The leading cause of death of babies in their first year of life is Sudden Infant Death Syndrome or SIDS, yet there might now be actual hope in finally solving the mystery why the deaths happen at all. SIDS is believed to be accountable for around 2,000 deaths of infants in the United States, explains the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Researchers, who were located at Boston Children’s Hospital, have discovered that numerous babies who have died “unexpectedly and suddenly” had fundamental brainstem abnormalities that were not at all normal preceding their deaths. The hospital had these findings printed up in the December 2013 issue of Pediatrics.
Such abnormalities damage brainstem circuits that help regulate heart rate, breathing, temperature during sleep and blood pressure. The research was done by neuropathologist Dr. Hannah Kinney and a group of her colleagues. They think the abnormalities stop sleeping babies from moving when they end up taking in too much carbon dioxide because of inadequate ventilation, do not breathe enough oxygen or they become overheated.
In the research study, Kinney and her group wanted to know if all the deceased infants were truly normal. They revisited the information they had, reviewing cases of over 70 infants who had passed away unexpectedly and without warning. They had been given autopsies at the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s office from the years 1997 to 2008, and there were brainstem samples of the babies available for examination. The researchers assembled the infants to their sleep situations. There were those that had been likely to have suffered from suffocation and those that most likely did not, all based on the death scene investigation information.
15 infants who died from SIDS were shown not to have suffocated, 35 SIDS infants, whose deaths were considered as being from possible suffocation asphyxia and nine infants who had plainly died from other factors. The team left out the group of nine infants, who had inadequate information or had confirmation of some other risk factors for death, such as being exposed to drugs or suffering from the extremes of either high or cold temperatures.
There were brainstem neurochemical abnormalities, which included serotonin, serotonin receptors and GABA receptors found in each group. The babies in both of these groups, both with and also without any environmental factors for suffocation, had identical brainstem abnormalities, and each of the groups varied significantly from the control group. Even the infants that died in a possible suffocation situation, such as sleeping with the face down or being placed next to an adult, showed that they had core brain stem abnormalities that most likely caused them to become vulnerable to sudden death if they experienced any period where they suffered a lack of oxygen, explained Dr. Kinney.
Such deformities prevented the brain stem from being able to respond correctly and wake the baby up. The investigators have confidence that these findings finally show that sudden inexplicable death in infants is related to fundamental vulnerabilities, and that not every infant who dies in a compromised sleep environment is actually a normal baby. Of course there are sleeping situations that could cause the death of any baby, such as becoming trapped in a crib, but if it is just from sleeping with the face down, the baby who dies could have some kind of underlying brain stem weakness, added Kinney. There have to be ways found in which to test for such underlying susceptibility in living babies and then be able to treat it when it is found. The group is now focused on creating such tests and treatments.
The doctor stated that it was vitally important to keep up safe sleeping practices so to help babies from any possible situations in which they could suffocate or choke. Hopefully this study will help in the prevention of SIDS.
By Kimberly Ruble
Sources:
Discover more from Guardian Liberty Voice
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
20 Responses
And the picture at the top of the article shows a baby with a blanket… Risk factor for SIDS. Nice. At least show a baby sleeping appropriately.
Babies that passed away from SIDS…Usually Don’t Live Long enough to even have been Vaccinated!!! Right? I know My Nephew Wasn’t He was only 7 weeks old!!! So maybe this does help & Make Some Sense..
Ok people, why are you all trying to link ONE thing to SIDS or Autism or ANYTHING? Has anyone thought of ALL the chemicals that we PUMP into ourselves over our entire lifetimes – including in-utero? Let’s think about it….we CONSUME and are exposed to known neurotoxins (thank Monsanto and others for that). Research shows that they do cross the placenta and can get to the fetus. But does this ONE thing do anything? Maybe not! THEN we consume GMO’s (research is out on that one but some show some MAJOR problems). THEN we INJECT vaccines which enter the body directly – no first pass through the liver or anything. THEN we feed our children chemical laden foods. THEN we think it’s ok to have chemicals sprayed into our atmosphere to help with global warming (yes, this is a fact and can be researched!). THEN we have chemicals in our water – fluoride and more. I’ve left out a TON of stuff but do you see what I’m getting at? It’s not how we lay our babies down that causes SIDS – that is RIDICULOUS and just the MDs grabbing at straws! In my OPINION (yes, opinion), SIDS, Autism and other disease that we can’t find a cause COULD be attributed to the OVERALL effect of the changes in our bodies caused by small amounts of chemicals that we PUMP into ourselves on a daily basis. Our children are effected as well. It’s not ONE thing that is the cause…it’s the result of tons of stuff that we eat/consume/come in contact with on a daily basis that finally strikes. Again – an OPINION but one that actually makes rational sense.
Lets try this again (third time, my comment kept getting eaten!)
URLs for the studies are at the bottom of the page.
As for that GPO article, I am very familiar with the claims contained within. Mr. Burton is referencing the thoroughly debunked ‘research’ performed by former Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Granted, being written in 2003, it was only a couple years after his claims came to light, and before it was discovered he was involved in fraudulent research, owning a large share in a company about to release a competing vaccine (now there is a conflict of interest).
Consider this though. In the US, the untold numbers of pharmaceutical companies are in constant competition with each other. Its how the system works. So if one company discovered that an ingredient used by another was dangerous, it would be in their best interest to point this out and any that could would profit handsomely. Of course, they would have to be able to prove this through sound research or there would be strong legal ramifications.
The major alleged culprit in vaccine danger, thimerosal, is only used in a very small number of vaccines now anyway. While there has been absolutely no proven link between this substance and any disorders, pharm companies removed it anyway. in fact, due to its chemical make-up, the mercury contained in that chemical, while in exceedingly small amounts, is not bioavailable to our bodies, and is excreted very rapidly. Since thimerosal was removed though, the increasing trend in autism diagnoses has not decreased at all.
Finally, our bodies are bombarded by many viruses and bacteria every day. From cold bugs to S. aureus to CMV, it really is nonstop. The immune response caused by a vaccine is tiny in comparison to what our natural defenses go through 24 hours a day.
This is a somewhat technical link (pdf) backing up the last paragraph, and does require some background knowledge of the human immune system. Unfortunately, many good sources are locked behind pay-walls that are inaccessible without paying a substantial fee, though many public and university libraries will have access to these.
http://iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/ImmunizationSafety/Kollmann.pdf
SIDS – vaccine studies:
First one:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10649
Second:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11298074
Third:
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=348303
Fourth:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16945457
Lets try this again.
First one:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10649
Second:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11298074
Third:
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=348303
Fourth:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16945457
As for that GPO article, I am very familiar with the claims contained within. Mr. Burton is referencing the thoroughly debunked ‘research’ performed by former Dr. Andrew Wakefield. Granted, being written in 2003, it was only a couple years after his claims came to light, and before it was discovered he was involved in fraudulent research, owning a large share in a company about to release a competing vaccine (now there is a conflict of interest).
Consider this though. In the US, the untold numbers of pharmaceutical companies are in constant competition with each other. Its how the system works. So if one company discovered that an ingredient used by another was dangerous, it would be in their best interest to point this out and any that could would profit handsomely. Of course, they would have to be able to prove this through sound research or there would be strong legal ramifications.
The major alleged culprit in vaccine danger, thimerosal, is only used in a very small number of vaccines now anyway. While there has been absolutely no proven link between this substance and any disorders, pharm companies removed it anyway. in fact, due to its chemical make-up, the mercury contained in that chemical, while in exceedingly small amounts, is not bioavailable to our bodies, and is excreted very rapidly. Since thimerosal was removed though, the increasing trend in autism diagnoses has not decreased at all.
Finally, our bodies are bombarded by many viruses and bacteria every day. From cold bugs to S. aureus to CMV, it really is nonstop. The immune response caused by a vaccine is tiny in comparison to what our natural defenses go through 24 hours a day.
This is a somewhat technical link (pdf) backing up the last paragraph, and does require some background knowledge of the human immune system. Unfortunately, many good sources are locked behind pay-walls that are inaccessible without paying a substantial fee, though many public and university libraries will have access to these.
http://iom.edu/~/media/Files/Activity%20Files/PublicHealth/ImmunizationSafety/Kollmann.pdf
Hmm. I posted a comment with a link to 4 different studies about vaccines and SIDS, from sources around the world, and it never appeared.
Probably because URLs need to be scrutinized by a human to show that they are not sales/marketing links
Ah, that makes sense.
Bryce, you did not come across as rude or disrespectful at all. And you backed up your statements. Thank you! Again, my kiddos are vaccinated. We just spread them out to avoid overwhelming little immune systems. Our bodies rarely, if ever, are naturally exposed to multiple viruses simultaneously, so we don’t follow the CDC’s recommended schedule. In response to your statement about the cost of vaccinations…they may indeed cost a couple of dollars per shot, but they are charging several times that for them where I am located. Pharmaceutical companies are in the business to make money and they have been less than transparent which makes me suspicious. I will always question and research when it comes to the well being of my children. I do not trust any study about the safety of vaccines that the pharmaceutical companies have been involved in. There is an obvious conflict of interest. I would love to see an independent study on SIDS and vaccines. If you know of one, please cite it. A previous comment said that there have been several, but didn’t cite any. I would like to share something I recently read about vaccines. It is a long, but very interesting read. It begins on page 2 of this government document: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CREC-2003-05-21/pdf/CREC-2003-05-21-pt1-PgE1011-3.pdf
All kits with sids where vaccinated that was not a hard study
One:
http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=10649
Two:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11298074
Three:
http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=348303
Four (Plot twist: This one even suggests an inverse relation between the two):
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16945457
Brandy is correct on this one sorry
The vaccines and profit PRATT…I love it.
Here’s a quick breakdown for you Brandy. No rudeness or disrespect is intended. The average cost of a measles vaccine is, according to WHO, about one to two US dollars, including average cost of adverse effects[3][6]. The cost of the course of treatment for an individual with uncomplicated measles is around 300 USD[3].
Doesn’t sound like much, does it?
Complications are not uncommon and include pneumonia, diarrhea, and severe ear infections. The first two can be fatal, and indeed kill thousands upon thousands a year. The ear infections can cause permanent hearing loss in approximately one out of ten. Then there is the SSPE, subacute sclerosing panencephalitis[1][5]. This complication, unless treated very early, is almost completely fatal, occurring 1-3 years after initial infection. Even if it is treated early, the patient is required to take expensive medications (to the tune of hundreds of thousands of dollars, including hospitalizations) for the duration of his/her life, and still has a 50/50 chance of dying. Patients with other diseases that have a compromised immune system cannot receive these vaccines and rely on herd immunity to remain safe[1].
The majority of the victims of measles are young children. This disease could be wiped out by vaccinations, just like smallpox was. If ‘Big Pharma’ was all about profit, it would be far more profitable to NOT vaccinate children and allow measles to continue. For example, between 1999 and 2001 in Japan alone, measles caused roughly $404 million in damages, while the vaccination costs were only $165 million. Far more were vaccinated than those that contracted the disease (The outpatient treatment cost alone was enough to vaccinate around 1,000 people)[4].
Sources:
[1]http://pmj.bmj.com/content/78/916/63.full
[2]http://www.cdc.gov/measles/about/complications.html
[3]http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2458/2/22/
[4]http://www.biomedcentral.com/1472-6963/11/254
[5]http://www.nps.org.au/medicines/immune-system/vaccines-and-immunisation/for-individuals/vaccines-a-z/measles-mumps-and-rubella-mmr
[6]http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs286/en/
Please do not allow crackpot websites with an agenda of their own like NaturalNews and Age of Autism to color your thinking. There is plenty of good information out there, backed by good science conducted all over the world to research. Anecdotes and pseudoscience are not it, and this growing hysteria is killing people that should’ve otherwise never even been at risk.
Can we stop with the vaccine nonsense, Brandy? Melinda is right. The “hysteria” I’ve noticed is an increase in parents not vaccinating their children because of this psuedoscience as well as an increase of children dying of diseases that had previously been eradicated due to vaccines.
This article is awkwardly written, poorly expressed, and grammatically questionable. I’ve read better reports composed by eighth graders. Does the Guardian even employ an editor?
But if SIDS is indeed due to brainstem abnormaIities, how can you prevent these babies’ death? I mean, even if you manage to keep the baby alive during that first year, what guarantees you that she won’t die the next year? Don’t these kids die because the abnormality is incompatable with life in the first place, like miscarriages happen because of abnormalities that are even worse?
Because once the babies get past a certain age, they seem to overcome these vulnerabilities. Current SIDS prevention methods & education have reduced these deaths by around 50%, if I recall correctly, and we haven’t seen increased mortality in older age groups of those deaths who were prevented in infancy. It would seem that for these babies with this abnormality, the key is to get them to a certain age, probably 1-2 years old, by being able to diagnose them with this abnormality and then applying specific treatments to help regulate temperature, etc.
Melinda, with all due respect, which media source are you referring to? The only “hysteria” I have noticed is that of parents who are researching before they blindly let someone inject their child with something that has been “studied” by the people who are profiting the most from vaccines. My kids are vaccinated. I would just like to see a fair, unbiased study that doesn’t allow the pharmaceutical companies to be involved at all.
Brandy stop beating a dead horse. Vaccines as well as SIDS have been studied extensively. Let go of the unfounded media hysteria
They need to do a study that correlates timing of vaccines and SIDS. If vaccines are truly harmless, why not do the study?