Coffee has always been a crowd favorite drink among all age groups. But we all know that caffeine has a different effect on everyone. Doctors often express how young kids and teens should be careful about caffeine but new guidelines regarding this set a firm boundary when it comes to teen health and caffeine. Health experts, working with the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, have new advice on healthy drinks for kids and teens in the age group of 5-18. The guidelines say that water and milk are the best drinks for them. They want kids to get into good drinking habits early so they can stay healthy. They're also worried about kids drinking too many sugary and caffeinated drinks. This new guide helps parents know what's good for their kids to drink.

How Did Caffeine Become So Popular Among Teens?

The new guidelines are especially relevant because caffeinated drinks have become increasingly popular among teenagers. Coffee shops, like Starbucks, are popular hangouts for teens, and energy drinks, often packed with caffeine and promoted by social media influencers, are widely available. And a very popular theme on social media is coffee, people enjoy having different varieties of it, making to a very affordable and trendy thing to enjoy! There are accounts dedicated to coffee consumption and often kids and teens partake in these trends.

A recent poll by the C.S. Mott Children's Hospital found that nearly a quarter of parents say their teens consume caffeine almost every day. The most common sources are sodas, followed by coffee and tea, and then energy drinks. Even chocolate contributes to caffeine intake. The amount of kids who consume coffee raises concerns about the potential health effects of caffeine on young people, whose bodies and brains are still developing. The easy access to these beverages and the marketing strategies targeting young audiences contribute to the problem.

Could The Lack Of Guidelines Be A Reason?

Right now, there aren't any official rules about how much caffeine kids can have. This makes it hard for parents and doctors to know what to tell kids about caffeine. The new report tries to fix this by giving some advice based on research. Experts are worried about how caffeine affects kids' sleep, mood, and health. Kids are more sensitive to caffeine than adults. Caffeine can keep them awake, make them anxious, and might even affect their hearts. Because there aren't any rules, it's important to have experts telling us what's safe.

How Caffeine Affects Kids

Caffeine is something that makes your body speed up. Adults can usually handle some caffeine, but it's different for kids and teens. Their bodies are smaller, and their brains are still growing, so caffeine can affect them more. It can make it hard for them to sleep, make them nervous, and even give them headaches or stomachaches. It can also raise their blood pressure and heart rate. Caffeine can also change their mood, making them cranky or unable to focus. We don't know all the ways caffeine affects kids in the long run, and that's another reason to be careful.

The report says that plain water and plain milk are the healthiest drinks for kids and teens. They say it's okay to have a little bit of 100% juice, plant-based milk, or flavored milk, but not too much. They also say kids should stay away from sugary drinks like soda, sports drinks, and lemonade. And, very importantly, they shouldn't drink caffeinated drinks or other things that give you a jolt. This advice is based on what we know about how these drinks affect kids' health. Sugary drinks can cause weight gain and other problems, and caffeine can mess with sleep and other things.

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.