Active discussions

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

Talk
News
Original poster

COT DEATH

270 replies

nannyoakley · 18/04/2005 21:31

I'd be interested knowing what anyone thinks about cot death being in the news so much and what your thoughts are on cot death. Most parents are left confused by what to do and we hear from people all the time wanting to know what is going on - why there are so many cot death parents being released from prison, why they were ever in prison in the beginning. The main gist of our campaign is to make sure our news about mattress wrapping for cot death prevention reaches the public, and give parents an informed choice, we believe it should be the parents who decide what they want to do - and believe me, we hear from people every day wanting to know about the Cot Life campaign.

Please ask questions / tell me what you think about what you are hearing in the news and reading on the internet, your thoughts are valuable to me and I think this is a serious issue that needs public debate.

Hope you can help.
Many thanks
Julee

OP posts:
hub2dee · 19/04/2005 09:46

Hi Toothache,

Sadly, her first post revealed her aim:

"The main gist of our campaign is to make sure our news about mattress wrapping for cot death prevention reaches the public"

It is one-sided: Mattress Wrapping will prevent your baby from dieing from cotdeath. She says this because:

"Mattress-wrapping for cot death prevention, which has been publicised in New Zealand for over six years, has had a 100% success rate. More than 400 cot deaths occurred in New Zealand during the years 1995 to 1999 inclusive, but there has been no reported cot death among the many tens of thousands of babies who have slept on mattresses wrapped to the Cot Life 2000 specifications. "
Source

Sadly, correlation does not show cause and effect.

You ask does "everyone delve into the background of every post??"

WRT this, I, and several other MNers, and several professionals in the field HAVE. And her pseudoscience does not stand up, and there is enough confusion wrt to cot death that we do not need more like this.

hub2dee · 19/04/2005 09:49

There is no initial desire for public debate, sorry, I disagree.

(And Toothache, sorry if you are fuming about this, but several of the posters on the thread have had bad exposure to the sales and promotion tactics of nannyoakley on other message boards and support groups to do with Cot Death, parenting organisations etc. It is not isolated).

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:06

ok.... let the onslaught on MN continue. If this was an unusual reaction on MN I'd not have been so angry.
Since when do we report people to MN btw?

Twiglett · 19/04/2005 10:12

um people are reported when they post obvious unsubstantiated scare stories with an aim to make money out of scaring the hell out of other parents

beatie · 19/04/2005 10:13

I for one am grateful that the old link to NannyOakley's previous thread was posted by someone at the bottom.

I might well have entered into a real discussion about SIDS and then been momentarily reeled in by what Julee Oakley has to say. Those who have researched the matress covers before have saved me a lot of work. I hate misinformation. I hate people using psuedoscience for their own end. I hate to think of other parents being exploited.

There are many mothers here who would not have gone off and done their own research about this and probably would have bought a matress cover.

That can't be right, can it?

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:14

Why is everyone so sure thats what it is though Twiglett?
I hope she comes back and posts here, but I'm sure she won't.... I wouldn't if I was her.

beatie · 19/04/2005 10:15

I also hate my typos but hey - such is life.

Twiglett · 19/04/2005 10:18

As Hub2Dee just said

"the simplest way to see this is Irishbird's direct point that even if Sprott's findings are right, by their own admission, mattress covers wouldn't be needed on new mattresses in the UK for 16 years now. "

beatie · 19/04/2005 10:21

The Cotlife2000 website is just an endoresement of Babesafe products.

It makes bold facts and statements

"Smoking does not cause cotdeath"

and does not back them up with evidence

When you click on the research link, it lists names of journals and dates of research but doesn't even provide links to the research. Probably in the hope that no-one will be bothered to go and read them but instead will just buy the Babesafe products.

Plenty of hyper-links provided to the retailers of the Babesafe product though.

irishbird · 19/04/2005 10:23

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:25

Twiglett - And that seems to be proof enough for everyone on MN.

An informed choice.... okay, so in her opinion mattress wrapping helps... in someone elses opinion it does totally nothing.... there an informed choice! Surely that means reading everyones opinions and making your own decisions. So it's great that people posted links and showed the other side of the coin... and perhaps that has more scientific backing... but its still IMO not a reason for the reactions on here.

Twiglett · 19/04/2005 10:30

in her "I can make money if others believe this, but I'll make the most money if I can really scare them with pseudo-science" opinion you mean Toothache

Twiglett · 19/04/2005 10:31

what seems to be proof to me Toothache is the number of posters who's opinions I respect who have actually looked into it before

this is the worst form of marketing - and should be, probably is, illegal - it is scaremongering and making money from doing so

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:32

Irishbird - I think your question is a very valid one and not confrontational.... it was the implication that at midnight she ran off and didn't answer the question. She may well not come back to answer, but I just thought it was a bit presumptious at that point that she hadn't just gone to bed, thats all.

Beatie - Has anyone actually gone on to read these journals before assuming they don't exist?

aloha · 19/04/2005 10:32

I think it is dreadful that someone with a commercial interest in a product they are trying to flog comes on here with completely unfounded scare stories designed to frighten new mothers. It's awful. I'm so glad MN has intelligent, informed posters who are vigilant about this sort of thing so people aren't fooled and get proper information that may actually save their baby, instead of being fleeced and misinformed.

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:33

Well thats your opinion Twiglett.... and thats mine.

Twiglett · 19/04/2005 10:34

what that is should be ok to frighten people to sell a product ???

I know I'm misunderstanding that post toothache

aloha · 19/04/2005 10:35

And opinions are not what's important here - it's scientific research. My opinion might be that feeding your baby brandy prevents cot death - it would still be wrong and dangerous.
The claims about chemicals causing cot death have been rigorously investigated and found to be untrue. This is scaremongering for money, and I am so glad Mumsnet is a place where you don't get away with this sort of thing.

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:35

sigh<

I suppose I'll go before I get the same treatment!

I was only trying to point out that in many occasions on MN people jump the gun.... calling people trolls when they are not.... accusing people of things. Its depressing.

aloha · 19/04/2005 10:36

One more thing, I remember the people who stood up to Judge Flounce and denounced her/him getting this sort of slating too - about persecuting people etc etc etc, while they were actually doing everyone a favour, for no benefit to themselves.

beatie · 19/04/2005 10:37

I didn't say they don't exist. Doesn't it strike you as weird that a website committed to one campaign doesn't include hyperlinks to its research? Apart from the fact that most people wouldn't know where to look to go and find the research articles, it also shows me that the website is MORE concerned with pulling the wool over parents eyes.

In essence, the website lists someones opinion on SIDS and then offers lots of reasons to buy a babesafe matress or matress cover, plus lots of links to the retailers selling the babesafe prodcuts. The reserahc is hidden away. Why?

aloha · 19/04/2005 10:37

I find it terribly depressing when people on Mumsnet are justifiably protective of the site and its members and try to defend them against trolls and dangerous misinformation - and get attacked for it.

beatie · 19/04/2005 10:37

research even

Marina · 19/04/2005 10:38

Hear hear Aloha and Twiglett. Toothache, Nannyoakley has a long history of spamming people in the NCT and other forums on this issue, including people whose babies were cot death victims. That is a bad and insensitive way to disseminate your opinions. I think it is hugely to Mumsnet's credit that she doesn't get away with it here. She keeps doing it. I prefer to stick with the FSID's line - I used to work with their Director and a shrewder and more conscientious person would be hard to find.

Toothache · 19/04/2005 10:39

I'm not the only one with this opinion, I'm just the only one stupid enough to think it's okay to post an opinion.

Like I said... feckin sick of it.