To be slightly worried my child may become seriously ill now?

[walktothefront]

Because he's 14 months and has never been ill, not even a cold.

This man says for an immune system to work properly, it needs to be confronted with an infection in the first year of life.

This article says this, I've copied in a picture. This man is supposedly supported by lots of cancer research companies, and he has received or is going to receive an honour for his research and findings.

It's from The Guardian so less likely to be completely BS

I wouldn’t worry too much. Go to soft play, playgroup and meet friends with other children and i’m sure your little one will catch a bug. X

I read that earlier - he seems to be implying that the overuse of cleaning agents combined with a growing unwillingness to let children get exposed to everyday dirt and germs is at the root of the theory. Doesn’t surprise me. Read any thread on here about the incredible lengths some go to to sterilise every single surface and make the connection.

Sounds like utter bollocks to me. What are his sources/qualifications?

My DD had leukaemia when she was 6.... she WAS ill in first year of life. Still a lot of uncertainty around causes of leukaemia

My friends child never got sick. Not once. For the first 4 years of her life. Not even a sniffle. She started school and has been ill for the last two years. It will happen

We love to sterile. That’s a well known fact

I have a friend whose son has Leukaemia. He was alway sick. Then suddenly got a cold. That would t go away.

I'm sure your child has encountered illness and infection, even if not caught it themselves.

It's not bollocks. There's lots of evidence that cleaning homes in the way that a lot of people seem to do now is seriously affecting our health.

I saw this too. Not the Guardian link though. He's an academic/scientist working in cancer research...I'll see if I can find a decent link.

Anyway I read it as if they hadn't been exposed to enough germs in the first year...I don't remember DS being ill at all in his first year but I'm sure he was exposed to plenty of stuff.

You don't know that your baby hasn't had an infection though. If he caught one that he had inherited antibodies from, you might not have noticed anything was amiss.

Yes but first of all your child needs to be in the 1 in 20 that has an existing genetic mutation... far more likely that they don’t. They would also then need to have a second chance genetic mutation at a later date, which is more likely if they’ve had no immune challenges but not definite. Also did you bf at all? Because that is protective and it also provides antibodies to help fight infections which may mean your child’s immune system was active and you just never saw any symptoms.
If it was as simple as 1 in 20 children who never had an obvious illness in first year of life the rate of leukaemia in children would be way higher. Try not to worry and maybe let them eat the odd cheerio off the floor

Sounds like utter bollocks to me. What are his sources/qualifications?

Easy enough to find out. Not as if he’s well known in the scientific community...

www.icr.ac.uk/news-archive/pioneering-scientist-mel-greaves-is-knighted-after-research-to-unveil-cause-of-childhood-leukaemia

Just because he hasn't shown symptoms of an infection, it doesn't mean he hasn't come into contact with an infection

Our house is generally a tip, multiple pets including a licky ddog and a dcat who's feet occasionally land on the table .
Apart from a dc with a medical condition, my under 16 dc have had 100% attendence their full school lives.
No coughs /colds /d&v /bug.
Nothing.
Imo that article is claptrap.

I no nothing about science, really, and embarrassingly thought childhood cancers such as Leukaemia came up randomly I didn't know it was a genetically predisposed thing. So you're more likely to get it if a relative had it once upon a time?

I'm still breastfeeding, yes, but I assumed the protection from that would've worn off by now

More to the point, only around 0.2% of children will suffer from lukemia. The is a new body of research that links increased risk of childhood cancer with immune system response and over-hygienic environments. But that just means there is a slightly increased risk on something that’s already very unlikely to happen.

The important part is that first there has to have been a mutation in utero which only happens to 1 in 20 children. Then they have to miss out on a mild infection. That's all very unlikely. Also, as others have said, your child could easily have had a mild infection and you haven't noticed any symptoms.

Did your child play outside in the dirt, eat stuff off the floor, hang out with older children go to soft play, lick their toys?

Probably has been exposed then.

Can I suggest a couple of science books? Because understanding basic science concepts; like genetic predisposition and how hypothesis testing works, are crucial to making really important decisions.

Did your child play outside in the dirt, eat stuff off the floor, hang out with older children go to soft play, lick their toys?

He's always been exposed to 'wholesome' dirt. And I always let him eat off for floor

But my house is admittedly disinfected and full of Zoflora, within an inch of its life

I no nothing about science, really, and embarrassingly thought childhood cancers such as Leukaemia came up randomly blush

Some do. Some need a complicated series of switching genes on or off which may be a combination of inheritance and environmental. Some are one gene that dramatically increases chance of getting a certain cancer.

Cancer and it’s development on an individual level is very complicated, and is why a cure isn’t an easy find.

Not understanding it is fine.

Dismissing research like this, which in this case is actually peer reviewed and written by a highly respected scientist, as utter bollocks and claptrap is more ignorant.

Did you even read the article??

@Santaisfastasleepatlast I'm not sure you understand what the article is saying. Your family is proof of the theory that clean houses can lead to more health problems not fewer. Your children's immune systems will have been well primed by pets and lived in home.

www.icr.ac.uk/news-archive/pioneering-scientist-mel-greaves-is-knighted-after-research-to-unveil-cause-of-childhood-leukaemia Here he is! I was reading about the new year honours.

I thought the protection of breastfeeding lasted as long as you breastfed? DS (2) is still breastfed and he does get ill but not as often as my friends DC and always mildly (touch wood)

The research I've heard suggests that super super sterile homes can have a negative impact on longer term health particularly leukaemia in children BUT there are a million things that can kill us everyday and if we spent time worrying about them all there wouldn't be much times for other things. Keep a clean house but don't bleach every service multiple times a day and don't stop your child coming into contact with bugs (ie not letting them go to soft play) and try not to worry about the bug stuff, there isn't much more we can do.