this post was submitted on 08 Oct 2023
425 points (96.5% liked)
Technology
59429 readers
2670 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I had 3 babies and spent $0 on video monitoring. Your baby will be fine. Don't fall for the advertising drama. Babies have been fine for thousands of years with no electronics.
They've also not been fine.
SUID Death rate for infants has decreased even since 1990. Baby monitor likely had a role in that.
FYI not supporting subscription for features a device has in hardware, just saying I'd rather have a monitor that never went off than no monitor and a dead child. There are plenty of alternative devices without subs that cost a lot less to begin with.
You know what else happened in the 90s? Leaded gas was banned. I'll attribute it to that. Anecdotes don't mean much.
You need to publish a scientific paper on your SIDs discovery. Don't let this major work languish in some technology comment on Lemmy!
Leaded gas was banned in the 70s.
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/gasoline/history-of-gasoline.php#:~:text=Unleaded%20gasoline%20was%20introduced%20in,using%20leaded%20gasoline%20in%20vehicles says otherwise. Unleaded gas introduced in the 70s and lead gas phased out in 96.
I'm not saying baby monitors are the only reason for improved SUID rates. I'm saying they likely played a role. Despite your sarcasm, you might also be right that lead could have adversely affected unexplained infant mortality. The point I was trying to make was that baby monitors are not useless devices designed to extract money from you as implied by OP, whose comments by the way, were anecdotal.
$400 is excessive though. As is a subscription.
And data on SIDS is freely available. https://www.cdc.gov/sids/data.htm
I used a wireless webcam to monitor my baby and, honestly, I was so paranoid that I don't regret it. Seeing her breathe or move before I went to bed and when I woke up was a comfort and relief.
And only a few children were kidnapped by the Fae.
I can just hear some people going, "WHAT? Are you crazy?". I was a little tike in the early 60s and the only monitor my mom had was me screaming or the "THUNK" of me falling and hitting the floor.
What about the ones that were left in the cold for being sickly?
They turn into Swedes.