- This could be the biggest breakthrough in SIDS research
in a long time or is it?
A new study published on May the 6th
in the journal, EBioMedicine
is causing a stir among parents
and there's some pretty huge claims
being made on social media
and in articles around the internet,
some of which frankly are inaccurate
and even potentially harmful.
So in this video,
I'm going to break down what this research really means,
how much of a breakthrough it actually is,
and everything else you need to know about it.
Firstly, let's talk about the study
completed by Dr. Harrington and her team.
These researchers measured the level of an enzyme,
which is referred to as BChE
in the blood of 67 babies in Australia who died of SIDS.
And what they found is that the babies who died of SIDS
had significantly lower levels of BChE
than babies who did not die from SIDS.
Now this finding is very interesting
as low levels of this enzyme
would actually reduce a sleeping infant's ability to wake up
or respond to its environments
and this would increase their risk of SIDS.
So for example, usually,
when a baby experiences a life-threatening situation,
such as having difficulty breathing while they're sleeping,
they will wake up and cry out for help.
But for babies with low levels of BChE,
they don't have the same arousal response
and they will stay in this compromised position.
Based on these findings,
the researchers concluded that the enzyme, BChE
could actually be a potential biomarker
to help identify newborn babies who are at risk of SIDS.
Now, some people have interpreted these findings
to mean that Dr. Harrington and her team
have identified the cause of SIDS.
While at first glance,
this might seem like a reasonable conclusion,
it's simply not accurate.
But before I explain why,
make sure you download a copy
of my free parents guide to naps
by clicking the link in the description
if you haven't already.
This will help to make nap times much easier
for you and your baby.
So even Dr. Harrington and her team
acknowledged that this study is not definitive
by titling their paper,
BChE is a potential biomarker
for sudden infant death syndrome,
not BChE is a definitive biomarker
for sudden infant death syndrome.
In fact, Dr. Harrington stated more research is needed
to determine whether BChE tests
would be an effective way
to identify infants at risks of SIDS
and prevent future deaths.
Medical experts have also urged people to be cautious
for a number of reasons.
Firstly, the lab samples tested were more than two years old
and the enzyme levels may have changed
since the time of collection.
Secondly, they're only coroner diagnoses,
not autopsy findings were used
to determine which deaths were classified as SIDS.
The findings also included data on children
up to the age of two,
but a SIDS diagnosis is only given to a baby
who dies under the age of one.
And the sample size itself was relatively small
with 67 cases of children who had died from SIDS
and 10 controls, so these were 10 living cases.
What they did find
is that some of the infants in that control group
did have low levels of BChE, but they did not develop SIDS.
Due to the small sample size
and the conflicting findings in that control group,
it's clear that much more research is needed
to know if these findings are in fact conclusive
in a larger group of infants.
Furthermore, it's important to note that this study
is only a small piece to a very large puzzle for SIDS
and this is because current research
indicates that SIDS is not due to one factor,
rather it occurs where multiple factors happen
at the same time,
which is explained in the triple risk model.
So according to this model,
SIDS occurs when three factors occur simultaneously.
The first factor is a vulnerable infant.
So the infant themselves
might have an underlying vulnerability
that puts them at risk for SIDS.
So, this might be that they have low BChE
or the baby might have been born prematurely,
they may have been a male,
they might have a low birth weight,
the baby may have been exposed to tobacco smoke
or illicit drugs in utero,
or there may be a genetic component.
The second factor is a critical developmental period
for homeostatic control.
So this simply means that the infant
is under six months of age
because we know that around 90% of SIDS death
occur in the first six months of a baby's life,
with it peaking at around two to four months of age
and few babies die in that first month.
And the third factor is there is an exogenous stressor
or external stressor.
So these include environmental factors
like sleeping a baby on their belly
or on a soft sleeping surface, using a pillow, bed sharing,
or accidental overheating.
So when these three factors overlap,
there is the greatest risk
of sudden and unexpected death in infants, including SIDS.
Given that SIDS occurs when these three factors overlap,
the findings by Dr. Harrington and her team
may offer a small hint
at what might be a potential biomarker
that makes an infant vulnerable to SIDS,
but it will not eradicate SIDS,
nor does it lower the importance
of creating a safe sleep environment.
It's important that we continue
to eliminate environmental elements,
which are known risk factors for SIDS
and follow the safe sleeping practices,
as well as keep unsafe baby sleeping products
well away from our baby's sleeping spaces.
Watch this video next to find out
which products you should never have in your baby's crib.
Many of these are marketed as essential items,
but are actually completely unnecessary
and can increase the risk of SIDS for your baby.