2 ms·
"We aren't talking about any type of population, we are talking about children 0-1 year." Sure, you have the circumcised vs uncircumcised populations as the mo
by giantg2 2y ago
"We aren't talking about any type of population, we are talking about children 0-1 year."
Sure, you have the circumcised vs uncircumcised populations as the most prominent groups for long term observation.
"There is very little research on how pain affects the development of humans at this stage"
This isn't true. There is a fair amount of research on Pubmed. The general concensus is that repeated pain can have developmental impacts, but that one-off pain generally does not.
"I understand why"
It doesn't sound that way.
"How could we not consider that?"
I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered. It's simply not a significant enough factor to sway most decisions.
The rubbing with oil part is general uncomfortable but not nearly on the level of pain that the studies I've seen are finding to be a problem (eepeat surgeries, repetitive needles, etc).
- Fire-Dragon-DoL 2y ago> "I understand why" > It doesn't sound that way. There are only a handful of medications tested on infants and that are safe on them. It's pretty easy to understand since every medication is for "12 years+" essentially > I'm not saying it shouldn't be considered. It's simply not a significant enough factor to sway most decisions. I don't think that's the case. If a medium discomfort is being addressed, pain could sway to the "no procedure" option. If we are talking about a high discomfort, sure like you said, it doesn't sway. Not only that, but it's on the parent to make the call, not on the professional.
- giantg2 2y agoThe parents are making the call based in the benefits (perceived or real) and the risks. There is no objective benefit to the use of anesthesia at that age and the risks of use are significant. So it's all about the other risk/rewards of the procedure. Temporary pain is not a real factor.