4 ms·
I would expect that if there was a valid debate to be had she would also have peer reviewed papers published on the topic. Skimming https://www.brown.edu/resea
by lamename 7y ago
I would expect that if there was a valid debate to be had she would also have peer reviewed papers published on the topic.
Skimming https://www.brown.edu/research/projects/oster/ https://www.brown.edu/research/projects/oster/ I haven't found any related
It seems like her general cause is a good one: to ease parents to relax a bit on what some perceive as apparently harsh recommendations on health and parenting.
But it also seems like she misses the point on what public health bodies are for (minimizing risk on large scale) versus clear advice to individuals. Take alcohol for example, if the actual evidence is flimsy on whether 1 drink is bad or not, it's an easy choice if I'm speaking to millions of people: play it safe. That's not the same as claiming that low alcohol consumption is bad, and it's certainly not an attempt to shame.
- deleted 7y ago[deleted]
- JamesBarney 7y agoOne of my pregnant friends talked to their doctor about having a glass of wine once a week. Her doctor said that was fine but when she ordered one at the restaurant it was terrible. The waiter was visibly uncomfortable serving it, other people in the restaurant stared. The intent might not have been to shame but the effect has been that lots of women feel way shittier about themselves than they need to. And the science might say something like 3 glasses of wine are terrible but we can't really statistically tell the difference between 0 and 1 glasses of wine. But what has filtered down to the masses is "if you have a glass of wine while pregnant you're a terrible mother."
- animal531 7y agoSure, but that's because it's easier to say have no glasses of wine, than to try and explain to every person that having some is still within tolerance (and then also why one is decent, but two maybe not).