New findings about alcohol: even low amounts can influence baby's development

milkbar

I have come across this article today and thought this study could help someone to make their choice on whether they can have an occasional glass of wine during pregnancy. Though it doesn't say that a small amount of alcohol is harmful for baby's cognitive abilities, unfortunately, it can alter face features even during second and third trimesters. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/r-drinking-in-pregnancy-tied-to-subtle-changes-in-babies-faces-2017-6

UPD. After seeing surprisingly negative feedback about this article, I want to add a couple of clarifying words here. First of all, my post is not advice and it's not meant to teach you, offend you or judge you about your choices. This is just information for consideration.

Second, I shared it because for me these finding are a big deal. I was sure it's perfectly fine to have a glass of wine on a special occasion from time to time. However, that study really surprised me that the second and third trimester can be affected by alcohol consumption, I never heard that before.

It's sad but it made me reconsider my opinion. This article helped me to make a decision, maybe it will be useful for somebody else too. Those who find this information faulty or disagree with it, please share your opinion constructively, without offense or sarcasm. 

Please note, the study talks only about very subtle changes in the baby's faces, which are not harmful or influence any cognitive capabilities. These changes are so small you can't even see them with a naked eye. And not all babies get affected. So ladies, who like me allowed yourselves a glass of wine, our babies will be perfectly fine!! )

PS. The link to the abstract of the actual study https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2630627
Jama is a peer-reviewed general medical journal.

vvitchhazel

Well, my daughter's face is perfect so I think I'll take that chance again.

Amber_Waves

Sorry, that's not science.  

The research it links to from JAMA is a very brief write-up with no info on statistical significance. Further, it does not appear to be peer reviewed. 

milkbar

@vvitchhazel  I think, they say here or in another article about this study that changes are 2mm at most which is invisible to a naked eye. But the fact that alcohol can do that is a bit scary to me. 

milkbar

@Amber_Waves You can find more numbers from the study if you google it. As to the peer review, you may be very right. I am keen to hear more scientific opinions on these findings. 

ameliabedelia-2

ameliabedelia-2

Can we somehow link this post under the "crappy unsolicited advice you've received" thread?? 

abcola

Thank you @ameliabedelia-2 or inorder to post something like this you need to have read 'Expexting Better' by Emily Oster who reviewed all sorts of studies about the taboo topics. 

failuretofly

So by the logic of this article, since I knew I was KU from the day I conceived and abstained from the juice throughout 1st tri, I'm good to go now! Thanks! 

In case you're interested in the results of the actual study instead of an inflammatory journalists perspective:
"Of the 415 children in the study (195 girls and 220 boys; mean [SD] age, 363.0 [8.3] days), a consistent association between craniofacial shape and prenatal alcohol exposure was observed at almost any level regardless of whether exposure occurred only in the first trimester or throughout pregnancy. Regions of difference were concentrated around the midface, nose, lips, and eyes. Directional visualization showed that these differences corresponded to general recession of the midface and superior displacement of the nose, especially the tip of the nose, indicating shortening of the nose and upturning of the nose tip. Differences were most pronounced between groups with no exposure and groups with low exposure in the first trimester (forehead), moderate to high exposure in the first trimester (eyes, midface, chin, and parietal region), and binge-level exposure in the first trimester (chin)."

From here: https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2630627

milkbar

@abcola The study that she refers to in her book can be misleading too. Some say, the fact babies exposed to alcohol in pregnancy show higher cognitive abilities is not because it's healthy or safe but because moms who tend to have drinks during pregnancy are higher paid employed intellectual women who can give a better upbringing. The study above by the way is not about cognitive possibilities but facial changes. Anyways, I am here not to ague but to say that there is a new study moms-to-be might want to consider when they are making a choice. 

milkbar

@ameliabedelia-2  This is not advice, this is information for consideration. 

milkbar

I don't judge anyone's choices. It's none of my business or interest. But i do care to share information that can be of other people's interest.

milkbar

ameliabedelia-2 said:

@ameliabedelia-2 I don't judge anyone's choices. It's none of my business or interest. But i do care to share information that can be of other people's interest. If you find this information faulty, better share with us information why we shouldn't be concerned about these findings. Your sarcasm doesn't contribute anything to the discussion and makes wrong impression about me, which is offensive.

failuretofly

@milkbar based on the study, the primary findings were on alcohol consumption in the 1st tri. Most of us are past the 1st tri. So if you are actually concerned about the results then you're basically telling everyone who may have had a drink, whether they knew they were pregnant or not, that they're bad mom's and they fucked up and it will be on their baby's face for everyone to see. Because it's too late for any of us to go back now and change the decisions we made in the first trimester. 

What exactly was your purpose of sharing this, exactly?

milkbar

kvacmak said:

@milkbar based on the study, the primary findings were on alcohol consumption in the 1st tri. Most of us are past the 1st tri. So if you are actually concerned about the results then you're basically telling everyone who may have had a drink, whether they knew they were pregnant or not, that they're bad mom's and they fucked up and it will be on their baby's face for everyone to see. Because it's too late for any of us to go back now and change the decisions we made in the first trimester. 

What exactly was your purpose of sharing this, exactly?

@kvacmak This is study relates to all trimesters:
"a consistent association between craniofacial shape and prenatal alcohol exposure was observed at almost any level regardless of whether exposure occurred only in the first trimester or throughout pregnancy". 
So this information can be still useful.

PoeMasque

Why does no one post the studies that link MALE drinking to FAS??? Ok ok, so it was only done in rats so far, but come on, when do men take their share of the blame here?? 

Im secretly sure all sorts of things are linked to mens choices pre-conception......but who wants to blame men right? (I'm picturing the surprised look on my partner's face when the IF clinic nurse told HIM to limit drinking the month we did IVF, it was awesome, plus I got to say I told you so )

milkbar

@PoeMasque You are totally right. Male pre-conception choices influence 50% of the outcome. Alcohol and certain drugs affect the sperm count, mobility and most importantly - its mophology. Which in its turn can lead to abnormailities in development and miscarriges. Considering that sperm renews within 3 months, men should be on a more strict regimen before and during TTC then us! ))

lund

***TOTAL DIRTY LURKER***

Does anyone else find it strange that this is OP's first day posting and she apparently knows ALL THE THINGS?

Guise, you're so lucky to have such an intellectual giant randomly burst through the proverbial Dec BMB door like the Kool-Aid man!

jlemons-2

Aww thanks! She provided advice to me on another thread as well. 

milkbar

@lund Nothing strange. Am I not allowed to express my opinion if I haven't posted before? Or to be part of this forum I need to deserve approval of its regulars first? I haven't seen it in the rules. It's not very friendly. 

jlemons-2

@Lund was making the point that we are a community of people who post regularly after introducing ourselves to one another. Therefore, yes, no one cares about your opinion. 

flowerpower5838

Well this forum is a community; do you regularly go up to a group of strangers IRL giving unsolicited advice? This is no different, we just all happen to be behind screens. It's not about "regulars" it's about reading the pinned post that says READ THIS FIRST, introducing yourself, participating in the back and forth that is a community and then of course sharing information that some may find useful in a non-judgemental, open-discussion manner. 

milkbar

@Amber_Waves just found out, the Jama magazine is peer-reviewed.

milkbar

@flowerpower5838 Please read my update to the post about advice and judgements as well my other comments in the thread on this topic... I believe my mistake is that I didn't realize that the culture of this forum obliges you have to be an active and known user here to post. I personally have a very limited time to monitor and participate in discussions. I guess that limits my right to share and I have to accept it. Too sad, that information sharing is not the primary goal here. You have to build your relationships to have a say.

vvitchhazel

@milkbar Like I said in the other post, a little blurb that said hey, I haven't contributed yet but here is a little bit about me and I saw this article fellow moms might be interested in, it would've been received differently. You don't necessarily have to build relationships to have a say, but try making it a little more personal... The whole purpose behind these forums is finding support and friendship with other woman. Can you understand how walking in when no one knows you and bringing up a controversial topic, maybe isn't the best thing to do? 

alysapuggles

@milkbar We all have limited time. We all have lives outside of TB, and we do welcome newbies. The difference is we introduced ourselves to the group and read the pinned newbie posts to get a feel for the board before unleashing articles that can come across as judgemental and inflammatory. That may not have been your intention, but that is how it comes across. This forum is not like a lot of others where you just hop in and hop out. We actually value getting to know each other and having a community, so yes, we stick by those rules. It's very much worth it.

milkbar

@vvitchhazel @alysapuggles I wish I got this explanation right after I posted the discussion instead of being attacked. I am glad we have figured that out. I've have just added my introduction and added an update to my post which hopefully will make people more comfortable reading it.

eazybreezy225

anewadventure

i appreciate your update as an attempt to be civil. 

however.

telling internet strangers that they should post without sarcasm or offense? insisting that all discussion be constructive? this is not your workplace. this is not how the internet works. 

i don't feel i should have to explain this to you. you don't get to decide the rules for how people respond to your posts. in particular, if you are going to post topics that are touchy or inflammatory subjects, yet expect only polite and sweet responses, your grasp on reality is suspect. 

here, allow me to close with a typically passive-aggressive statement that usually makes OPs like you feel better: Hope that helps! Happy and Healthy 9 months! We're all here for support! Blah blah blah. 

Amber_Waves

I'm glad to hear that JAMA is peer-reviewed.
Does anyone have access to the full text of the article?

Because, as I mentioned above, there is no information about statistical significance in the abstract.  
Meaning:  there might be a measurable difference in the average cuteness of the noses, but we have no idea how likely it is that the difference is due to chance alone.  Typically, they have to be 95% sure, based on statistical modeling, that the difference is not due to chance, but they don't provide that information. 

Also, the study, as described, can only show correlation (if there is statistical significance) not causation (it's not an experiment, it's an enhanced survey); so "alcohol can influence"  is poor language choice as "influence" implies causation.  

AMCsquared

i think i'm the only one who wasn't bothered by this post, but hey i'm here to read the ongoing comments. (repeating popcorn GIF from above lol)

lund

milkbar said:

I have come across this article today and thought this study could help someone to make their choice on whether they can have an occasional glass of wine during pregnancy. Though it doesn't say that a small amount of alcohol is harmful for baby's cognitive abilities, unfortunately, it can alter face features even during second and third trimesters. 

https://www.businessinsider.com/r-drinking-in-pregnancy-tied-to-subtle-changes-in-babies-faces-2017-6

UPD. After seeing surprisingly negative feedback about this article, I want to add a couple of clarifying words here. First of all, my post is not advice and it's not meant to teach you, offend you or judge you about your choices. This is just information for consideration.

Second, I shared it because for me these finding are a big deal. I was sure it's perfectly fine to have a glass of wine on a special occasion from time to time. However, that study really surprised me that the second and third trimester can be affected by alcohol consumption, I never heard that before.

It's sad but it made me reconsider my opinion. This article helped me to make a decision, maybe it will be useful for somebody else too. Those who find this information faulty or disagree with it, please share your opinion constructively, without offense or sarcasm. 

Please note, the study talks only about very subtle changes in the baby's faces, which are not harmful or influence any cognitive capabilities. These changes are so small you can't even see them with a naked eye. And not all babies get affected. So ladies, who like me allowed yourselves a glass of wine, our babies will be perfectly fine!! )

PS. The link to the abstract of the actual study https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2630627
Jama is a peer-reviewed general medical journal.

milkbar said:

@vvitchhazel  I think, they say here or in another article about this study that changes are 2mm at most which is invisible to a naked eye. But the fact that alcohol can do that is a bit scary to me. 

milkbar said:

@Amber_Waves You can find more numbers from the study if you google it. As to the peer review, you may be very right. I am keen to hear more scientific opinions on these findings. 

milkbar said:

@abcola The study that she refers to in her book can be misleading too. Some say, the fact babies exposed to alcohol in pregnancy show higher cognitive abilities is not because it's healthy or safe but because moms who tend to have drinks during pregnancy are higher paid employed intellectual women who can give a better upbringing. The study above by the way is not about cognitive possibilities but facial changes. Anyways, I am here not to ague but to say that there is a new study moms-to-be might want to consider when they are making a choice. 

milkbar said:

@ameliabedelia-2  This is not advice, this is information for consideration. 

milkbar said:

I don't judge anyone's choices. It's none of my business or interest. But i do care to share information that can be of other people's interest.

milkbar said:

ameliabedelia-2 said:

@ameliabedelia-2 I don't judge anyone's choices. It's none of my business or interest. But i do care to share information that can be of other people's interest. If you find this information faulty, better share with us information why we shouldn't be concerned about these findings. Your sarcasm doesn't contribute anything to the discussion and makes wrong impression about me, which is offensive.

milkbar said:

kvacmak said:

@milkbar based on the study, the primary findings were on alcohol consumption in the 1st tri. Most of us are past the 1st tri. So if you are actually concerned about the results then you're basically telling everyone who may have had a drink, whether they knew they were pregnant or not, that they're bad mom's and they fucked up and it will be on their baby's face for everyone to see. Because it's too late for any of us to go back now and change the decisions we made in the first trimester. 

What exactly was your purpose of sharing this, exactly?

@kvacmak This is study relates to all trimesters:
"a consistent association between craniofacial shape and prenatal alcohol exposure was observed at almost any level regardless of whether exposure occurred only in the first trimester or throughout pregnancy". 
So this information can be still useful.

milkbar said:

@PoeMasque You are totally right. Male pre-conception choices influence 50% of the outcome. Alcohol and certain drugs affect the sperm count, mobility and most importantly - its mophology. Which in its turn can lead to abnormailities in development and miscarriges. Considering that sperm renews within 3 months, men should be on a more strict regimen before and during TTC then us! ))

milkbar said:

@lund Nothing strange. Am I not allowed to express my opinion if I haven't posted before? Or to be part of this forum I need to deserve approval of its regulars first? I haven't seen it in the rules. It's not very friendly. 

milkbar said:

@Amber_Waves just found out, the Jama magazine is peer-reviewed.

milkbar said:

@flowerpower5838 Please read my update to the post about advice and judgements as well my other comments in the thread on this topic... I believe my mistake is that I didn't realize that the culture of this forum obliges you have to be an active and known user here to post. I personally have a very limited time to monitor and participate in discussions. I guess that limits my right to share and I have to accept it. Too sad, that information sharing is not the primary goal here. You have to build your relationships to have a say.

milkbar said:

@vvitchhazel @alysapuggles I wish I got this explanation right after I posted the discussion instead of being attacked. I am glad we have figured that out. I've have just added my introduction and added an update to my post which hopefully will make people more comfortable reading it.

milkbar said:

@flowerpower5838 Please read my update to the post about advice and judgements as well my other comments in the thread on this topic... I believe my mistake is that I didn't realize that the culture of this forum obliges you have to be an active and known user here to post. I personally have a very limited time to monitor and participate in discussions. I guess that limits my right to share and I have to accept it. Too sad, that information sharing is not the primary goal here. You have to build your relationships to have a say.

Just grabbing the QFP since OP likes to edits posts. 

ETA spoiler.

***back to lurking***

dkizz82

AMCsquared said:

i think i'm the only one who wasn't bothered by this post, but hey i'm here to read the ongoing comments. (repeating popcorn GIF from above lol)

I'm not bothered by it. Maybe because i don't drink anyway.  I don't know. It's interesting seeing everyone's perspective. 

milkbar

@Amber_Waves This is a good point. I haven't found the full description, I hope it'll become available. The only additional peace of information I have just found is a beginning of the article in Jama magazine about this study https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/2630625

elcd458

@AMCsquared @dkizz82

Same.

Also-- and I'm not suggesting anyone here falls into this category, as really I haven't seen anyone on the Dec 17 BMB yet who I would consider a sanctimommy, including OP-- but I've always been intrigued by friends IRL who feel they must defend their decision to do things during pregnancy that may be disputed (such as alcohol consumption), but are the first to flame someone post-birth for something like using a nonorganic sunscreen on baby, or formula-feeding, or what have you. Meanwhile, I'm like "Hey, all of our children will be telling their therapists in 20-30 years that we screwed them up, so can't we all just give each other a little grace right now?" 

failuretofly

@lund
as per usual, the most helpful lurker/poster out there  

Of course my alumni university journal access doesn't have JAMA pediatrics...

clovelyone

@AMCsquared @dkizz82 @elcd458 This post didn't bother me either. I know that there are conflicting studies on the issue so to me it was just informational. I also don't really care if she's posted before or not. If a post doesn't seem interesting or statistically significant, I can choose not to continue reading it or just skip it from the beginning. I think the timing may have seemed a little fishy to those who just had a discussion about having a drink, but I guess I'm just the type who doesn't care what other people think. I mean, I know this is the internet, but I just don't understand why things have to be such a big deal. To me, it's like the "gender" guessing posts. I know the rules state that people shouldn't post that, but I think one person pointing the OP to the rules should be enough rather than 5 people getting attitudes about it and going back and forth with the OP. Especially if it's someone who has never posted. I think ignoring those posts (besides having one person note the rules) would be just as effective. I guess I should probably post this as an unpopular opinion because it seems like a lot of people enjoy the drama. If this is a community where we want to get to know each other, why be rude because someone skipped or possibly missed a rule? 

shellac835

@elcd458  ha, yep, exactly!!

AMCsquared

@clovelyone YESSSSSS. all of this exacttttlyyy!!! I really don't give a shit if someone hasn't posted before.

splsmama2016

I needed something to make me chuckle as I sit here with my 1.5oz of white wine. Thanks guys!!

PoeMasque

There are definitely people on here who spend way too much time on these boards and seem to delight in roasting people for the slightest infraction. 

This is is why I have such a hard time getting the families I work with to actually meet other parents in person, if you're going to be roasted online, just imagine what horrors await you IRL. Makes me sad. Being a human is hard enough, but add being a self conscious parent to that and it's downright miserable.

to be honest, it's part of the reason women were the last group to get the vote, and why we still haven't had a female president.....if we practiced a little more "bro-mentality" instead of being hyper-critical, we could truly rule the world as we were meant to.