Kids love going around places, playing, and exploring new things. While all of this is fun, it can expose them to diseases. When they come from school, they are exposed to various germs through air and transmission or direct contact. They also touch surfaces a lot, then their face, then their mouths. This makes it easy for illness to spread. While it is impossible to prevent illness completely, there could be several measures that can reduce the risk and support recovery.

Vaccination

Vaccination is a critical step in preventing severe illnesses. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommend following an established vaccine schedule. Vaccines protect against life-threatening infections, including those that disproportionately affect infants and young children.

Good Hygiene

While no vaccine can prevent one from common cold, good hygiene practices can significantly reduce germ transmission. Parents must therefore encourage their children to wash their hands after touching toys, hard surfaces, and other people. What is more important is proper hand hygiene, as handwashing with soap and water is the most effective way to eliminate germs.

ALSO READ: This Spring, Make Hand Hygiene A Priority, Says Expert

The Hygiene Hypothesis: Does Exposure to Germs Strengthen Immunity?

There are several research that suggests that early exposure to germs may help develop a child’s immune system, a concept known as the "hygiene hypothesis." However, many immunologists argue against this theory, noting that children naturally encounter enough germs to build immunity without unnecessary exposure to unsanitary conditions. A balanced approach ensures children develop a strong immune response without increased risk of illness.

Cleaning and Sanitizing Children’s Belongings

Regular cleaning of toys, school supplies, and frequently touched objects is essential. Understanding the difference between cleaning, sanitizing, and disinfecting can help:

• Cleaning removes visible dirt and debris.
• Sanitizing reduces germs to safer levels.
• Disinfecting kills germs completely, offering the highest level of protection.

It is important to read product labels carefully, use child-safe cleaning products, and rinse toys thoroughly after disinfection, especially those that go into a child’s mouth.

Choosing Effective Sanitizing Products

To minimize germ exposure, parents should clean objects with soap and water first and then use a sanitizer for everyday items. Disinfectants, which are stronger, should be used on objects that a sick person has touched. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) provides a list of approved sanitizers and disinfectants that effectively kill germs.

Encouraging Good Hygiene Without Causing Anxiety

Teaching children proper hygiene without creating fear is essential. Make handwashing engaging by incorporating songs or counting games. Explaining the benefits of hygiene in a positive way helps children understand that washing hands protects them and others. Parents can reinforce these habits by leading by example.

Boosting Immunity Through Nutrition

A strong immune system helps children fight infections more effectively. Proper nutrition plays a crucial role in immune support. A balanced diet should include:

• Proteins
• Vegetables
• Fruits
• Healthy fats
• Carbohydrates
• Adequate hydration

Multivitamins are generally unnecessary for well-nourished children, but if supplements are used, they should be free of added sugars and taken under supervision to prevent choking hazards.

Teaching Respiratory Etiquette

Proper respiratory hygiene reduces the spread of illness. Parents should model behaviors such as covering their mouths with an elbow when coughing or sneezing. Using tissues and disposing of them immediately is also a good practice. Reinforcing these habits through positive encouragement makes children more likely to adopt them.

When 36-year-old mom Angela Sanford, from Fort Mill, SC, went for an appointment for a Pap smear five years after she had her first child in 2008, her nurse midwife, who she has never seen before asked her a question she did not expect. "Who stitched you up after your first birth?"

Speaking to Healthline, Sanford shared that she just started crying when the nurse said, "This is not right." Sanford said that this was the first time she ever heard the term 'husband stitch'. Sanford was told that her stich was "too tight" by the hospitalist who managed her after her first delivery.

Also Read: US CDC Warns Of New Immune-Evasive COVID Variant In 23 Countries

“He gave you what some people call a husband stitch,” Sanford recalled the midwife telling her.

“I couldn’t connect in my mind why it would be called that. My midwife said, ‘They think that some men find it more pleasurable,’” she recalled. “My husband has been worried about me and fearful of hurting me. He would never have asked for this.”

A 'Husband Stich' - What Is It?

During vaginal delivery, a woman undergoes perineal tears or vaginal lacerations which means tears between the vaginal opening and anus. This causes pain, and requires stitches for grades two and higher. It also takes 4 to 6 weeks to heal. Women can experience from first to fourth degree tears.

Sometimes, a surgical incision is made in the perineum during childbirth to enlarge the vaginal opening, this is called an episiotomy. However, it is not medically necessary or a routine procedure, unless it is a case of emergency.

Stiches are required in such cases that dissolves on its own. However, a 'husband stitch', also known as "daddy stitch" is an unethical practice where an extra stitch is given during the repair process that 'tightens the vagina' to increase sexual pleasure for a male partner. While it is considered a medical malpractice, it is still done to women after vaginal delivery.

Many women face difficulty after the extra stich is given to them. In Sanford's case, she felt "excruciating" pain during sex afterwards.

Read: Romanticization And The Silent Dismissal Of Women’s Pain

When Objectifying Women's Bodies Is Made A Medical Practice

Stephanie Tillman, CNM, a certified nurse midwife at the University of Illinois at Chicago and blogger at The Feminist Midwife told Healthline: “The fact that there is even a practice called the husband stitch is a perfect example of the intersection of the objectification of women’s bodies and healthcare. As much as we try to remove the sexualization of women from appropriate obstetric care, of course the patriarchy is going to find its way in there."

Harkins, 37, said that she "kind of" laughed it off when an "old, crusty Army doctor" overstitched her so she could give her husband more pleasure. In many cases, doctors do it as a routine practice without even being told by anyone. “I couldn’t even process [it], but I kind of laughed, like what else do you do when someone says that? I had just had a baby. I didn’t think much about it because the whole birth experience was so traumatizing, but now that I think about it differently, the implications of that are just crazy.”

Episiotomy Is An Excuse For 'Husband Stitch'

Dr Robert Barbieri, chair of obstetrics and gynecology and reproductive biology at Brigham and Women’s Hospital in Boston, told the Huffington Post that doctors were taught in the 50s and 60s that "routine episiotomy was good for women".

“What they thought is that if they did a routine episiotomy, they’d have a chance to repair it and that during the repair, they could actually create a better perineum than if they hadn’t done it. The idea [was] that we could ‘tighten things up,’” explains doctor.

However, a 2005 systematic review in the Journal of the American Medical Association found no benefit to routine episiotomy use. A 2017 Cochrane review “could not identify any benefits of routine episiotomy for the baby or the mother.” In 2016, the American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) recommended that clinicians “prevent and manage” delivery lacerations through strategies like massage and warm compresses rather than making cuts on the perineum. Yet, this practice still continues inside the labor rooms.

While you may be buying fast-fashion clothes that are easy on your pocket and also give your children trendy looks, a new study highlights the risk of being laced with a highly toxic ingredient: lead.

The preliminary research, based on lab tests of several shirts from different retailers in the US, found that all the samples exceeded the country’s federal regulatory lead limits.

The US Consumer Product Safety Commission currently has a 100 parts per million (ppm) lead limit for children's products like toys and clothing.

"I started to see many articles about lead in clothing from fast fashion, and I realized not too many parents knew about the issue," said Kamila Deavers, principal investigator of the study, at Marian University in the US.

Deavers began the study after her young daughter’s lab reports showed elevated levels of lead in her blood from toy coatings.

How was study conducted?

The team tested 11 shirts that spanned the rainbow—red, pink, orange, yellow, gray, and blue. All brightly colored fabrics, particularly reds and yellows, showed higher levels of lead compared to more muted tones.

"We saw that the shirts we tested were all over the allowed limit for lead of 100 ppm," said Priscila Espinoza, from Marina.

The researchers explained that some manufacturers use lead (II) acetate as an inexpensive way to help dyes stick to the materials and produce bright, long-lasting color.

Children At Greater Risk

The researchers found the risk is particularly higher among younger kids as they tend to playfully suck or chew their clothes during play.

"Even briefly chewing these fabrics could expose children to dangerous lead levels,” they found in the study, to be presented at the forthcoming meeting of the American Chemical Society.

According to the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), lead exposure can lead to behavior problems, brain and central nervous system damage, as well as other negative health effects in children.

The agency considers children under six years old to be most at risk from exposure. Even low levels of lead in the blood of children can result in:

• Behavior and learning problems
• Lower IQ and Hyperactivity
• Slowed growth
• Hearing Problems
• Anemia

The researchers also pointed out safer alternatives to lead-based dyeing agents that already exist. These include natural and less harmful substances such as:

• Plant-based tannins (e.g., oak bark, pomegranate peel)
• Rosemary
• Alum.

A recent systematic review published in the European Medical Journal found that racial discrimination leads to postpartum depression and low birth weight (LBW). Pregnant women of color were 40 per cent more likely to experience postpartum depression and have 170 per cent higher risk of delivering a baby with LBW.

The findings allowed the researchers to report that racial discrimination is a modifiable determinant of maternal and nenonatal health. Researchers also note that they should be integrated into perinatal research and care to reduce inequalities.

Large Review Examines Decades of Research

A large review of international studies has found that racial discrimination experienced by pregnant women may be linked to a higher risk of postpartum depression and poor birth outcomes, including babies born with low birth weight.

Researchers analysed nearly three decades of research that examined self reported experiences of racial discrimination among pregnant women or those who had previously been pregnant. The analysis included more than 20,300 research records and covered close to 1.5 million participants.

The study explored whether exposure to racial discrimination was associated with a range of maternal and newborn health outcomes. These included hypertensive disorders during pregnancy, gestational diabetes, mode of delivery, postpartum depression, fetal growth, gestational outcomes, infant mortality, and admission of newborns to neonatal intensive care units.

Among all the outcomes studied, the strongest link was found with postpartum depression. Women who reported experiencing racial discrimination had a 37 percent higher risk of developing postpartum depression compared with those who did not report such experiences.

Higher Risk of Low Birth Weight Among Affected Mothers

The analysis also found significant associations between racial discrimination and low birth weight in babies.

Women who experienced racial discrimination were found to have a 121 percent higher risk of delivering babies with low birth weight. The risk was even greater for very low birth weight babies, with the likelihood increasing by 170 percent.

However, researchers did not find clear links between racial discrimination and certain pregnancy complications. No strong association was observed with hypertensive disorders of pregnancy or gestational diabetes.

Findings related to preterm birth were mixed. Cohort studies did not show a clear association, while cross sectional studies suggested a modest 19 percent increased risk of premature birth among women who reported discrimination.

For several other outcomes studied, the available evidence remained inconsistent.

Stress and biological changes may explain the link

Researchers suggested that everyday experiences of racial discrimination may affect maternal health through multiple pathways.

Repeated exposure to discrimination can create chronic stress, which may affect both mental and physical health during pregnancy. The stress can also lead to social isolation and strained personal relationships, which may increase the risk of postpartum depression.

Biological changes triggered by prolonged stress may also affect pregnancy outcomes. Researchers noted that stress linked to discrimination could influence placental function, metabolism, and inflammatory responses in the body. These changes may contribute to restricted fetal growth and increase the risk of babies being born underweight.

Experts call for stronger public health response

The authors emphasized that healthcare systems should recognize racial discrimination as an important social stressor that can influence maternal and newborn health.

They recommend that routine prenatal care include screening for social stressors along with mental health assessments during pregnancy and after childbirth.

Currently, many clinical guidelines do not explicitly recognise racial discrimination as a potential risk factor for maternal and neonatal health.

Researchers say the evidence highlights the need for broader policy efforts that address discrimination at a structural level. Treating discrimination as a public health issue rather than an individual experience may help reduce health inequalities and improve outcomes for mothers and babies.