New baby, new mattress - cot death risk?

MrsE_2

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/2380873.stm

My DD was telling me that all babies must have a new mattress because of cot death.

But what about cots in hotels? Hospitals?

Nicki

The mattresses in hospital cots are coated in washable plastic and wiped down with antiseptic wipes between patients. Nothing can penetrate their innards!

In hotels, you always have the option to bring your own travel cot, and in fact i'd recommend that given how rickety some hotel cots are!

hitchins

To be honest it seems to be common sense.

But it said the mattress must be:

[*]Clean
[*]Firm, not soft
[*]Does not sag
[*]Shows no signs of deterioration

To my knowledge they have no definitive answer as to why cot death occurs unfortunately and I doubt it's all down to mattresses.

Ms_Magnetite

Playing on fear, they are. Especially now, when the older mattresses with the scary chemicals in are long gone.

Tim_Deegan

Stop worrying!!!!!

That report is dated November 2002. I'm sure most of you will remember the scare that involved the chemicals antomony and atropene (I'm not sure of the correct spelling). These chemicals were being used as fire retardants at the time, but have now been outlawed.

The problem arose when a baby's vomit reacted with the chemicals, which is why they suggested a wipe clean waterproof mattress protector. In fact even though the chemicals have now been outlawed, they still recommend the wipe clean mattress protectors.

Nicki

I'm sure I have read more recently about health scares where a mattress has been stored between babies in loft or garage and mould spores have penetrated the mattress though?

We used the same mattress for 1 and 2 having said that, but there was only 13 months between them so it was still being used by 1 up to the point that 2 got it, so no concerns about being badly stored in between.

Tim_Deegan

Nicki wrote: »

I'm sure I have read more recently about health scares where a mattress has been stored between babies in loft or garage and mould spores have penetrated the mattress though?

We used the same mattress for 1 and 2 having said that, but there was only 13 months between them so it was still being used by 1 up to the point that 2 got it, so no concerns about being badly stored in between.

Mould spores would be a health worry even for adults. So if there is any doubt then replace it.

Just remember that many scares are started by companies who could benefit from pannick buying.

hitchins

Tim_Deegan wrote: »

Mould spores would be a health worry even for adults. So if there is any doubt then replace it.

Just remember that many scares are started by companies who could benefit from pannick buying.

Aye and them mattresses aren't cheap. Like I said it's common sense.

My mum said when we were young (many moons ago:D) they were told to lay babies on their front.......now they say lay on their back. They just don't know.

Apricot

I agree with nicki - if you know where the mattress has been kept it shouldn't be a problem but some people will have kept it in a shed or somewhere where it could have gotten mouldy. You also need to check that the mattress is firm and doesn't have any dipped parts.

Research has shown that babies who have slept on second hand mattresses have an elevated risk of cot death but this is less if the mattress was used by an older brother or sister.

Tim_Deegan

I should also add that the problem is mainly connected to foam mattresses due to their lack of ventilation.