Baby Friendly USA is backpedaling as fast as they can

I’ve always said it was only a matter of time. For years, the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) and its US outlet Baby Friendly USA have been exaggerating the benefits ...

Revisiting the 39 week rule

Over 3 years ago, I wrote about a study that showed that the “39 week rule” (banning elective deliveries before 39 weeks) increased the risk of stillbirth. A new study ...

Vaginal steaming and the seductive appeal of pseudoscience

Why, in the absence of any scientific evidence to support it, are ridiculous “treatments” like vaginal steaming embraced by purveyors of pseudoscience? Why, in the absence of any scientific evidence ...

Spotlight

Journalist Jennifer Block’s evidence double standard

The Twitterverse has been roiled by Scientific American’s decision to publish a ...

Pseudoscience is not a feminist statement

One of the most depressing aspects of health pseudoscience is that it ...

Anti-vax: a flat earth theory for the 21st Century

The flat-earthers are back! Well, not exactly, but their descendants have come ...

Latest News

Baby Friendly USA is backpedaling as fast as they can

I’ve always said it was only a matter of time. For years, the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) and its US outlet Baby Friendly USA have been exaggerating the benefits of breastfeeding, ignoring the risks of breastfeeding promotion and shutting women out of decisions on feeding and caring for their own babies. As a result, […]

Continue Reading

Revisiting the 39 week rule

Over 3 years ago, I wrote about a study that showed that the “39 week rule” (banning elective deliveries before 39 weeks) increased the risk of stillbirth. A new study purports to show that is not the case. The new study is Association of Widespread Adoption of the 39-Week Rule With Overall Mortality Due to […]

Continue Reading

Vaginal steaming and the seductive appeal of pseudoscience

Why, in the absence of any scientific evidence to support it, are ridiculous “treatments” like vaginal steaming embraced by purveyors of pseudoscience? Why, in the absence of any scientific evidence to support it, has anti-vaccine advocacy become so popular? Why, in the absence of any scientific evidence to support it, have homeopathic products that are […]

Continue Reading

Journalist Jennifer Block’s evidence double standard

The Twitterverse has been roiled by Scientific American’s decision to publish a hatchet piece on gynecologist Dr. Jen Gunter. The piece, though written by a journalist, Jennifer Block, is hardly journalism. It is a blatantly ad hominem attack by an author whose most recent book is in direct competition with Dr. Gunter’s far more successful […]

Continue Reading

Pseudoscience is not a feminist statement

One of the most depressing aspects of health pseudoscience is that it is dominated by women. Women are far more likely to believe in and use quack “treatments.” They believe in and spearhead deadly movements like anti-vaccination. And, of course, quack practitioners like herbalists, cranio-sacral therapists and lay midwives are often women. Perhaps even more […]

Continue Reading

Anti-vax: a flat earth theory for the 21st Century

The flat-earthers are back! Well, not exactly, but their descendants have come up with the flat-earth equivalent for the 21st century: they don’t “believe in” vaccination. Anti-vaxxers are all over social media promoting the “dangers” of vaccination. Anti-vaccine advocacy isn’t about vaccination, though. It’s all about parents and how they wish to view themselves. It […]

Continue Reading

OK Lactivist!

They think they can ignore the problems they cause. They refuse to listen to the younger generation they harm. They imagine that because they hold the power, they don’t have to care. They’re not boomers; they’re lactivists. Tens of thousands of infants are re-hospitalized each year for breastfeeding complications. Shockingly, exclusive breastfeeding has become the […]

Continue Reading

Why does LC Serena Meyer think she speaks FOR women with breastfeeding complications without speaking TO them?

Yesterday I wrote about why you can’t trust lactation consultants to understand scientific literature. I used a post in which an IBCLC insisted the fact that 1 in 71 exclusively breastfed babies are re-hospitalized for complications is not supported by the scientific evidence. I’ve repeatedly cited the claim and the paper that it comes from. […]

Continue Reading

Lucy Ruddle demonstrates why you can’t trust lactation consultants to understand research

Lucy Ruddle IBCLC is exasperated because I have repeatedly used her as an example of the heartlessness many lactation consultants show to women who can’t or don’t wish to breastfeed. I doubt she is going to be relieved that today I will use her as an example of the utter cluelessness of lactation consultants when […]

Continue Reading

The ugly sin of midwives and lactation professionals: self-justification

There is no question that aggressive promotion of the ideology of normal birth has led to tens if not hundreds of infant brain injuries and deaths in various hospital trusts around the UK. There is no question that midwives were excruciatingly aware that they were at fault; that’s why they hid the evidence. Yet I […]

Continue Reading