Measles Is Serious (A History Lesson from My Grandmother)

Measles is back. The outbreak of this highly contagious viral illness that started at Disneyland in December has spread across the country and shows no signs of slowing. As of February 6, the CDC reported 121 cases in 17 states in this year alone, most linked to Disneyland. In 2014, we had 644 cases of measles in the U.S. This is a striking increase compared to the last 15 years, when we usually saw less than 100 cases in an entire year.

measles 2015 CDCI’m sorry that so many people have been sickened in this outbreak and hope that it is reined in soon. This is no easy task given our mobile society and the fact that we like to congregate in places like Disneyland, schools, doctors’ offices, hospitals, airplanes, and shopping malls. Add to that the pockets of unvaccinated people where measles can easily spread, and we have a recipe for still more outbreaks until we can improve vaccination rates. In this situation, I particularly feel for those who can’t be vaccinated. Babies under 12 months of age and people who are too immunocompromised to get the MMR vaccine, like cancer patients receiving chemotherapy, are counting on the rest of us to get vaccinated and reduce the spread of this disease. Right now, we’re letting them down.

One positive outcome to this outbreak is that it has sparked lots more conversation about vaccines. It inspired me to be more public about proudly stating that our family is fully vaccinated. And I wrote an op-ed piece for my local paper, the Register-Guard, about the risk of measles in our community, given the low vaccination rates in our schools.

FB profile pic(Our baby, of course, has so far only received the newborn Hepatitis B dose. He won’t receive the MMR shot, which includes the measles vaccine, until 12 months of age.)

I spent a lot of time researching vaccines last year for my book. The result is an in-depth look at vaccine development, risks and benefits, and safety testing and monitoring. I also cover some specific vaccine concerns, like whether or not we give too many too soon (we don’t) and if we should be worried about aluminum in vaccines (we shouldn’t). (I don’t just tell you these things, though; I break down the science for you.) I read hundreds of papers about childhood vaccines, talked with researchers, and felt more confident than ever about vaccinating my kids on the recommended schedule.

There was one other bit of vaccine research that may have been the most meaningful to me: I flew to Florida to interview my grandmother, now 90 years old. She raised seven children before most of today’s vaccines existed. She was a mother during the 1952 polio epidemic that killed 3,145 and paralyzed more than 21,000 in the U.S. She was having her babies before a vaccine for rubella was available. That disease caused 11,250 miscarriages, 2,100 stillbirths, and 20,000 children to be born with birth defects in a 1964-1965 outbreak in the U.S.

My grandmother also nursed her children through the measles. Before the vaccine, nearly every child suffered through a case of measles at some point in childhood. During the current measles outbreak, I’ve seen some comments downplaying the seriousness of this disease. After all, most kids did survive measles without long-term consequences. However, many didn’t. Among those who didn’t survive was my grandparent’s second child, Frankie. In 1956, at the age of 6, he died of encephalitis, or inflammation of the brain, a complication of measles.

My dad was the oldest of my grandparents’ children and the first of 3 boys: Richard, Frankie, and Larry. When the boys were little, the family lived in a faculty housing unit at Princeton, where my grandfather was an English professor. The families that shared the building were a tight-knit community. They built a playground together and parents took turns keeping an eye on the kids. “It was such a marvelous place to grow up,” my grandmother told me. “There were a whole bunch of kids, and you knew every single parent. Had conferences about your children and so on.”

Three brothers (from left to right): Richard, Frankie, and Larry Green, circa 1953 or 1954, in Princeton, New Jersey. Frankie died in 1956, at age 6, of encephalitis caused by measles. Photo by Margaret Green, used with permission.

Three brothers (from left to right): Richard, Frankie, and Larry Green, circa 1953 or 1954, in Princeton, New Jersey. Frankie died in 1956, at age 6, of encephalitis caused by measles. Photo by Margaret Green, used with permission.

In May of 1956, all three boys came down with measles. My grandmother remembers neighbors remarking that they were lucky to get it all at once, although this wasn’t surprising given that measles is one of the most contagious pathogens on earth. Those infected are contagious for several days before the characteristic rash appears, and the virus can survive in respiratory droplets, suspended in the air, for two days. Continue reading

Introducing Our New Baby Boy!

I think it’s time to officially introduce you to our new baby! If you follow me on Facebook, you know that our baby boy was born just before Christmas, and if you’re not on Facebook, you’ve probably guessed as much. Here on the blog, I’ll call him BabyM until I come up with a better blog name. (I have the foresight to realize that BabyM won’t be an appropriate name forever, and nor will the other things I call him now, like Milk Man, Sweet Cheeks, or Little Guy. I’m already terrified of how quickly he will grow!)

BabyM’s birthday went well. I started having contractions at midnight, went to the hospital around 4:30 AM, and we had our healthy baby boy just after 9 AM. My labor with Cee lasted 30 hours, and although I don’t think I would do anything differently if I could, it was a marathon that included an epidural, Pitocin, and more than two hours of pushing. BabyM, on the other hand, came so fast that by the time the pain got really intense, there wasn’t time to think about an epidural. I didn’t have my heart set on anything about this labor and delivery – after wanting this baby for so long, I truly just wanted a healthy baby. Still, it was cool to have the experience of an unmedicated birth. I had fabulous support from the nurses, my OB, and my husband and mom, who were both there for BabyM’s birth.

BabyM birthI have to say that the last month has been pretty blissful. I say this with a bit of trepidation, because I know that bliss isn’t always the #1 word used to describe the postpartum period, at least if we’re being honest. But I feel lucky to have this baby, and I am claiming this bliss right now. I love holding BabyM, nursing him, and even, or maybe especially, changing his diaper. He’s most alert, and amazingly, calm during diaper changes. He can be a very quiet, calm little soul, but he can also turn on a dime. His cries can sound angry, arms punching the air, face red and broken into a sweat. He did cry for the better part of three hours tonight, so while I do feel incredibly happy right now, life is not all roses. Continue reading

Parenting in the Present Moment: A Review and Giveaway

First, a baby update: no baby yet! I’m past 38 weeks now and definitely getting excited for baby’s arrival. I still feel like I have a lot of things on my to-do list that I’d ideally like to get done before I go into labor, but I’ve also entered a stage of acceptance that, ready or not, when the baby arrives, we’ll carry on with life even if the fridge isn’t fully stocked and the floors haven’t been mopped. However, one thing on my to-do list is this post, because I wanted to share with you a new parenting book that came at just the right time for me, and I think you’ll find it particularly helpful in the midst of the holiday craziness.

The book is Parenting in the Present Moment: How to Stay Focused on What Really Matters by Dr. Carla Naumburg, published in October by Parallax Press. I received a free review copy of the book, but as always, I only review books that I love and can whole-heartedly recommend (more on my review policy here). I have loved this book so much that I’ve already purchased several more copies to pass on to friends.

The last month or so has been really busy with copy-editing my own book and finishing up the college teaching term. A 3-week-long cold hit my late pregnancy body like a freight train in the middle of that, and I felt like I was barely getting to the most urgent tasks each day while my to-do list piled up around me. But every night, I would read a few pages of Parenting in the Present Moment before crashing into sleep, and I would feel like I could accept how that day had gone and reset my intention for parenting and for caring for myself for the next day.

First of all, I absolutely love the cover of this book. It speaks perfectly to the content of the book and one of the greatest challenges of parenting: maintaining balance even while your agile offspring challenge it. As a side note, something similar seems to happen to me almost daily: I squat down to pick something up, in a graceful way that only a 38-week-pregnant woman can manage, and my daughter comes up behind me to give me a surprise “hug,” which sends me teetering off balance.

Parenting-In-Present-Moment-Cover-Small

Just seeing that photo makes me smile and feel motherhood has always been this way, regardless of the species, and I’m doing okay.

This book is about parenting with mindfulness. What is mindfulness? Naumburg explains, “Mindfulness is about making a choice, over and over again, to pay attention to whatever is happening in the present moment without judging it or wishing it was different.” Really paying attention to what is happening with our kids and in our own minds can help us come back to the present moment and respond intentionally and effectively, with kindness and compassion for our children and ourselves. Continue reading

Pertussis Vaccination in Every Pregnancy: Is it Safe and Effective?

I’m now 37 weeks pregnant, and it blows my mind how quickly this pregnancy has flown by. Now the days are ticking by faster than I can tick things off of my to-do list, and I can feel my body warming up for birth with increasing Braxton Hicks contractions and the baby dropping into my pelvis.

Preparing for a new baby means lots of things to me. There is the physical preparation of washing and folding tiny clothes and setting up baby’s space for changing and sleeping (in our bedroom for now). There is the arduous task of coming up with names – two of them, since we don’t know the baby’s sex. There is the mental preparation of imagining life with a new baby, trying to map out a few strategies for coping with wakeful nights and baby-filled days. There are the talks with Cee about how things will change and how they will stay the same, how she can help us with the baby, and how we’ll help her to adapt to the change in her life.

There’s also the very important aspect of making sure that we do everything we can to protect our new baby’s health, especially before the first round of immunizations at 2 months. This baby will be born during the season of flu and cold viruses, and this year is predicted to be a pretty bad one for the flu. Just south of our home in Oregon, California has so far recorded nearly 10,000 cases of pertussis, also known as whooping cough, this year, more than they’ve seen in 70 years. Cee will be exposed to a range of pathogens in preschool, and my husband will encounter them in his job in healthcare. We’ll do our best to protect our baby by leaving our shoes at the front door, changing clothes when needed, and washing our hands frequently. I also plan to breastfeed, which should confer some passive protection to the baby. However, some of the most important protection has hopefully already been given to this baby during pregnancy, because I’ve been vaccinated for both the flu (as soon as the vaccine was available this season, around 26 weeks) and pertussis around 34 weeks.

Getting vaccinated for flu and pertussis during pregnancy can protect your baby from these serious illnesses during early infancy.

Getting vaccinated for flu and pertussis during pregnancy can help protect your baby from these serious illnesses during early infancy.

The flu vaccine was first recommended for pregnant women in 1964,1 and there is a large body of research showing that the flu shot is safe in pregnancy and an effective way of preventing flu infections in expecting moms, which can pose a significant risk to the fetus. There’s also good evidence that influenza antibodies are transferred to the baby in utero,2 reducing baby’s chances of infection and hospitalization with the flu in early infancy.3,4 (Several of the above links direct you to evidence-based articles written by Tara Haelle on her blogs at Red Wine and Apple Sauce and Forbes. If you want to keep up with vaccine and other health news, Tara is an excellent blogger and science journalist to follow.)

The latest news on this year’s flu season is showing that most of the cases seen so far have been identified as being caused by seasonal influenza A H3N2, a nasty strain, and about half of these are a new subtype that isn’t well-covered by this year’s flu vaccine. If you haven’t yet gotten a flu shot this season, don’t let this news deter you. The flu vaccine will still protect you from the older strains of the flu and might decrease the severity of an infection with the newer type. The vaccine is very safe and still offers the best protection against the flu for you and your baby.

The recommendation that women be vaccinated against pertussis in every pregnancy – using the Tdap vaccine here in the U.S. – was new in 2012. It wasn’t recommended when I was pregnant with Cee in 2010, although I had recently gotten a Tdap booster for my job at the time. Several pregnant friends and readers have emailed me this fall asking if Tdap in pregnancy is safe and if they really need it, particularly if they were just vaccinated in the last couple of years. The good news is that there have been quite a few studies published on these questions in just the last year or two, and I’ll focus the rest of this post on the evidence for the Tdap shot in pregnancy.

What is the concern about pertussis in young infants?

We’ve seen big increases in pertussis recently, especially over the last decade. In 2012, there were more than 48,000 cases reported in the U.S., making it the worst year since 1955. Pertussis hits young infants the hardest. Among the 20 deaths from pertussis in the U.S. in 2012, 15 were in infants less than 3 months of age [PDF]. The first dose of pertussis vaccine is usually given with the DTaP shot at 2 months of age, and before this time, infants are particularly vulnerable to the disease. The 2012 recommendation that women be vaccinated with Tdap in the third trimester of every pregnancy came in response to these infant deaths, the hope being that maternal antibodies to pertussis could help protect infants during those first few months of life. Continue reading

Can Fetal Movements Predict a Baby’s Sex or Temperament?

I’m now 31 weeks pregnant. The weeks are flying by, and for the most part, I’m relishing all the physical changes in my body and the preparations for this baby. We waited a long time for this pregnancy, and it will probably be my last. I curl around my belly at night and think about the baby growing inside me. I wonder about the person that he or she will become and how our little family will adapt to welcome a second child. (We’ve chosen not to learn the sex of this baby until its birth.)

When I was pregnant with Cee and about to become a mom for the first time, I thought a lot about what kind of mother I would be and how this big life transition might alter my identity, my career path, my marriage, and my daily life. The baby-to-be was kind of a vague amalgamation of all the babies I’d known.

This time around, having been around many more babies, I recognize the individuals that babies are from the first days of life – and even in utero – and I spend a lot more time wondering about this baby’s temperament and personality. Introverted and contemplative, like Cee? Or totally different?

Filling me with wonder, this baby moves around in utero a lot, and this feels very different from my experience carrying Cee. I didn’t feel movement from Cee until around 23 weeks, but I began to feel this baby move at 16 weeks. And this baby continues to be very active, more than I remember with Cee, especially making big, dramatic movements in the evening hours but also having significant activity bouts throughout the day (and sometimes in the middle of the night, of course).

Because we don’t know the sex of this baby, I’m often asked if I have any predictions on that front. How would I know, I think? I don’t feel like I have any kind of gut instinct for this kind of thing, and I don’t buy into any of the old wives tails. But if I’m pushed to make a guess, I guess that this baby is a boy. And when I ask myself why that is, it comes down to this observation about more fetal movements. This baby feels different from Cee, and my brain makes a jump to sex as a possible explanation. And then I stop, remind myself that I’m perpetuating a total gender stereotype, and feel embarrassed.

One day, I repeated all of this to a friend as we walked together (complete with an apology for the gender stereotype), with Cee riding her bike within hearing distance. A couple of weeks later, my mom was talking to Cee on the phone and asked her if she thought the baby would be a boy or a girl. Cee answered in what seemed like a verbatim copy of my own explanation: “Well, Mom thinks that it’s a boy, because the baby moves around a lot inside of her, and I didn’t move very much.” Yikes. From now on, I’m keeping my mouth shut. And for the record, Cee is really hoping for a little sister.

All of this left me wondering if fetal movements can actually predict anything about the baby, whether sex or temperament, in postnatal life. I happened to be corresponding with Jena Pincott, author of Do Chocolate Lovers Have Sweeter Babies?, a few weeks ago, and I asked her if she knew of any research on this. She wrote back, “As for ‘in utero’ forecasts, my prediction is that your 2015 is going to be very, very busy!” and sent me a few research articles. I dug around and found quite a few more studies of this question. Finally, I could stop speculating and start talking science! Here’s what I found:

How is this question studied?

Most studies use ultrasound or a Doppler transducer placed on the mother’s belly to us baby profile croppedmeasure fetal movements. Most are conducted over a period of about an hour, during which the moms are asked to rest, and the best studies take several of these measurements over the course of the pregnancy. Studies of postnatal temperament then use standardized behavioral observations or questionnaires to describe aspects of the baby’s behavior.

Is it true that some fetuses are more active than others?

I wondered if my perception that I was carrying a more active fetus is this pregnancy was really true or if it was influenced by other factors? Continue reading

The Whole Truth About Infant Cereals: 7 Science-Based Tips

I recently received an email from a reader with a question about baby cereals:

“My wife and I are expecting a baby this October. We are planning to breastfeed but have lots of questions about introducing solid foods, particularly cereals. Do we have to feed the baby commercial baby cereals? I am concerned about all the extra crap that is put into commercial food, including unnecessary sugars and possible GMOs. Is there another product or whole food option that we could use to introduce grains to our baby instead of a commercial cereal product?”

~Brenda and Leah in San Diego, CA

Baby cereals have made a big swing in popularity over the last couple of generations. It wasn’t long ago that they were considered an essential first food, given to baby within the first months or even weeks of life. These days, in some circles, they’ve become a marker of lazy parenting, with conscientious parents choosing instead to prepare their own organic carrot purees or scrambling eggs with butter and breast milk. Cereals, meanwhile, get slammed in blog posts that call them over-processed, pointless, and even toxic. The movement towards more real foods for babies is definitely a good thing, but the scare-mongering about baby cereals is not. Brenda and Leah’s question is a great one, and it deserves an answer that is science-based, not sensationalized.

mother feeding her baby

1. You don’t have to feed a commercial baby cereal.

The reason infant cereals are typically recommended is that they are fortified with iron, and iron can become limiting during late infancy, particularly in breastfed babies. In early infancy, babies are mostly using stored iron that was transferred from mom during pregnancy, but by around 6 months, those stores run low, and they need to be getting some iron from solid foods. At this age, babies are growing and developing rapidly, and studies show that iron deficiency in infancy can cause developmental delays and lasting cognitive deficits.1–3 Breastfed babies are at greatest risk for iron deficiency,4,5 because breast milk is quite low in iron. (The iron in breast milk is efficiently absorbed, but there simply isn’t much of it.)

Commercial baby cereals are fortified with iron, effectively making it an easy way to deliver extra iron to lots of babies. In one study, among breastfed babies fed a fortified cereal daily, only 2.5% developed iron deficiency, compared with 14% of babies fed solids at their parents’ discretion.6 Infant formula is also fortified with iron, so babies that are formula-fed for at least half of their milk meals generally get enough iron that way.

However, there are other sources of iron that are actually better than fortified cereals. Meat, poultry, and fish all contain heme iron, which is more efficiently absorbed in the digestive tract than nonheme iron, the form found in plants like spinach and beans, as well as fortified cereals. Including a source of heme iron in a meal also increases the absorption of nonheme iron, so serving baby a little chicken with lentils actually increases the bioavailability of iron from the lentils. Baby cereals are often recommended as first foods, but this is based more on tradition and culture than on any scientific evidence. There is no reason why you can’t introduce those great heme sources of iron (meat, poultry, fish) as first foods, and in fact, this is now recommended by the AAP. If your baby is consuming 1-2 small servings of meat per day, plus other sources of non-heme iron, then there’s no reason that you have to supplement with an iron-fortified cereal. See more of my tips on ensuring that your baby gets enough iron in this post: 5 Practical Ways to Increase Iron in Your Baby’s Diet. Also, note that your pediatrician should test your baby for anemia around 12 months, so this will at least alert you if your baby is very deficient in iron.

Many babies and their parents also opt to skip spoon-feeding entirely, doing some version of Baby-Led Weaning. Cee simply wasn’t interested in being spoon-fed pureed foods, but she loved feeding herself soft finger foods. That meant that she ate very little infant cereal, except what I baked into muffins or pancakes (mostly to use up the box, but I figured she could also use the extra iron). This route can be fun and appropriate for babies that are ready to self-feed by around 6 months; others may need spoon-feeding and may love the interaction of feeding with a tuned-in caregiver.8 There are lots of options here, and the most important thing is to offer iron-rich foods (cereal or otherwise) and to follow your baby’s lead with texture and timing.

2. Commercial baby cereals may not be as bad as you think.

Here’s the Nutrition Facts label and ingredient list for Gerber’s oatmeal cereal (this one happens to be an organic product, but the conventional version is otherwise the same):

gerber oatmeal label

What’s in baby cereals? Take a look at the ingredient list. Continue reading

New Research on Gluten Introduction to Infants and Risk of Celiac Disease

If you’re worried about your child’s risk of celiac disease and wondering when to introduce gluten-containing foods, then you’ll want to know about two new studies published in the New England Journal of Medicine this week.

Gluten is delicious to most of us, but it can be devastating to those with celiac disease. Photo by Adrian van Leen

Gluten is delicious to most of us, but it can be devastating to those with celiac disease. Photo by Adrian van Leen

Celiac disease is an immune response to gluten, a protein found in wheat, barley, and rye. It causes inflammation and damage to the small intestine, and while it can be successfully managed with a gluten-free diet, it is a lifelong disease. (Celiac disease is distinct from non-celiac gluten sensitivity, which is a murky and controversial condition that may not be related to gluten at all.)

I reviewed the research on early infant feeding and risk of celiac disease on my blog about a year ago (Breastfeeding, Gluten Introduction, and Risk of Celiac Disease). I have since received lots of comments and messages from parents concerned about this, so I wanted to be sure to write about these important new studies.

These latest studies dramatically advance our understanding of this topic because they are randomized controlled trials. Both started with a group of babies already identified as being high-risk for celiac disease, randomly assigned them to different time of introduction of gluten, and then tracked their development of the disease. Previous studies were all observational, thus only able to identify associations between variables, and were limited by confounding factors and other sources of bias.

The first study was led by researchers in the Netherlands but included children born in 7 European countries and in Israel. 944 babies were identified as being high-risk for celiac based on a genetic predisposition (HLA genotype) and having a first-degree relative (parent or sibling) with celiac. The babies were randomized to two groups, and one group was given a small amount (100 mg) of gluten starting at 4 months of age, while the control group was given a placebo and instructed not to introduce gluten until 6 months, at which point parents in both groups were advised to gradually introduce gluten-containing foods. The incidence of celiac disease was tracked through 3 years of age, with all suspected cases confirmed with an intestinal biopsy. Overall, about 5% of the study participants developed celiac disease by age 3, and it made no difference whether gluten was introduced at 4 or 6 months. It also made no difference whether the babies were breastfed (exclusively or not) or currently breastfed at the time of gluten introduction.

The second study was conducted in Italy and had a similar design but instead compared gluten introduction at 6 vs. 12 months. Continue reading

Bed-sharing with Young Infants: Is It Safe After All?

Does bed-sharing with infants increase their risk of SIDS, even without known risk factors such as alcohol use, smoking, and co-sleeping on a couch or chair? A recent study makes what is probably the best attempt to date to answer this question. The study, led by U.K. researcher Peter Blair, was published last week in the journal PLOS ONE and is freely available to the public (yay!).1

Many studies have found that co-sleeping is associated with an increased risk of SIDS, but most of this risk doesn’t come from co-sleeping per se, but rather doing so in particularly hazardous conditions, such as on a couch or with a parent who has been drinking. However, there’s an important, albeit controversial, caveat to this conclusion. Several studies have looked specifically at infants younger than 3 months and still found a significant risk of bed-sharing even in the absence of these other risk factors.2–6 The current study comes to conclusions much more reassuring to bed-sharing parents. In this study, bed-sharing without alcohol, smoking, or couch/chair co-sleeping was not associated with a significant SIDS risk in infants younger than 3 months and even seemed to be protective in older babies. Both of these findings run counter to previous studies and to the sleep recommendations of the AAP, so they deserve a close look.

How was the study conducted? Continue reading

Zero to Five: A Book Review and Giveaway

I received a review copy of a really cool book over the summer: Zero to Five: 70 Essential Parenting Tips Based on Science (and What I’ve Learned So Far) by Tracy Cutchlow. I loved the book and wanted to review it on my blog, and the publisher offered to give away 5 copies to Science of Mom readers! (If you’re curious about my policy on reviews and giveaways, check my About Me page.)

Author Tracy Cuthlow with her daughter, Geneva.

Author Tracy Cuthlow with her daughter, Geneva.

Zero to Five is a book of parenting advice starting with pregnancy and going up through age 5. Author Tracy Cutchlow is a former journalist at the Seattle Times and edited John Medina’s books Brain Rules and Brain Rules for Baby. Then she had a daughter, now 2, and was inspired to create a book that would bring together relevant, evidence-based parenting advice into an enjoyable and accessible format. I’d say she succeeded.

Each of the 70 parenting tips are explained in 2-4 page spreads summarizing the research in the area and accompanied by gorgeous candid photographs of children and parents. The tips are practical, and they’re explained simply, but they’re rooted in science.

ZTF-guard-babys-sleep

The book is divided into 9 topics headings, listed below with examples of some of my favorite tips in parentheses:

  • Prepare (Bolster your friendships; Expect conflict as a couple)
  • Love (Create a feeling of safety; Comfort newborn with the familiar)
  • Talk (Talk to your baby a ton; Read together; Teach sign language)
  • Sleep, eat, and potty (Guard your sleep; Guard baby’s sleep, too; Let baby decide how much to eat)
  • Play (Let baby touch that; Save the box; Make music with baby)
  • Connect (Choose empathy first; Allow mistakes, discomfort, boredom)
  • Discipline (Be firm but warm; Label intense emotions; Teach instead of punish)
  • Move (Rock, jiggle, and swing; Keep moving)
  • Slow down (Be still; Don’t bother to compare)

Some of these tips are obvious, like talking to your baby. But they’re also really important, and that’s one of the things I love about this book. Continue reading

What’s so important – and stressful – about family dinner?

A recent study about the stress of getting family meals on the table has been getting lots of attention from both the media and moms. A Slate piece, “Let’s Stop Idealizing the Home-Cooked Family Dinner,” posted Wednesday, has already garnered 3.5K comments on the article itself and more than 26K Facebook shares. This has obviously struck a nerve. While feeding a family is a big and often stressful job, some perspective about why we do it and what matters most about family meals might be helpful to families feeling the mealtime crunch.

The study itself, titled “The Joy of Cooking?”, was published in Contexts, a publication of the American Sociological Association geared to be accessible to the general public. The paper itself is a really interesting read and freely available online.

Researchers in the sociology and anthropology departments at North Carolina State University conducted the study. This was a qualitative study, which means that the data came in the form of stories, generated from interviews with real people. From the paper:

“Over the past year and a half, our research team conducted in-depth interviews with 150 black, white, and Latina mothers from all walks of life. We also spent over 250 hours conducting ethnographic observations with 12 working-class and poor families. We observed them in their homes as they prepared and ate meals, and tagged along on trips to the grocery store and to their children’s check-ups. Sitting around the kitchen table and getting a feel for these women’s lives, we came to appreciate the complexities involved in feeding a family.”

These kinds of methods are common in sociology and anthropology research, and they allow researchers to understand the many complex variables that contribute to how people feel and why they feel that way. However, we have to be careful about interpreting these studies beyond the individual stories that they provide. For example, this study wasn’t a random sample of moms, and it can’t give us quantitative information like the percentage of moms who find cooking to be an unbearable chore versus rewarding or enjoyable. It doesn’t allow us to look at correlations between family income and nights of home-cooked meals per week, for example.

Here’s what it can tell us: Continue reading