Among the other problems I have with this (and I am extremely data- and research-driven myself) is that so many readers will come to the same conclusion that this NYT commenter did: "This article supports what has long been my general philosophy when it comes to my own kids: nothing really matters as long as I love and interact with them. Thanks for confirming!"

Saying X is 37% better than Y but sometimes harder to achieve because of Z does not equal "nothing really matters [but love]!" I definitely want people to know things like "so far we only see a small but significant benefit" instead of "IT'S SO AMAZING YOU MUST DO IT OR YOU ARE LITERALLY SATAN." I want them to understand things like "we don't have enough data yet" means that "WE KNOW FOR SURE THAT IF YOU DO X YOUR CHILD WILL BE A SUPERHARVARDGENIUS" is baloney. But those things *still mean* that there is a benefit to the first thing and we don't know *either way* about the second thing. They don't mean "eh, whatever, it doesn't really matter." I understand that is a backlash to the ridiculous expectations placed on mothers (much moreso than parents generally) to get everything "right." But it's not any more true.

So, this new book says that breastfeeding does have some benefits, but not as much as the breastfeeding militants claim. Also that sleep training is probably a net positive for the family. And that both working and staying at home has benefits and drawbacks.
I feel like this article just shut down 80% of dcum flame wars.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi Emily, I don't believe in getting health advice from an economist. Your advice about prenatal drinking was wrong.

Citation?

Or was it just wrong because you disagree with it morally?

Because I'm a scientist who studies brain development. I understand that lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack. I also understand that susceptibility to neurodevelopmental insults is going to be influenced by genotype. Do you know the hepatic enzyme genotype of your fetus? I'm guessing not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788102/

OMG. She knows big words. She must be right.

That’s the reaction you were hoping for, right?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi Emily, I don't believe in getting health advice from an economist. Your advice about prenatal drinking was wrong.

Citation?

Or was it just wrong because you disagree with it morally?

Because I'm a scientist who studies brain development. I understand that lack of evidence isn't evidence of lack. I also understand that susceptibility to neurodevelopmental insults is going to be influenced by genotype. Do you know the hepatic enzyme genotype of your fetus? I'm guessing not.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4788102/

So great, thanks for posting!

I love Emily Oster and data-driven parenting, but I recognize that it doesn't resonate with everyone. For example the alcohol in pregnancy issue. While many people point to to data and believe (as I do) that the risks are over stated I understand that some people still aren't comfortable with it despite evidence to the contrary. I do wish those same people would admit that that's their own decision to make and not judge others for making more evidence based decisions for themselves and their babies.

Love it. Seriously.

Anonymous wrote:If, like me, you relied on this book for data-driven, useful information about pregnancy, this article gives a taste of her upcoming book- the bit on breastfeeding alone is worth a read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/sunday/baby-breastfeeding-sleep-training.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage

OMG. I will be buying a copy! Yes to everything in the article about breastfeeding. And sleep training!

Thanks for posting.

Anonymous wrote:Great article! Its going ot be a full book?

According to the article:

Emily Oster, an economics professor at Brown, is the author of “Expecting Better” and the forthcoming “Cribsheet: A Data-Driven Guide to Better, More Relaxed Parenting, From Birth to Preschool,” from which this essay is adapted.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hi Emily, I don't believe in getting health advice from an economist. Your advice about prenatal drinking was wrong.

Citation?

Or was it just wrong because you disagree with it morally?

+1 Seriously. She did a review of all the available studies, and then she left it up to the reader to make an informed decision. Not sure what part of that you could disagree with.

I enjoyed her book on pregnancy. I'm well past the baby stage now so a lot of the new book will probably not be relevant to me, but I may read it anyway for kicks.

Great article! Its going ot be a full book?

Anonymous wrote:Hi Emily, I don't believe in getting health advice from an economist. Your advice about prenatal drinking was wrong.

Citation?

Or was it just wrong because you disagree with it morally?

Hi Emily, I don't believe in getting health advice from an economist. Your advice about prenatal drinking was wrong.

If, like me, you relied on this book for data-driven, useful information about pregnancy, this article gives a taste of her upcoming book- the bit on breastfeeding alone is worth a read.

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/04/19/opinion/sunday/baby-breastfeeding-sleep-training.html?action=click&module=Opinion&pgtype=Homepage