If you want ~100CE greek doctors to be more inclusive you're gonna need a time machine.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  I think GP would like that to change, hence his comment.. You don't have to change history (lol) like you suggest to do that.
  - sundvor 8y ago
    Precisely, thanks.
iends 8y ago
Reminds me of the onsies that have arrows for head, arms, etc and say “You can do this Dad”
xevb3k 8y ago
Parenthood, particularly in some communities is like entering some kind of twilight zone. In particular I’ve been shocked at how many fathers do almost nothing in terms of childcare. It’s a shame that there isn’t a more general expectation on fathers to look after their kids at least to some extent, and that not looking after your kids isn’t considered socially unacceptable. I don’t believe this is just the fault of “men”, but I think it comes from a surprising lack on understanding in terms of how much work looking after kids is. It’s pretty much a 16 hour a day job for the first few years. If you don’t have someone to help it’s almost unbearable.
- darkerside 8y ago
  It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. That said, I agree it's a shame when it actually plays out that way and our society as a whole (and even fathers in modern society) lose out.
  - rdlecler1 8y ago
    There’s an evolutionary underpinning driving a statistical difference in rearing behavior of males and females. You’d expect mothers to always commit more resources to their children because (1) eggs are expensive and spermm is cheap and the number or progeny is limited (2) high cuckolding rates also imply that men will hedge by spending less resources on their family. (3) Males may take a different strategy that contributes to the family which involve risk taking and high mortality rates (there’s no free lunch).
  - KirinDave 8y ago
    > It's unfortunately understandable that this behavior would evolve, culturally if not biologically. Because of our reproductive systems, men are incentivized to play the numbers game and women to invest in created offspring. Fathers have multiple physical adaptations for fatherhood that are very important. The idea that fathers experience no hormonal or physical changes is not scientific. Much like mothers, though, if they remove themselves from the proximity of their children these effects cease.

gerdesj 8y ago

No idea why this got posted here but I should point out that Mary Beard is well respected around these parts and is a mother. The TLS is not generally considered a rag either. Now, the article itself does start off with a pretty confrontational style. I humbly suggest you get over it.

polotics 8y ago

So it says: "some pseudo-science which claimed that the stress of crying would prevent the proper development of the baby’s brain" ... But cortisol levels have been tested I believe, and the effects of cortisol are well known.

dgut 8y ago
It has become more or less accepted (at least in Scandinavia) that small children crying is just a form of misbehavior that shouldn't be given any attention. Coming from South Europe, I found that very strange. But they've become as good at reading a child's cues as they themselves are at socializing.

Salamat 8y ago

Grandmother used to say babies cry because of three things: need for sleep, need for food, and temreture issues (cold or hot causing colic and gases)

Moru 8y ago
Our baby cried because of cow milk protein allergy. The milk protein came from the mother drinking cow milk and breastfeeding. When we figured that out it took a few weeks and then she got happier and quiet and could sleep again. Also the dry spots on the skin vanished.
- crispyporkbites 8y ago
  Could it not have been something else, or a combination? There are so many factors with a baby it seems unlikely to be one specific element
  - Moru 8y ago
    Sorry, didn't write the whole story: We were told to try feeding her some milk formula to see if she just was hungry. Maybe not getting enough out of the breast. Her skin directly turned red with white dots. Since I'm allergic myself but for other things I know what that means. We also took her to hospital for a complete test and that was also positive. She has now outgrown it and can eat milk normally if she wants to but she finds most milk products taste awful.
- dgut 8y ago
  I remember reading a Dutch study where nearly all "child is allergic to milk" diagnosis by parents turned out to be false. Unfortunately, I can't find the study.
  - cdjk 8y ago
    Here's a counter-example. We accidentally fed formula with cow milk protein in the middle of the night once after switching to a different formula (it was the middle of the night, we were sleep deprived, the bottles looked the same in the dark, and we hadn't purged all the old formula yet). His symptoms returned immediately for a couple days until it cleared his system. I know this is anecdata but seeing the immediate change and having a very easy experiment to test it with if the child is eating formula makes me question the study.

jimnotgym 8y ago

The ancients did not know this, but for some reason a trip in the car has always made my kids sleep. Once you have fed and changed them of course. Anecdotally formula milk from a bottle seems to help them fill up quicker than breast feeding, and stay quiet for longer. Although I seem to remember that may have the bad side effect of increasing the likelyhood of cot-death, presumably because they are sleeping more deeply and for longer

rangibaby 8y ago
The ancients did know it. I think babies would have gone to work with mom and dad (=movement) instead of hanging out at the cave on their own
- se6 8y ago
  The noise is very important. Any kind of white noise is soothing for a baby... noise from water, car or even vacuum cleaner.. I used to generate a noise with: sox -n soothingnoise-3mn.wav synth 3:0 pinknoise tremolo 0.5 30 fade q 5 3:0 30 Worked a treat to make my son sleep.
  - Odenwaelder 8y ago
    Awesome! You could do an iterative approach with a grid search to find the most-soothing parameter set!
  - TeMPOraL 8y ago
    You're using pink noise, right? I wish it would be less common to kind any kind of noise "white noise", as people might instinctively search for / generate actual white noise, dislike it, and abandon the concept. Pink noise is a particular kind of noise that's much nicer to listen to than white noise. I used it from time to time to block my cow-orkers off.
jacquesm 8y ago
Ford is on to that: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic6vWoSd8Fk https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ic6vWoSd8Fk

wst_ 8y ago

For some time already there are studies suggesting that infant colic is not actually a colic but the process of early brain development. In face of this, looks like there's not much we can do. As much as it is heartbreaking, most parents and babies just have to walk through it. https://journals.lww.com/jpgn/Fulltext/2013/12001/Brain_Maturation,_Early_Sensory_Processing,_and.8.aspx https://journals.lww.com/jpgn/Fulltext/2013/12001/Brain_Matu...

brazzy 8y ago
"Suggesting"? It's pretty obvious to everyone with half a brain that "colic" is just a label applied (specifically in the English-speaking world) to a baby that keeps crying despite all obvious causes of distress being taken care of, and has nothing whatsoever to do with digestion. I mean, the official definition is based exclusively on the amount of crying and nothing else, how could it possibly be a diagnosis of an underlying cause?