this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
226 points (93.8% liked)
Lemmy Be Wholesome
9957 readers
61 users here now
Welcome to Lemmy Be Wholesome. This is the polar opposite of LemmeShitpost. Here you can post wholesome memes, palate cleanser and good vibes.
The home to heal your soul. No bleak-posting!
Rules:
1. Be Respectful
Refrain from using harmful language pertaining to a protected characteristic: e.g. race, gender, sexuality, disability or religion.
Refrain from being argumentative when responding or commenting to posts/replies. Personal attacks are not welcome here.
...
2. No Illegal Content
Content that violates the law. Any post/comment found to be in breach of common law will be removed and given to the authorities if required.
That means: -No promoting violence/threats against any individuals
-No CSA content or Revenge Porn
-No sharing private/personal information (Doxxing)
...
3. No Spam
Posting the same post, no matter the intent is against the rules.
-If you have posted content, please refrain from re-posting said content within this community.
-Do not spam posts with intent to harass, annoy, bully, advertise, scam or harm this community.
-No posting Scams/Advertisements/Phishing Links/IP Grabbers
-No Bots, Bots will be banned from the community.
...
4. No Porn/Explicit
Content
-Do not post explicit content. Lemmy.World is not the instance for NSFW content.
-Do not post Gore or Shock Content.
...
5. No Enciting Harassment,
Brigading, Doxxing or Witch Hunts
-Do not Brigade other Communities
-No calls to action against other communities/users within Lemmy or outside of Lemmy.
-No Witch Hunts against users/communities.
-No content that harasses members within or outside of the community.
...
6. No NSFW Content
-Content shouldn't be NSFW
-Refrain from posting triggering content, if the content might be triggering try putting it behind NSFW tags.
7. Content should be Wholesome, we accept cute cats, kittens, puppies, dogs and anything, everything that restores your faith in humanity!
Content that isn't wholesome will be removed.
...
8. Reposting of Reddit content is permitted, try to credit the OC.
-Please consider crediting the OC when reposting content. A name of the user or a link to the original post is sufficient.
...
- No politics. So no mentioning government officials etc
Also check out:
Partnered Communities:
...
Reach out to @LadyButterfly@piefed.blahaj.zone for inclusion on the sidebar.
All communities included on the sidebar are to be made in compliance with the instance rules.~~___~~___
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Whoop whoop, that's the sound of the breast feeding police!
Fact is that most of this is, at best, pseudo science and shouldn't be spread. There's nothing wrong with breast feeding, but it's treated like a religion.
Correlating breast feeding with SIDS is some ol' bullshit. Be better. link
I'll agree that there's a lot of conflicting information when it comes to parenting, it's called the mommy wars for a reason. But, I'll disagree with you that I provides pseudoscience. I'll direct you specifically to references 11 through 13 in the link I provided. They are dated, but peer-reviewed.
I'm also confused by your link, it appears to be a meta-analysis which "found ample evidence that both breastfeeding and [pacifier] use reduced the risk of SIDS."
Overall, I like Cribsheet's stance again - the best baby is a fed baby, the difference between a breastfed baby and a formula-fed baby are very minor and do not result in any persistent, dramatic differences.
The Odds ratio in your research is tiny, and the paper I linked shows that a pacifier has the same effect. You're ignoring the underlying reasons (such as lighter sleeping) and just looking at poor conclusions of research as though it's fact.
The ample evidence is the correlation, which is weak. If you think that pacifiers and breastfeeding both reduce risk of SIDS, then logically it's a phenomenon of an underlying driver and not breastfeeding per se. That's correlation, not causation.
Ah, the old effect size vs significance issue, thanks for clarifying. I perused the link you sent, I didn't do a deep dive. The authors could have used more precise language.
Here's a second paper from 2017, https://eprints.gla.ac.uk/151483/1/151483.pdf , which looks at duration of breastfeeding and SIDS. Not sure if you've come across it, but I was surprised to see the potential protective factors don't begin until breastfeeding has gone on for at least 2 months.
Unfortunately I think the odds that we get a randomized clinical trial looking at breast vs formula are low - I didn't find one in my brief Google Scholar search, but I'm also not a pediatrician.
But, ultimately, the first link i provided includes breastfeeding as part of a larger suite of recommendations for co-sleeping that, if all are followed, bring the risk of SIDS down to a comparable rate with modern safe sleep recommendations.
This could be an automated reply based on keywords in your comment. If so, then I imagine the bot was likely meant to argue with anyone who said breastfeeding increased SIDS risk.
As a FTM this year, I am so tired of the mom police saying everything is dangerous without really understanding the contributing factors to go with the risk, and without considering the magnitude of the risk. Yesterday I saw a lady getting corrected online about babywearing while toe deep on the edge of a creek because she might fall in the shallow water and her baby would drown.
Or it could not be a bot, but a parent who actually read up on the topic when his kid was born... Your call, really.