Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

WIBU to have one small beer at 5 weeks pregnant?

398 replies

BlackberryQ · 26/08/2017 16:36

It's a lovely wedding celebration outside on a hot day. How much harm could it do?

I'm on the fence and you can talk me out of it if it's really a bad idea!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
SenatorBunghole · 27/08/2017 14:05

No reborn, that's not what I'm asking you. At all.

I'm asking you whether you feel the need to advise people to advise all substances and behaviours that don't have a 100% proven safe level for pregnant women. A different question.

SenatorBunghole · 27/08/2017 14:06

To avoid, sorry, not advise.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 14:06

And yes, I've read a lot of Hepper's work as it happens. Not all of it. Only those concerning fetal development as that is my primary area of interest. You've probably read them all though.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 14:08

No. I "feel the need", as you put it, to advise women to avoid substances that are proven harmful. In fact, it's an professional obligation that I do so.

SenatorBunghole · 27/08/2017 14:11

What, a professional obligation to advise posters on Mumsnet? Fascinating.

Anyway, glad we've clarified. You apply double standards, demanding different standards of proof for alcohol than you do for other risks. Excellent. Readers will draw their own conclusions.

grandOlejukeofYork · 27/08/2017 14:13

I'm talking about the one that deals specifically with low level alcohol consumption in pregnancy

There isn't ONE that deals with that, there are several. It's quite clear you haven't read them, but you could have a look now if you are interested?
But the one you specifically refer to was published very early in 2015, not 2016.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 14:15

@Senator, seriously I don't know what you're even talking about! No, I have a professional obligation in my real life profession. You silly goose Grin

However, as with most things on MN, when a poster asks a question that I have a bit of knowledge around, I'm happy to chip in. So I did.

I demand nothing by the way. I am on a thread dealing with alcohol in pregnancy. If and when a thread dealing with cheese or sky diving or whatever it is you are angling towards comes up, I might just wade in there too.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 14:17

Nope @grandolejuke, the book I'm referring to was published in 2016. We're obviously talking about two different publications? Can you send me a link to yours? Not sure which one your referring to.

grandOlejukeofYork · 27/08/2017 14:23

The study was published in early 2015. I have no idea what book you found it in, but obviously that would come after the studies it refers to.

SenatorBunghole · 27/08/2017 14:23

Yes, the fact that you don't understand what I'm talking about shines out brightly.

LisaSimpsonsbff · 27/08/2017 14:30

I have no particular horse in this race between reborn and grandole but I do have institutional access, which makes it clear that reborn is referring to the chapter 'Observing the Fetus’ Behavior to Assess Health: The Behavior of the Human Fetus in Response to Maternal Alcohol Consumption' which was indeed published in Fetal Development Research on Brain and Behavior, Environmental Influences, and Emerging Technologies, a book edited by Nadja Reissland, Barbara S. Kisilevsky and which was published by Springer in 2016.

LisaSimpsonsbff · 27/08/2017 14:32

It isn't my field, but it looks like it's a review article to me.

grandOlejukeofYork · 27/08/2017 14:34

But surely it is obvious that the BOOK is referencing previously published studies? Reborn seems to think that the book is where the research comes from, rather than the fact that the book, and that chapter in particular, references a great number of studies, and the specific info she mentions comes from various studies dated between the ealy 1990's and 2015?

LisaSimpsonsbff · 27/08/2017 14:38

Yes, it's a review article, as I said. However, by drawing together disparate studies it is possible for such an article to make a genuine contribution to knowledge. As I said, I don't have the knowledge to make my own judgement and nor do I wish to get drawn into the argument, but I did think it was unfair to act as if she had invented the existence of the piece in question.

grandOlejukeofYork · 27/08/2017 14:40

I didn't say or intimate that the piece did not exist. Reborn very rudely suggested that I had not read the relevant research at the time I said I had, when all she had read was a 13 page summary of lots of previous studies (a summary which, by the way, added nothing new to the subject by way of information or analysis).

EssentialHummus · 27/08/2017 14:41

I'm not going to weigh in on this substantively having not read beyond the first and last pages. My two cents as a very pregnant person - this is just one of many (many) potentially guilt-provoking but practically minor decisions you'll need to make regarding your child. Learn to confidently reach your own decisions, because otherwise you'll soon go nuts with the stress.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 14:56

'Rude' @grandolejuke? I don't think I've been rude at all actually. You though...

Anyway, still waiting to see the piece of work out of all the pieces you've read that has convinced you with absolute certainty that alcohol in pregnancy is safe. It must be outstanding to meet your approval.

RebornSlippy · 27/08/2017 15:01

Anyway, as fun as this is, I've gotta go. Things to do etc. Sunday in the Slippy household requires my attention. Might pop in again later. Might not. You don't care, I know. Just didn't want to ghost you.

grandOlejukeofYork · 27/08/2017 15:05

Anyway, still waiting to see the piece of work out of all the pieces you've read that has convinced you with absolute certainty that alcohol in pregnancy is safe. It must be outstanding to meet your approval

This sums up your complete and fundamental misunderstanding of how science works and why you appear to want to prove a negative. There isn't one single piece of work, how could there be? You don't understand the science, you don't understand publishing, you don't understand referencing.
Please stop advising people when you haven't got the basics.

PencilsInSpace · 27/08/2017 16:36

The JAMA study uses standard drinks as the measure, not units. A standard drink in Australia contains 10g of alcohol, whereas a UK unit contains 8g of alcohol.

7 AU standard drinks is 8.75 units. I haven't seen anybody advocating that level of drinking per week in pregnancy.

Happydoingitjusttheonce · 27/08/2017 17:04

Are you craving a beer? If so then just push on through the craving because it won't stop at one beer. If you're not craving a beer then just have a soft drink instead.

OutComeTheWolves · 27/08/2017 19:45

God this thread is infuriating. The truth is we try so hard to control our pregnancies but it's sadly one of the few things in life we can't really do anything about. If something is going to go wrong with a foetus, then it will go wrong and there's very little you can do to stop it. If a foetus is viable and healthy, there's very little you can do to fuck that up. Its largely out of our hands.

Get yourself a copy of Expecting Better - it's awesome. Although I do agree some people like all the fuss that comes with following all of the rules!

sunglassally · 27/08/2017 20:03

Strange how women had children during war, pestilence, plague, and famine.

If they didn't few of us would be here now.

Women are castigating women here who might have a glass of beer or wine during pg. I cannot believe it. And no proof of the danger either. Someone somewhere decided that pg women needed to be controlled, and so it has come to pass.

It is really nice to be so superior and omniscient isn't it. Would you all feck off back in your judgmental boxes and read some feminist material.

nolongersurprised · 27/08/2017 21:17

pencil low level equals seven or fewer.

The Australian guidelines are for no alcohol during pregnancy, I'm surprised that the UK is otherwise. FAS is becoming a big thing here though.

I can't see how the guidelines can be otherwise. If it's accepted that alcohol is teratogenic and that there's a dose-response effect then threads like this always have the dissenters saying that :
Sure, y level of consumption is loads but x level is ok, and there's no evidence that x is harmful.

X is usually a few drinks a week, or whatever the dissenter drinks/has drunk during pregnancy.

But if you're writing guideline you need to consider all of the other factors that are related to x such as the pregnant woman's size, her ability to metabolise alcohol, whether she's eaten etc. Bearing in mind as well that a fetus receives close to 100% of the ingested alcohol and then has delayed clearance of it as it hangs around in amniotic fluid.

And then you look at fetal issues. Sure, a fetus likely to have normal cognitive ability, normal executive function and normal impulse control is less likely to be affected by low level exposure, but one fated to have ADHD and/or learning problems is at greater risk.

sunglass I don't personally feel that learning about how a fetus metabolises alcohol is controlling, but each to their own, I suppose.

PencilsInSpace · 27/08/2017 21:45

pencil low level equals seven or fewer.

But 7 AU standard drinks is NOT low level and from this study we have no way of working out the difference between people who drank that amount and those who drank at actual low levels.

The Australian guidelines are for no alcohol during pregnancy, I'm surprised that the UK is otherwise. FAS is becoming a big thing here though.

The guidelines in the UK are now 'no alcohol during pregnancy'. The guidelines are not based on any evidence they are based on how stupid Public Health think women are.

I can't see how the guidelines can be otherwise.

Can you really not? I can. We could have guidelines that start with 'the evidence shows...' and then go on to tell the truth about what the evidence shows for various levels of drinking, right down to the level with 'no evidence of harm'. This would require crediting women with a modicum of intelligence though so I can appreciate the problem.

If it's accepted that alcohol is teratogenic and that there's a dose-response effect then threads like this always have the dissenters saying that: Sure, y level of consumption is loads but x level is ok, and there's no evidence that x is harmful.

And they'd be right! I posted earlier on the thread about the dangers of all-or-nothing public health messages:

  • people made needlessly anxious over immeasurably small risks
  • people left with no useful scale of harm once they've broken the all-or-nothing rule
  • people losing trust in all Public Health messages once they clock on they are being told bollocks