Let's Call the Sheep "Baaahb" *

Let's face it: throughout time, people have held some pretty moronic beliefs about what's good for babies and young children. When you challenge these beliefs, they might protest "but my dr says...." Oh--your dr says? Well, what did drs say on the issue 10, 20, 200 years ago--and why has the tune changed each time? And why does my dr disagree with your dr?

Very few would deny that parenting attitudes, trends, and practices are in a state of constant flux, and vary widely across cultures and points in history. Yet, by raising our children a certain way, we operate under the illusion that we are doing something timeless and "natural." Nevermind that our environment has completely changed from a couple generations before; nevermind that some of these practices are obsolete, flawed, or romanticized. Nevermind that we try to conduct certain parenting aspects "naturally" in a completely unnatural environment.

One piece of particularly Orwellian parenting "wisdom" I hear, repeatedly parroted by certain parents from some nebulous, ambiguous source, is that "it's good for babies and young kids to get sick a lot, as that means they'll get sick less later on." I think this belief is worthy of being sucked down the memory hole.

Where to even begin? First of all, babies' immune systems are not well-developed, which means that they will often be hit harder by illnesses than an adult (look up RSV, which manifests itself as a common cold in adults but can be deadly in a child under 2, or read up on whooping cough or rotavirus). The only virus I can think of that's "better" to get in childhood instead of adulthood is chicken pox. Likewise, viral and bacterial infections are much more likely to also cause ear infections in children than in adults.

Let's move on to the lack of compassion humankind often has towards children. Young children who are sick cannot take care of themselves. Often they are too young to safely take over-the-counter remedies that would alleviate their symptoms. But more importantly than that, illness takes a toll on a child's ability to learn--either by lost school days, or by virtue of the fact that it's pretty hard to learn when you're feeling miserable and exhausted. The view that children "should" get sick a lot to avoid getting sick as much in adulthood says "it's more ok for children to stay home from school, and their parents to miss work, than that child take a sick day from their job later on in life."

This view also endorses complete inefficiency. Children have a lot less control over their environment than adults do. Children are often contagion super-spreaders by no real fault of their own--they put things in their mouths, do not wash their hands, and are all-around not yet schooled in good hygiene. They have limited control over the health of their diet, home environment, and the people they spend their day with. Adults are much more effective at illness prevention--and therefore, should get sick less anyway.

People play with fire when they are sick a lot. The link between viruses and other illnesses and long-term health conditions (such as cancer, birth defects, lasting lung damage, and allergies, asthma, and other auto-immune responses) is only now starting to be undersood. By viewing mass and frequent infection in our a children as a "good" thing, we are also putting others at risk for long-term health problems and even death, including pregnant women, seniors, young babies, people with chronic medical conditions, and even perfectly healthy children and adults.

It's well-established that the price of both personal and "herd" immunity is high. Yet, as the threat of diseases such as polio and measles becomes almost an abstraction, so the collective memory fades of just how many children perished from these diseases. When I lived in Nepal, people had some immunity to waterborne illnesses, right? Sure, maybe--if they survived it in infancy. "Natural immunity" means a higher infant mortality rate across "the herd." I don't think the US would like to trade infant mortality rates or average lifespan facts with Nepal. Yet, the anti-vaccine and pro-"natural immunity" crowd romanticizes the robustness of people in developing nations--without bothering to check exactly how many die of preventable diseases each year.

Finally, this belief is simply illogical. A child does not need to *be sick* in order to build his or her immune system. When I talked to my son's pediatrician about this issue, he enlightened me to the fact that all of us are exposed to germs every single day, just by breathing. Yet, each and every germ we come into contact with does not necessarily make us ill. Also, people espouse this belief seem to neglect the fact that diseases, especially viruses, mutate so that getting a cold or flu this year does not make you immune to a cold and flu next year.

Am I saying we should live in sterile isolation--of course not. I'm saying that having perpetually (almost year-round with maybe a break in the summer months) sick children is not normal or natural. When I ask people or reflect on my own childhood, previous generations of children did not live this way. Our lifestyle practices need to change in order to match our changes in lifestyle--ie, that children get a lot less fresh air, fresh food, and exercise nowadays, and spend a lot more time in enclosed instutions and large-group settings.

I suspect this segment of the parenting population is the only one on the face of the earth who think the key to being healthy in the future is to be sick now. Unfortunately, I chalk up this parenting belief to, as is so often the case, a product of the times. As more parents have either put their children in daycare, or in school at earlier ages, they started noticing that their childre were almost perpetually ill. As some parents looked for a justification for the ill health of their children, so the rise of logic that sounds intuitive, but is faulty in reality. The key to good health for people of all ages was, is, and ever will be: good diet, good exercise, good hygiene, good environment. Ok, and some good old-fashioned luck and good genes.

*I am not, nor do I claim to be, a health care professional. These are my own personal opinions, based on my own research, beliefs, and discussion with my son's dr.