Some new moms are coming home from the hospital with more than a baby. They're also bringing the placenta that nourished the child for nine months, planning to eat the organ like many animals do.

Proponents of placenta consumption say the practice gives a new mom energy, improves milk production and eases postpartum depression.

But the authors of a study published recently in the American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology found no evidence for those claims and warn that mothers who eat the placenta put themselves and their breastfed child at risk of infection.

The researchers want doctors to inform their patients of the risks of placenta eating - also known as placentophagy - and also to consider it as a possible cause if they encounter a new mom or baby suffering from a certain type of bacterial infection.

Here's what's behind the trend, and what parents should know before consuming a placenta capsule or smoothie.

Lotus births and placenta planting

Officially, the placenta is an organ, the only organ shared by both mother and baby. It develops from the outer cells of the days-old embryo, and serves as the child's lungs, gastrointestinal system, kidneys and liver during the pregnancy. At the end of nine months, it is a blood-rich mass about 9 inches long and 1 inch thick, attached to the infant by the umbilical cord. The placenta is expelled from the woman's body after the child is born.

In the past, some doctors have snipped the cord (or let the father do so) quickly. Earlier this year, however, the American College of Obstetrics and Gynecology, the American Academy of Pediatrics and the American College of Nurse Midwives issued a joint statement recommending that the cord be left intact for at least 30 seconds and up to a minute because blood is still circulating from the placenta to the infant. Leaving it connected longer improves circulation and iron levels in the child, and is especially beneficial for pre-term babies.

Some people are taking this even further, opting for what has become known as a lotus birth. In a lotus birth, the baby is left connected to the placenta until the cord falls off naturally, which can take up to 10 days. The practice is scorned by some physicians, including Dr. Jen Gunter, who calls leaving a baby attached to a decomposing organ "madness."

"It is the equivalent of diapering up a raw steak and attaching to your newborn for three to five days," Gunter wrote.

But that doesn't thwart some women, who even buy special bags in which to carry the placenta.

Some couples show reverence to the placenta and its role in their new baby's life by burying it after birth and holding "placenta planting" ceremonies.

Others have it steamed and dehydrated at a business like Salt Lake Placenta, which will pick up your placenta at the hospital, turn it into easy-to-swallow capsules and then deliver them to you, all for about $200.

Some moms just take it home with them and either eat it raw, or cook it like meat. If placenta stew or placenta spaghetti sauce isn't your thing, you can freeze it and make a placenta smoothie, the website WhattoExpect.com says.

What the risks are

Interest in placenta consumption has increased because of the growing interest in natural childbirth, the authors of the new study wrote. They acknowledge that researchers are still learning about what the placenta does.

"It has been recognized that there is a more interactive dialogue between the placenta and the maternal tissues than previously considered. The definitions of the placenta are changing, and this unique organ is being reconsidered on a physiological rather than a structural basis," they wrote.

But the report said that the arguments for placenta consumption so far have relied on anecdotes or small, limited studies.

In June, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a warning about the practice based on the case of an Oregon baby who became sick with Group B Streptococcus agalactiaesepsis after the child had already been treated for it. Doctors believe the child became ill again because the mother was taking contaminated placenta capsules.

"Although the infection could have come from another family member, this report is the first solid evidence that contaminated placenta capsules can be a source of infection," the report said.

There are no federal standards governing the processing of placentas, and public health officials warn that infectious pathogens can remain even after the placenta is heated, dried and pulverized.

According to SELF magazine, placenta-processing companies won't accept placentas from women who have hepatitis, herpes, chlamydia, syphilis and Lyme disease. Even an E. coli infection can be passed to a breastfeeding child, Korin Miller wrote for SELF.

"Many times nothing may happen, but there is a risk that an infection is going to occur," Dr. Amesh A. Adalja, a senior associate at the Johns Hopkins Center for Health Security, told Miller.

How it's done

Erica Putnam, of Salt Lake Placenta, is an advocate for the practice and went into the business of making placenta capsules because she believed they helped her after the birth of her children, who are now 1 and 4.

"I noticed when I forgot to take my placenta capsules, I had harder days," Putnam said.

Although certification isn't required in Utah, Putnam is working toward being certified by the International Placenta & Postpartum Association, and she has completed food handling training required by the state.

She prepares the capsules in her kitchen, first cleaning and trimming the placenta, then steaming it from 20 to 40 minutes, depending on its size. Then she cuts the placenta into thin slices, and using a dehydrating tray, dries it for 24 hours at 160 degrees. Finally, she puts dried pieces in a coffee grinder to turn them into powder, which goes into the capsules along with a selection of herbs.

Putnam said she has had 55 clients so far this year, and most say their primary reason for wanting to consume the placenta is its purported effect on depression. Like any nutritional supplement sold in stores, the effects are not guaranteed, but that doesn't mean they're not real for some women, she said.

"Childbirth is exhausting; it's hard to recover. The capsules help replenish iron levels, and help to regulate hormones so we can function a little better and not have such severe mood swings afterward," she said.

"Who knows if it really works or not? It could be a placebo, but even if it is, it helps, one way or the other. It's a tool women have."

Another option

Putnam had not read the most recent study, but has heard about the Oregon case cited by the CDC. She noted that doctors couldn't prove the baby's illness came from a placenta capsule, but said that if the placenta isn't processed properly, something like that could happen, which is why she supports increased regulation of the business.

At many hospitals, placentas are treated as medical waste, and some parents have resorted to stealing their placentas for later consumption.

"Hospitals are very worried about safety, because the placenta really is a biohazard. It's full of blood, it's not very sanitary; it could be a public health nightmare," Titi Otunla, a certified nurse midwife at Texas Children's Pavilion for Women in Houston, said in Parents magazine.

Proponents of placenta consumption suggest that pregnant women talk to their doctors and interview hospitals about what their policies are. In Utah, Intermountain Healthcare allows women to take their placenta home, as does the University of Utah Hospital and MountainStar Healthcare.

Even if it's permitted where you live, if placenta planting or eating just isn't your thing, there's another option that may be better than relegating this important organ to the trash, if you've got the money.

A company called Americordallows new parents to store portions of the placenta, along with umbilical cord blood and tissue, in case the stem cells they contain are needed for future medical treatment. The company says it offers service in all 50 states and will store the tissue for 20 years for $1,999.

The post New mothers are eating their placentas – here’s why doctors say they should stop appeared first on FamilyToday.

It's not just the approach of the flu season that has federal health officials saying every American should get a flu shot before Halloween, including women who are pregnant.

The annual message also comes in reaction to a study, published Sept. 25 in the journal Vaccine, that found pregnant women who had flu shots in the first trimester were more likely to miscarry than women who had not been vaccinated.

The findings surprised Wisconsin researchers who had previously published studies that showed no association between the flu shot and pregnancy. And they're worrying health officials, who fear some pregnant women will just read the headlines and not look more deeply into the research.

Despite the report, the nation's leading group of obstetricians says the vaccine is safe during pregnancy and remains an important part of prenatal care.

"In addition, maternal vaccination is the most effective strategy to protect newborns because the vaccine is not approved for use in infants younger than six months," Dr. Haywood Brown, president of the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, said in a statement.

The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services is even more direct, saying, "Pregnant? Get a flu shot!" on its website. The CDC advises that every American 6 months and older get a flu shot each year, preferably before the end of October.

But mothers-to-be who won't eat deli meat or soft cheese out of fear of harming their baby may wince at the thought of introducing dead strains of the flu into their body voluntarily, particularly because they are accompanied by trace amounts of formaldehyde and thimerosal. (Vaccine mists contain live virus, but they are not recommended by the CDC this year.)

When making a decision about whether to get the vaccine, here are three things for expectant moms to consider.

One doctor considers the study bad science

A co-author of the new study told NPR that he knew the results would be controversial but that he believed it was important for the public to know both the good and bad.

"I believe the best approach with the public is to be very clear and open and transparent about 'Here's what we know; here are the limitations; here's why we still recommend the flu vaccine during pregnancy,'" said Dr. Edward Belongia, an epidemiologist and a member of the CDC's advisory committee on immunization practices.

The study only showed an association between the flu shot and miscarriage; it did not show that the vaccine caused the miscarriages. And although researchers looked at data from two flu seasons - 2010-2011 and 2011-2012 - miscarriages were only notable during the first season of study, and then only among women who had been vaccinated for two consecutive years.

That's one reason Dr. Paul Offit, a professor of pediatrics and director of the Vaccine Education Center at Children's Hospital of Philadelphia, argued in The Daily Beast that the study shouldn't have been published. Six previous studies had shown no association, making the latest study an outlier, Offit said, adding that the troublesome numbers were too small to be significant.

"After the CDC researchers had finished sub-stratifying their data, the numbers were small: 14 cases of spontaneous abortions in the vaccinated group and four in the unvaccinated group. The problem with small numbers is that they're often misleading," Offit wrote.

He said the study contained "weak, biologically inexplicable data" and that the publication of it could harm pregnant women and their babies if they elect not to get a flu shot because of it. About half of all pregnant women get a flu shot now and it's important because if they get the flu while they're pregnant, they're more likely to die from it than women who aren't pregnant, he said, and also to have a miscarriage, premature delivery or a low-birthweight baby.

Out of all age groups, infants who contract the flu are the most likely to die from it, Offit said, and since babies can't have the vaccine in the first few months of life, the only protection available to them is having a mother who has been immunized.

There's a curious 28-day window

In his statement, Brown, the ACOG president, noted that one mystery in the new research is why the increased risk of miscarriage only occurred when the vaccine was given early in the first trimester and then only within 28 days after vaccination.

"Scientifically, it is unclear why this would occur. There was no association seen with a pregnancy loss more than 28 days after vaccination. In the same study, when vaccination was given either later in the first trimester or in the second or third trimester, there was no association seen with pregnancy loss or any other adverse pregnancy outcomes," Brown wrote.

Although this might suggest that women who are worried about miscarriage should wait until the end of the first trimester or later to get a flu shot, ACOG does not suggest waiting.

Previous studies have found the vaccine "safe and effective" during pregnancy, the ACOG statement said, and "there is insufficient information to support changing the current recommendation which is to offer and encourage routine flu vaccinations during pregnancy regardless of the trimester of pregnancy." The group called for more studies to address the concern raised by this one.

Likewise, the study acknowledge that it "does not and cannot" show that flu shots caused the women to miscarry and concluded that "further research is warranted."

Pregnant women can ask for a special vaccine

Most obstetricians and federal health officials maintain that the flu vaccine is safe whenever research suggests otherwise. One of the most publicized scares came when vaccines were linked to rising rates of autism. The connection was eventually debunked and labeled a "myth" that contributed to a brief decline in vaccination rates.

The controversial connection surfaced again earlier this year when a study of about 197,000 women in California found a slightly increased risk of autism among children whose mothers had a flu shot during the first trimester of pregnancy.

The authors of that study, published in January 2017 in JAMA Pediatrics, concluded that if the flu vaccine had contributed to autism in the cases they analyzed, the numbers were so small (amounting to approximately 4 out of 1,000 women) that the finding could simply be attributed to chance.

As NPR noted in a report about the study, the researchers didn't consider whether the flu shots contained thimerosal, a mercury-based preservative that the FDA says shouldn't be given to infants.

Thimerosal, which has been a target of environmental activist Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and others in the anti-vaccination movement, has not been allowed in childhood vaccines since 2001, a change that some health officials say was unnecessary because there was no evidence that it was a problem, even in children.

(Adults don't have to worry about thimerosal, Wired magazine reported

While insisting that the vaccine containing thimerosal is safe for everyone, including pregnant women, the Department of Health and Human Services says that pregnant women who are still concerned about its presence can ask their doctors for a thimerosal-free dose.

Also, the CDC notes that you can ask your health-care provider to see exactly what's in any vaccine you (or your children) receive. "All vaccine packages come with information (called an insert) that lists the ingredients," the agency says on its website.

Beyond getting vaccinated, the Department of Health and Human Services recommends that pregnant women do one more thing to protect their baby from the flu: Ensure that everyone who will be around the newborn, from grandparents to siblings to the babysitter, has gotten a flu shot, too.

It's never been easier to get one. In some communities, such as Allentown, Pennsylvania, you can even get a drive-through flu shot without leaving your car.

The post Can a flu shot increase your risk of miscarriage? Doctors reveal the answer appeared first on FamilyToday.

The same pediatrician who gave your baby her first check-up may soon be giving her advice on how to safely get a tattoo or nose ring.

The American Academy of Pediatrics on Monday issued its first guidelines on "body modifications," acknowledging that invasive body art - once used to mark criminals and slaves in America - has gone mainstream. Nearly 40 percent of millennials have tattoos, and the U.S. Armed Forces has relaxed its restrictions on tattoos in recent years.

Despite the growing acceptance of tattoos and piercings, the academy has been silent about the practice. Now it says that physicians should talk to adolescents about the importance of hygiene at piercing studios and tattoo parlors, even though in most states, it's illegal for a minor to get a tattoo without a parent's permission.

But the guidelines don't mean the group is endorsing the practice.

The report, published in the journal Pediatrics, notes that medical complications can occur and that body modifications "may also co-occur with high-risk behaviors" among adolescents. The pediatricians urge adolescents to talk with their parents, guardians or another "responsible adult" before making the decision to get a tattoo.

Young people should know that "tattoos are permanent and that removal is difficult, expensive and only partially effective," their report said.

Since most people with tattoos say they don't regret getting them, the prospect of a future expensive and painful removal is unlikely to deter a young person intent on etching a rose or skull, among the most popular body art this year, onto a shoulder.

But that's not all they should know, and there's no need to wait for the next doctor's visit. When talking to teens and college students about tattoos, here are other issues that parents might want to point out.

Why hygiene matters

The Food and Drug Administration considers tattoo ink a cosmetic, albeit one that is applied with needles that puncture the skin. Most tattoo artists use a machine that injects ink into the dermis, the second layer of our skin, by pricking the outer layer (the epidermis) several thousand times a minute.

Ideally, the skin is cleansed with an antiseptic before and after the procedure, and the tattoo should be covered for at least 24 hours, then protected with antibiotic ointment as it heals, the academy's report said. "Tattoos generally take two weeks to heal; sun exposure should be avoided or sunscreen should be used, and swimming, direct shower jets, or soaking in water should be avoided," the authors wrote.

The healing time for pierced flesh varies with the part of the body. Pierced ears can recover in a matter of weeks; a pierced belly button might not heal for nine months, Dr. Cora Breuner, a physician at Seattle Children's Hospital and a co-author of the academy's report, told NPR.

Dirty working conditions or unsterile equipment poses a risk, not only of infection, but of the transmission of HIV, hepatitis B and C, tetanus and other complications.

Each state sets its own regulations for sterilization and sanitation, and many studios are fastidious in adhering to best practices. In California, for example, studio owners register with the state health department, take a yearly course in bloodborne disease and infection control, NPR reported. They also have to show that they've been vaccinated against hepatitis.

Consider the ink

Tattoos may pose a health risk based on what ingredients are used in the dye; the Food and Drug Administration says that some inks have been been found to contain components of printer toner and car ink. The academy also expresses concern that some dyes contain traces of metals, including chromium, cobalt, iron and mercury.

"Although the concentration of metals in tattoo ink is low, metals are emerging as a class of human carcinogens. Cutaneous exposure over a lifetime may result in adverse events," the authors wrote.

The FDA encourages people to report adverse reactions to a variety of consumer products, tattoos among them. Between 2004 and 2016, the agency received 363 reports of infections and persistent allergic reactions associated with tattoos.

Does it honor God?

A Harris Poll in 2016 found that 86 percent of people with tattoos said they didn't regret getting them. When asked why they enjoyed having a tattoo, 30 percent said it made them feel sexier, 21 percent said it made them feel attractive or strong, and 5 percent said it made them feel more athletic, and 16 percent said it made them feel more spiritual.

Some people get Bible verses and crosses tattooed on their arms; quotations are the second most common type of tattoo, after roses.

There's even an Alliance of Christian Tattooers, based in Chandler, Arizona.

Yet not everyone agrees that having a tattoo is something pleasing to God. Some people point to Leviticus 19:28, which says, "You shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor tattoo any marks on you: I am the Lord."

The United Church of Christ says that for Christians it is "better that a person not get tattoos" because of the health risks and the possibility of others judging us because of them.

While tattoos are more widely accepted than in years past, more than a third of human-resource managers say that having a visible tattoo can limit someone's career, Business Insider reported last year.

And the pediatricians' report cited an earlier survey in which 76 percent of 2,700 people with a tattoo or piercing thought it hurt their chances of getting a job.

Think before you ink

Although tattoo removal is possible, the process is complicated and expensive. But some people are so desperate to remove old tattoos that they'll go through it anyway.

The American Society of Aesthetic Plastic Surgery says more than 52,000 people had tattoos removed last year, up 13 percent from the previous year, The Chicago Tribune reported. The average session costs $463 and it can take several sessions to remove a tattoo, Kate Thayer reported for The Tribune.

In its new guidelines, the academy notes that there is no comprehensive reporting of medical complications caused by tattoos and body piercings, and in light of the number of people who have them - an estimated 30 percent of Americans have at least one tattoo - the number is likely relatively low.

Problems are most likely to occur if the piercing or tattooing is done at an unlicensed facility. Even at licensed facilities, people should observe a procedure to ensure that best practices are followed. For example, "The piercer should be observed putting on new, disposable gloves and removing new equipment from a sterile container," the academy report said.

At tattoo studios, check to see that fresh, unused ink is poured into a new, disposable container with each client.

And both parents and pediatricians should remind young people that not everyone may love their tattoo as much as they do - including their own future selves.

The post The talk you should have with your teen about tattoos appeared first on FamilyToday.

Fewer than 2 percent of children in the U.S. are known to be allergic to peanuts, but those who are can die within minutes of eating a morsel of something containing peanuts, even if they don't swallow and even if they spit it out.

With peanut allergies on the rise and many schools banning peanut products, some parents might be tempted to withhold all peanut products from the house just to be safe. But a growing body of research suggests that's precisely the wrong thing to do. And earlier this month, the Food and Drug Administration officially agreed.

The FDA announced Sept. 7 that it will allow manufacturers to say on food labels that babies who are introduced to food containing ground peanuts early in life are less likely to develop peanut allergies. The advice comes eight months after the National Institutes of Health issued new guidelines that encouraged parents to expose children to ground peanuts as early as 4 months of age.

The guidance was a reversal of advice issued 17 years ago by the American Academy of Pediatrics. Then, the AAP said that high-risk infants - those who have severe eczema or are known to be allergic to eggs - should not be exposed to peanuts before age 3. Since then, studies have found no benefit in waiting to introduce children to peanuts and, conversely, have found a protective effect.

But before parents start slathering peanut butter on the teething crackers, they should know exactly what the guidelines say. Most importantly, never feed a baby whole peanuts; children should not have whole peanuts or tree nuts until at least age 4 because they are a choking hazard.

What the guidelines say

Although babies should breast-feed or have formula until at least age 1, most parents begin to introduce solid foods to their children anywhere from 4 to 6 months. In America and some other countries, a baby's first food is usually a cereal or porridge made with rice, followed by mashed fruits and vegetables.

A baby is ready to start solid foods if she can hold her head up, move food from a spoon into her throat, open her mouth when food comes her way and has doubled her birth weight, the AAP says.

At this time, parents can freely give peanut butter or other products containing ground peanuts to children at no risk of an allergy.

For infants at risk, the process is a little more involved.

Babies who appear allergic to eggs and who have severe eczema should be tested for a peanut allergy before peanuts are introduced. Depending on the test results, they can be cleared to begin eating food containing ground peanuts, either at home or in the presence of a physician.

Parents of babies who aren't allergic to eggs, but who have mild to moderate eczema, should also proceed cautiously. They should be given ground peanuts at about 6 months of age, after they have been introduced to other solid foods. A physician's evaluation is not needed unless a reaction occurs.

The guidelines were based on the results of a 2015 study in which 640 infants with severe eczema and/or egg allergies either avoided or consumed peanut products until they were 5 years old. (No children already identified with peanut allergies were included in the study.)

At age 5, 13.7 percent of children who hadn't consumed peanuts were diagnosed with a peanut allergy. Of children who had consumed peanuts, 1.9 percent were allergic.

How to proceed

In the study on which the new guidelines are based, children ate, on average, 4 heaping teaspoons of peanut butter each week, according to an NPR report.

But that doesn't mean you should put smooth peanut butter on a spoon (chunky, of course, is taboo) and offer it to your child. The American Academy of Pediatrics says that even smooth peanut butter can cause children up to age 2 to choke because of its thickness.

Instead, dilute the peanut butter by adding hot water.

Dr. Ruchi S. Gupta, a pediatrician and immunologist at Northwestern University, told NPR you should add water to 2 tablespoons of peanut butter and stir it to make a puree.

Once it's warm, not hot, put some on a spoon and offer a taste to your child. Then watch the baby closely for 10 minutes, looking out for any potential side effect, such as hives, a rash, behavior changes or trouble breathing. If there is no change, you can feed the baby more, but continue to monitor the child for side effects for another two hours, Gupta said in a video produced by the American College of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology in San Francisco.

The National Peanut Board, which is understandably happy with the turn of events, has also put out a video suggesting other ways to offer peanut butter to babies. The board suggests creating a puree using peanut butter mixed with breast milk or formula and mixing powdered peanut butter (who knew there was such a thing?) with applesauce or cereal. Parents can also make a puree using creamy peanut butter combined with mashed bananas or strawberries. The board helpfully offers a recipe for homemade peanut butter teething biscuits.

It's important to remember that peanut butter shouldn't be the first solid food your child eats but should only be introduced after your child has eaten other solid foods.

When giving babies peanut products, however, parents should stay away from the iconic food of childhood, the PB&J.

Pediatricians may have changed their minds about peanut butter, but sugar remains a nutritional villain, so much so that the American Academy of Pediatrics no longer recommends fruit juice.

The post The FDA says it’s OK to give your baby peanut butter; here’s why appeared first on FamilyToday.

The $417 million jury verdict for a California woman who is dying of ovarian cancer after using Johnson's Baby Powder for more than 40 years has the company, researchers and families seeking ways to respond to the unproven connection between the disease and talcum powder.

The Aug. 21 decision marked the fourth time that juries have awarded millions of dollars to baby-powder users diagnosed with cancer, and thousands of other cases are pending, The New York Times reported.

But despite the alarming headlines, baby powder remains on store shelves, and the American Cancer Society says there's no proof that the iconic Johnson & Johnson product or other talc-based powders cause cancer. Some studies have shown an increased risk after long-term use; others have found no connection.

In a statement, Johnson & Johnson said it would appeal the California decision because the company is "guided by the science, which supports the safety of Johnson's Baby Powder."

Still, the possibility of harm has some health officials suggesting that consumers think seriously about continued use of the product.

"In medicine we usually say that association does not prove causation. So until further information is forthcoming, I recommend for patients to be cautious," Dr. Anthony Picket with Dignity Health California Hospital told KCAL, a CBS affiliate in Los Angeles.

Getting moms to part with their baby powder, however, is a challenging task. The product is a staple in bathroom cabinets and on changing tables, and mothers have been using it since the 19th century to reduce chafing and treat diaper rash. Its aroma is one of the most memorable of childhood, so much so that Yankee Candle once sold a candle with the scent.

But with accumulating verdicts against Johnson & Johnson, families may be wondering if it's time to throw the baby powder out, along with hot dogs, grilled meat and other items that studies have shown are potential carcinogens. Here's a rundown on the latest research, as well as alternatives to consider.

The California verdict

In the most recent court case, attorneys for Eva Echeverria, a 63-year-old grandmother who once worked as a medical receptionist, convinced a California jury that she has terminal cancer because she used baby powder in her perineal region since she was 11. Echeverria was too sick to testify, but in a video played in the courtroom, she wept and said her daughter was a teenager when Echeverria was diagnosed and that she would have stopped using the powder if its label had said there was a health risk.

In court filings, Echeverria and other plaintiffs said Johnson & Johnson knew of the "unreasonably dangerous and defective nature of talcum powder" yet the company "compelled women through advertisements to dust themselves with this product to mask odors."

The lawsuit involved not just Johnson's Baby Powder but also Shower to Shower, a body powder once marketed with the slogan "A sprinkle a day helps keep odor away."

A key ingredient in cosmetic powder is talc, a soft mineral that is mined from rocks and naturally contains a small amount of asbestos. Before the 1970s, talc-based powders could have contained asbestos, but since then, all products sold in the U.S. must be asbestos-free. Echeverria had dusted herself with Johnson's Baby Powder since the 1950s.

Even absent asbestos, some researchers believe using powder in the genital region could present a cancer risk due to inflammation caused by particles that become lodged inside the body. And miners who inhaled talc particles were at risk for lung cancer, the American Cancer Society said.

But even the Harvard researcher who urged Johnson & Johnson to issue warnings on its label has noted that the risk may vary with factors that include age, weight and whether a woman smokes or uses hormone therapy.

On its website, the American Cancer Society said that in animal studies, results on asbestos-free talc are mixed, "with some showing tumor formation and others not finding any." The organization concluded that there is "some suggestion of a possible increase in ovarian cancer risk" but "little evidence" that talc-based powders cause other types of cancer.

"Until more information is available, people concerned about using talcum powder may want to avoid or limit their use of consumer products that contain it," the cancer society said.

'For toilet and nursery'

Johnson & Johnson, which reported earnings of $16.5 billion last year, has a website devoted to alleviating consumer concern about the safety of Johnson's Baby Powder. On it, the company cites three studies involving 180,000 women that showed no association between long-term powder use and ovarian cancer.

Another website published by Johnson & Johnson noted that mothers have been applying powder to their babies' bottoms since it was created in 1894 to treat diaper rash. Then called "Johnson's Toilet & Baby Powder," it was marketed as "antiseptic, perfumed talcum" for "toilet and nursery."

Tara Glasgow, the company's director of research and development, said in a video on the Johnson & Johnson website, "Talc is and has been safe for use."

The company now sells a cornstarch-based powder that could alleviate parents' fears about talc. Cornstarch, also called corn flour, is a white powder extracted from the endosperm of corn. Some people, including Dr. Mehmet Oz, recommend using it straight from the kitchen just like a cosmetic powder.

For babies, however, parents must also worry about inhalation, regardless of the base ingredient of the powder, USA Today reported earlier this year. Inhalation is a particular concern for babies who have heart disease or asthma, or those who were born prematurely, said Dr. David Soma of the Mayo Clinic Children's Hospital to Mary Bowerman of the USA Today Network.

"The talc powder is more concerning than cornstarch-based powder, but the big take-home message is that we don't recommend powders," Soma said.

If parents still decide to use powder, they should keep it away from the baby's face, he said. "Use as little as possible, probably put it on your hands and transfer to the diaper area or gently sprinkle to the diaper area."

Another physician, Dr. Michael Grosso, who is chairman of the Department of Pediatrics and chief medical officer at Northwell Health's Huntington Hospital in New York, told Bowerman that he'd prefer parents use a product containing petroleum jelly if they must use a product to prevent diaper rash.

But, he added, "Whenever practical, having a baby's bottom bare is the best remedy."

The post Does baby powder cause cancer? What EVERY mom needs to know appeared first on FamilyToday.

Editor's note: This article is part of the Ten Today series, which explores the relevance of the Ten Commandments in modern life.

Touch your spouse regularly, like more than half of evangelical Protestants do, and you'll be less likely to cheat.

Perform random acts of marital kindness every day, like 61 percent of baby boomers do, and you're also more likely to remain faithful.

And for the ultimate in high fidelity, talk about the relationship daily.

The findings about how committed couples behave are from a new survey by the Deseret News about Americans' attitudes toward adultery. The poll includes responses from 1,000 U.S. adults.

The poll shows that people who profess a strong religious faith are likely to employ science-backed strategies for staying faithful to each other, such as using non-sexual touch to facilitate bonding and countering the stress of daily living with frequent gestures of caring.

Few people, if any, enter into a marriage intending to cheat on their spouse

But the temptation to stray is so strong that some people have affairs even when the penalty for adultery is death, as it was in ancient times and still is in some cultures today.

About 15 percent of women and one-quarter of men confess to being physically unfaithful, according to the American Association for Marriage and Family Therapy. When you add people who tread into the "gray area" of infidelity, those figures climb by 20 percent.

But even then, that means the majority of married couples in America honor their vows, and with commitment and effort, you and your partner can be among them. Here are seven science-based strategies that can help ensure that your marriage is a high-fidelity relationship that lasts for a lifetime.

Build a zone around your marriage

Vice President Mike Pence has been both praised and mocked for his policy of not having dinner alone with a woman who is not his wife. Yet more than three-quarters of respondents in the Deseret News' poll said that having dinner with someone you are attracted to who is not your spouse is either "always" or "sometimes" cheating.

The practice that Pence calls "building a zone around your marriage" is a strategy that is often embraced by people of faith, including Hillary Cole, a mother of two and parenting blogger who lives in Charlotte, North Carolina.

Hillary and Bryan Cole pose for a photograph at Jetton Park Tuesday, April 12, 2017, in Cornelius, North Carolina. | Brian Blanco, For the Deseret News

In discussions about how to remain faithful to each other, Cole and her husband, Bryan, agreed not to open doors of opportunity that would allow infidelity to sneak in.

They promise to each other regularly "not to willingly put myself in a situation that would make cheating easy," Cole said. That might mean finding a new park or gym if one spouse starts noticing that another person there is attractive and noticing you, too.

If it means driving a few miles out of the way, that's nothing compared to how a poor moral decision might affect you, she said.

"When you make a decision to be unfaithful, you're really making a decision to throw your life away, the one that you have right now. You might recover (from the infidelity), but you'll never get that life back," Cole said.

Hillary and Bryan Cole pose for a photograph with their daughters Hazel, 5, and Hannah, 8, at Jetton Park Tuesday, April 12, 2017, in Cornelius, North Carolina. | Brian Blanco, For the Deseret News

In the gray zone of infidelity that has widened because of technology, it's important for couples to talk about what constitutes betrayal, relationship experts say. Couples that take it further - talking about temptations they come up against - may be able to keep flickers of interest from turning into flames. And such discussions allow couples to affirm their long-term goal of staying faithful.

In the Deseret News survey, 17 percent of people in a committed relationship said they talk about their relationship daily; 22 percent, a few times a week; and 14 percent weekly.

"One difference between humans and animals is that we have the ability to focus on the long run rather than the short run. We're constantly making decisions about how much energy we invest in our immediate sense of well-being, versus our long-term well-being," said Loretta Graziano Breuning, a California researcher on brain chemistry and author of "Habits of a Happy Brain."

Couples who value long-term fidelity can benefit from a rule-of-thumb that Breuning recommends: "Don't put yourself in a position where your short-term chemicals are going to be triggered."

Touch each other often

Physical intimacy helps make marriages strong. But non-sexual touching does, too.

The simple act of placing a hand on your partner's shoulder or arm, or holding hands when you walk or watch TV can release oxytocin, the hormone that is responsible for trust and attachment, which glues couples together. Touch is so important to our emotional well-being that behavioral scientists have coined a phrase that describes what we experience when we don't get it: skin hunger.

In the Deseret News survey, 62 percent of couples in a committed relationship said that they kiss, hug or touch daily; 26 percent said they do this a few times or once a week. Among members of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-Saints, the numbers were higher: 70 percent said they affectionately touch each other daily.

Sonja Lyubomirsky, a psychologist and professor at the University of California, Riverside, recommends that couples consciously increase the amount of non-sexual touching in their relationship.

"A pat on the back, a squeeze of the hand, a hug, an arm around the shoulder - the science of touch suggests that it can save a so-so marriage. Introducing more touching and affection on a daily basis will go a long way in rekindling the warmth and tenderness," Lyubomirsky wrote in her book "The Myths of Happiness."

And Tiffany Field, director of the Touch Research Institute at the University of Miami School of Medicine, has found that when husbands massage their pregnant wives, both partners reported less anxiety, anger and depression, and their relationship improved.

The frequency of sex, of course, matters, too. In the Deseret News poll, 4 percent of committed couples said they are intimate daily; 30 percent, a few times a week; and 22 percent weekly.

But it's the youngest couples who are having the most sex: Eight percent of millennials say they make love daily, compared to 2 percent of baby boomers.

You get bonus points for looking deeply in each other's eyes after a hug or a cuddle. Sustained eye contact facilitates bonding, so much so that it's been suggested that strangers can fall in love after staring intently in each other's eyes for four minutes.

Do sweat the small stuff

Research has found that major life events, such as being fired or promoted, or experiencing the death of a loved ones, comprise a danger zone for marital unrest.

But smaller, everyday stressors can also eat away at a marriage, Breuning said, because of how the stress hormone, cortisol, works in our body.

Cortisol is the "fight-or-flight" chemical that our adrenal glands release when we are afraid or stressed. And you don't have to be facing bankruptcy or unemployment to feel stress; something as minor as your spouse habitually leaving the cap off the toothpaste or the toilet seat up can be perceived as stress by your brain, particularly if this is a longstanding issue between you and your spouse.

"When that chemical is flowing, you're going to think your partner is a threat. You're going to go around with this constant sense that he's the enemy," Breuning said. "And suddenly, in daily life, the good-looking stranger is the person who's going to rescue you and the person you're with is the tiger who's going to eat you."

The high-fidelity couple, then, should strive to be mindful of each other's feelings, even when it involves seemingly minor things, and actively work to avoid causing each other unnecessary stress.

And in addition to being especially in tune to your marriage when you're experiencing a major life event, watch out for the "9s."

A birthday that ends in a "9" - like 39 or 49 - is often followed by life-changing behaviors such as signing up to run a marathon or starting an affair, a 2014 study suggests.

Make your marriage, not your children, the center of the family

Some research has shown that satisfaction in marriage declines after a couple has children, in part because spouses have less time for each other when juggling the demands of parenting.

John Rosemond, a psychologist and syndicated parenting columnist, says there's a bigger problem - that the American family has become child-centered, to the detriment of both children and parents.

"The marriage is the most important relationship in the family and that should be clear to the children. Husband and wife should pay more attention to one another than they pay to the children (an infant being a temporary exception)," he writes.

Research suggests that many spouses who stray do so in search of emotional intimacy they're not getting at home. Paying more attention to each other helps solve that problem.

Moreover, when the marriage is the most important thing in the family, the children's behavior improves, and the parents' stress level - remember cortisol? - goes down, Rosemond said in an interview.

"When children are paying attention to adults, children obey. When children obey, the stress level in the house is minimal; it's non-existent," Rosemond said.

(But parents shouldn't worry that having children will cause them to stray or divorce. In fact, having children makes it less likely that you'll divorce, and the more children you have, the more likely you stay together.)

Hillary and Bryan Cole pose for a photograph with their daughters Hazel, 5, and Hannah, 8, at Jetton Park Tuesday, April 12, 2017, in Cornelius, North Carolina. | Brian Blanco, For the Deseret News

Embrace the novel

If dinner and a movie is your standard date night, upgrade it to action - not an action movie, but an exciting activity.

Novel activities, such as riding a roller coaster or participating in a new sport, feed dopamine, and you will subconsciously associate the excitement you feel doing the activity with your marriage.

Newlyweds are often advised to schedule time for each other by setting a weekly date night. But to increase the chances that you and your spouse are faithful to each other over the long haul, forego dinner and a movie, pursue something exciting and physically challenging.

"If you do things with your partner that are novel and challenging and interesting, then there's a kind of excitement that goes with that - a positive excitement - and you associate that with the marriage," said Arthur Aron, a professor of psychology at the State University of New York at Stony Brook.

"The more challenging, the better - up to a point. You don't want to be failing together," he said."

Aron, along with Gary Lewandowski of Monmouth University in New Jersey, has studied the human desire for "self-expansion" - the accruement of new knowledge and experiences - and how a long-term partner helps. Their research indicates that, conversely, a lack of challenging experiences within the relationship may make partners more susceptible to infidelity, as explained in one study:

"If a person believes that the current relationship has the potential to provide self-expansion in the future, there is little reason to leave the relationship or seek alternatives. Conversely, if the relationship appears to have little ability to provide self-expansion in the future, an individual may likely be motivated to seek self-expansion through an extradyadic relationship."

Hang out with happily married friends

Aron is currently a visiting scholar at the University of California, Berkeley, which happens to be where he met his wife, Elaine, nearly 50 years ago. The couple are renowned for the 36 questions

Answering the questions together is one way that couples can become closer, but another way to cement their bond is to answer them with friends, Aron said.

"Having strong friendships with other couples is really good for the relationship, in part because it is supportive, and it gives you something novel and interesting to do," Aron said.

In their book "Two Plus Two," Geoffrey Greif and Kathleen Holtz Deal say that couples who share friends tend to be happier, and that the relationship between newlyweds is strengthened when they spend time with other couples. "A study of couples married an average of 20 years found similar results: Couples whose friends supported their marriage felt more satisfied with and committed to each other," Greif and Deal wrote.

Pray for your partner

If you're wanting a better relationship, pray - not just for the relationship, but for your partner.

Frank D. Fincham, director of the Florida State University Family Institute, has studied the effects of prayer on relationships, and found that praying for positive things to happen to a partner strengthens a relationship in ways that merely thinking positive thoughts about a partner does not.

In a study of unmarried people who were in committed relationships, those who were assigned to pray for their partner's well-being were less likely to have cheated than those who had been asked to think positive thoughts.

"We think it affects the goal structure in people's daily lives," Fincham said. "It brings to mind the longer-term perspective, to look beyond the immediate."

You might also want to say those prayers in church.

Fincham's research has found that, out of nine factors related to faith, only regular church attendance is predictive of marital faithfulness. "Interestingly, self-perceived nearness to God coupled with lack of religious attendance predicted greater infidelity," Fincham and co-author Ross W. May wrote.

This could spell trouble for the 34 percent of poll respondents who answered "never" when asked how often they attend religious services.

Show appreciation, in word and deed

When M. Gary Neuman, author of the book "The Truth About Cheating", asked people why they cheated on a spouse, the majority of men said that in addition to dissatisfaction with their sex life, it was because they didn't feel appreciated by their wife; the majority of women also cited a lack of appreciation, along with poor communication.

"The easiest practical thing you can do is to make sure that you're sending appreciative and thoughtful gestures," Neuman, an ordained rabbi and Florida psychologist, suggests. "At least two times a day, you should initiate a thoughtful, loving gesture - something that says I appreciate who you are," he said.

Fifty-five percent of respondents in the Deseret News survey say they're already doing that at least once a day. Twenty-one percent said they make it a point to do something like making coffee or filling the car with gas a couple of times a week.

Here, the baby boomers emerged as the most thoughtful, with 61 percent making an effort to perform thoughtful gestures for their partner every day. (The millennials came in at 49 percent.)

If you're the recipient of such a gesture, it's important that you express thanks, Neuman said.

"Successful couples focus on the positives and diminish the negatives,"

he said. "And it doesn't have to be both of you." One spouse can start being more appreciative, and their partner is likely to follow, Neuman said.

He also suggests that couples spend a minimum of a half-hour of uninterrupted time together daily - "uninterrupted" means after the kids are in bed. Couples who do so are significantly happier than those who don't, he said. And aim for at least two hours alone with your spouse on the weekend or a date night, with three topics off limits: money, work and kids.

"It's not what got you here; it's not what's going to sustain you," Neuman said. When a couple's conversation is reduced to money, work and children, they can lose each other emotionally, "and unfortunately, there are other people willing to admire us and have intellectual conversations with us," he said.

This article was originally published on Deseret News. It has been republished here with permission.

The post How to cheat-proof your marriage, according to science appeared first on FamilyToday.