Parent Thread

Julian the Apostate_sl said:

http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/...8431J920120504

Click to expand...

Exactly. Genetics does play a role but some website that alludes to 'nope nothing you can do if you or your spouse have allergies because the kid has a genetic predisposition to having allergies in the first place' (which cites zero studies) and leaving it at that....gives folks the impression that it has nothing to do with environment or behavior which is patently false. Tells less than half the story. As websites like that do.

Story you linked gets it exactly correct in terms of making sure the whole story is presented.

Edit: this all of course doesn't even BEGIN to discuss the fact that 'genetic predisposition' in and of itself is hilariously misleading because most research seems to indicate that if there is a genetic link between environmental allergy predispositions that its likely controlled by MULTIPLE genes all of which, (once identified) would then have to be examined for dominance/recession/co-dominance/epistasis etc in terms of how they interact with each other, the result of which would be phenotypically distinct in order to create 'levels of predisposition' if such a thing actually existed. But I'm sure baby center's got that covered somewhere.

Tarrant_sl said:

I'm laughing at you because you're wrong, but it's cool, no worries.

Click to expand...

I am?

I have provided science. You have provided baby center. I await your THOROUGH scientific explanation as to how anything I've asserted here is wrong. Til then, pretty sure that everyone here is fully aware of who is wrong in this case

This has been fun though. I had to google epistasis because its been so long since I've used that word that I had to make sure it was the right one. You know, genetics/immunology/virology concentrations in biochemistry and all doesn't stay in teh brain perfectly intact forever. I did get a good chuckle out of someone with zero education on the matter linking a pregnancy forum and glorified blog/advertising site as fact in a science based discussion.

Guess given the level of comprehension you have though I can see why its a comforting/non threatening resource choice for you though.

Tarrant_sl said:

I'm laughing at you because you say genetics plays no part in it then said "Sure it plays some role in it....but it doesn't play any role in it.

I'm laughing at your flip flopping.

I already said what you said in post #381. Genetics play a huge part in it, they wont though always match the allergies point for point. But studies done on Twins that show twins having a 65% chance of sharing the same allergies (in one case it was peanut, another it was animal dander) clearly show genetics are involved.

At any rate, you never admit your wrong about anything, even when you clearly are, so I'll let you get your final word in like you always have to have while still being wrong and I'll leave it at that.

Click to expand...

And as usual Tarrant, you missed the ENTIRE point of what I was trying to say. (See further, why people get annoyed with you that you can't comprehend why you make a pretty annoying mod).

1. No one said genetics weren't involved. I certainly didn't. I said it was a massive over generalization that led to a factually innaccurate conclusion.
2. I haven't deviated from that core first assertion I made. Maybe you can't keep up and that's why you think its flip flopping. Its really not.
3. LOL final word argument - when logic fails just go with that.
4. You need to read your twins study a bit better to see how that actually HELPS my point and hurts yours. Because if it was as huge of a role the number should be higher since it was identical twins used for a major part of that particular study. And that particular study makes SPECIFIC assertions that causality hasn't been proven because of the fact that as twins aren't raised in separate environments that's one failure of the study since there's no true environmental factor control group.

Yep. I've already ACTUALLY read the study you're referencing (but didn't provide links for conveniently). Anything else? We done here now?

It doesn't seem the studies did ANY analysis of whether or not the parents had allergies, and of course homes with allergic parents are less likely to have pets.

Correlations, causation, yada yada yada.

Advice for new parents: preschool blows.

When your first kid goes to school for the first time, be prepared for the whole family to be sick ALL THE FUCKING TIME because your little bundle of joy is being exposed to gazillions of viruses for the first time. We subscribe to the mkopec school of be-reasonably-clean-but-don't-lose-your-shit, but that didn't help us. When the second kid hit preschool, it was better, but there was still a surge of colds and flu.

Balin_sl said:

Advice for new parents: preschool blows.

When your first kid goes to school for the first time, be prepared for the whole family to be sick ALL THE FUCKING TIME because your little bundle of joy is being exposed to gazillions of viruses for the first time. We subscribe to the mkopec school of be-reasonably-clean-but-don't-lose-your-shit, but that didn't help us. When the second kid hit preschool, it was better, but there was still a surge of colds and flu.

Click to expand...

This is SO true. My eldest started school last year and most of our family has been sick every month since she started. I hear it gets better after the first year or two.

Etoille_sl said:

But the environmental role in allergy development is SO huge that someone saying "If you or your partner have allergies, there's nothing you can do environmental wise to reduce the way allergies develop" is pants on fucking head retarded.

Click to expand...

And you have data that shows which children did not develop an allergy that they otherwise would have but for the environment they were raised in, correct? Yeap, pretty sure that data does not exist.

Get the fuck out of here. This argument has left us Tarrant and one headless corpse.

There is an environmental factor to hypersensitivity and of course there such a thing as predisposition. I'm happy to hate on Etoille, but she's not saying anything stupid there. There's lots of shit that could happen but never does. There are more things of that nature than of things that could happen and do.

The concept of body as machine, and DNA as the blueprint, is outmoded. It's still useful but outmoded. The body is ghestalt.

This is relevant to your conversation.http://www.tim-spector.co.uk/?page_id=2

Also a link to a conversation with one of the authors of the study. The section of the show to listen to is calledIdentically Different: The Science of Epigeneticshttp://www.cbc.ca/quirks/episode/201...uary-2-2013/#5

I've been with my wife seventeen years. When I met her she had a two year old little girl and a one year old boy. Different fathers. They've not met their natural fathers since and they know very little about them. Raising them and the children we had has been the biggest priority in my life. I wanted to give them the best foundation in life I could.

In my experience genetics contributes 75% or more of the person someone will become. All you can do is try and establish moral values, honesty, work ethic, manners etc.

Yeah I think you pulled that number out of your ass. My sister and I had the same parents and were wildly different. I have cousins that similarly had the same parents and are like light and dark sides of the force. When you're talking about personality, I don't think genetics play an oversized role as you suggest.

Depends what you mean by 'wildly different'. Myself and my wife had four children together and yes, of course, they have varying personalities. One is musical, artistic and quiet, another is all about science and maths, is loud and wants to be a toxicologist.

What I'm suggesting goes way beyond that. The two oldest, with different natural fathers, are almost like different animals to each other and their four siblings. And they have huge amounts in common with their natural fathers in terms of behaviour, attitudes, ability and more who they have never met and know very little about.

General Antony_sl said:

And you have data that shows which children did not develop an allergy that they otherwise would have but for the environment they were raised in, correct? Yeap, pretty sure that data does not exist.

Get the fuck out of here. This argument has left us Tarrant and one headless corpse.

Click to expand...

/snicker

Well I guess folks know which side of an argument they are on in terms of winning/losing when you show up and declare a side.

The Ancient_sl said:

It doesn't seem the studies did ANY analysis of whether or not the parents had allergies, and of course homes with allergic parents are less likely to have pets.

Correlations, causation, yada yada yada.

Click to expand...

Sure. Except for the fact that the study builds on something else already clinically proven - that you can reprogram a predisposition.

See further - anyone who has ever had allergy shots for environmental allergies.

The study just proves that you can reprogram at an early age. Otherwise known as "babycenter saying you can't do anything is totally pants on head retarded." See further, original points (both my assertion and my analysis of Tarrants 'expert resources') proven.

Science....how does it work???????

Balin_sl said:

Advice for new parents: preschool blows.

When your first kid goes to school for the first time, be prepared for the whole family to be sick ALL THE FUCKING TIME because your little bundle of joy is being exposed to gazillions of viruses for the first time. We subscribe to the mkopec school of be-reasonably-clean-but-don't-lose-your-shit, but that didn't help us. When the second kid hit preschool, it was better, but there was still a surge of colds and flu.

Click to expand...

The flip side to this is depending on how long they were in preschool (mine was since she was a baby), they are pretty much immune to most things by the time they hit elementary school. This is her kindergarten year and she's only missed one day due to sickness whereas a lot of kids in her class missed for various sicknesses. It helps that the preschool we sent her was hardcore on washing hands and just keeping clean.

Etoille_sl said:

Sure. Except for the fact that the study builds on something else already clinically proven - that you can reprogram a predisposition.

See further - anyone who has ever had allergy shots for environmental allergies.

The study just proves that you can reprogram at an early age. Otherwise known as "babycenter saying you can't do anything is totally pants on head retarded." See further, original points (both my assertion and my analysis of Tarrants 'expert resources') proven.

Science....how does it work???????

Click to expand...

Are you asking seriously? Because you apparently don't seem to know. The study doesn't PROVE shit. It suggests a strong correlation.

My two year old just refuses to take medicine all of the sudden, weird. She had hand,foot mouth a few weeks ago and we had to get Feverall suppositories because she refused to take ibuprofen or acetaminophen, and now she has strep and refuses to take her amoxicillin. She'll drink it in a glass of orange juice, apparently strong enough to mask the taste, but nothing else seems to work. So now she has to get a shot of penicillin, which is going to hurt like hell for her. Nothing happened, she used to take her medicine well, but all of the sudden she just refuses. To the point that a nurse forced her to take acetaminophen and she forced herself to vomit it up. Goddamn kids.