Do you read parenting books? For real, as in from cover to cover? Did you get anything at all out of the book? Was it overall a great buy with an excellent philosophy, or was there at least one nugget of sage advice that has helped you shape your parenting style? If the answer to that last question was yes, then perhaps parenting books are good for you. For others, not so much.

I remember when I first started writing for ParentDish--way back in the Blogging Baby days. I was pregnant and trying to figure out if I had what it took to be a parent. I bought oodles of parenting books and tried to plow through them as best as I could. I found lots of conflicting information, some of it outdated. I had lots of conversations with other parents and got more of the same. I even asked them what parenting books they recommended. Some loved certain books, some hated said books. One such book was "What to Expect when You're Expecting." I wrote a post about that and got innumerable comments of both praise and abhorring. So it is with any sort of parenting advice.

Once you become a parent, generally all the things you were so scared of dissipate. You become more confident in your decision making and parenting abilities. Most of the time, you actually become a better wife, daughter, friend, sister, etc. in the process. Did the parenting books help? Maybe, maybe not. Being a parent did. The things we all fear--that we'll be bad parents, that we'll hurt our children, that they'll be taken from us through our own negligence--seem to go away the more we actually practice parenting. And that means whatever parenting style comes most naturally to us or works out best for us. And it is different for every person. I don't think it really matters how much attention you paid to WTEWYE--you're probably doing OK in the mommy or daddy department. Parenting books, if you actually have time to read them (see: before children) might offer some insight, but only you will be able to determine the right approach to raising your kids.

I love being pregnant, and I love having kids. I love breastfeeding. But I hate, and hate is really not a strong word compared to how I actually feel, nursing bras. They're all terrible. First of all, they're gigantic. Breasts become fuller with milk, of course, so they get bigger...and bigger, and bigger and bigger until they feel like they're going to burst. Hence, once needs a giant bra for the giant breasts. I can get behind that--it's rational and makes sense.

What I don't understand is why they have to be so hideously ugly and not actually provide the support required to tote around said enormous breasts. And while I may be funny, I'm also being dead serious. I have three or four (I think I banished one it was so awful) nursing bras from various manufacturers that were clearly designed with someone who either has never had breasts swollen with milk or who never wanted to look even remotely attractive without her shirt on. Those with underwires are uncomfortable. Those without lack any real support.

There's also the issue of the bras never quite managing to hold onto the breastpads placed in them to keep them from getting covered with milk leakage. I have had, however, quite a bit of success with Lily Pads, which are technically designed to be worn under things with which one can wear no bra or at night when one doesn't want to wear a bra to bed. Some women have reverted to wearing regular bras in larger sizes or just going braless all together.

What about you? Do you hate nursing bras, or have you found one that answers your prayers? Do you have a trick for making them more comfortable, or at least more tolerable?

According to a recent report, infections may be the cause of many premature births. Studies showed the more serious the infection, the more likely the premature birth and the sicker the infant. Studies also reported finding bacteria or (yick!) fungi in 15% of the amniotic fluid of women who'd given birth prematurely. Premature children are known to have an increased risk of everything from problems breathing and underdeveloped organs to cerebal palsy.

Prevention, of course, is the key. Twelve percent of births in the United States occur before the 37th week of pregnancy. Just how many of these could be preventable? The team responsible for conducting the study of infected amniotic fluid now have their sights set on detecting the infection before preterm labor starts and treating it.

The researchers studied 166 samples of amniotic fluid from pregnant women during the period of 1998-2002. They detected 25 were infected with the bacteria, fungi, or...what might be a new organism (very X-Files). All 25 infected women went on to preterm labor. Fifty-three women in whom no bacteria, etc. was detected, were able to have their preterm labor stopped.

Pic by zakwitnij.

Is there a downside to breastfeeding? A new report from the New York Times might have you thinking so. In a recent article, several studies monitoring a lack of vitamin D in infants might support that breastmilk is not enough to prevent things like rickets in children. The biggest fear is that the deficiency is more common than previously thought and is going undetected. Breastmilk apparently does not necessarily provide enough of the vitamin to children.

Doctors, of course, are rare to say anything at all negative about breastfeeding. Unlike perhaps even fifty years ago, women are being told that they simply must breastfeed, that they are wrong for not doing so, and that breastmilk is the ultimate wonder food for their infants. This may well be true, but the medical profession that's been pushing breastfeeding down our throats has also admitted to knowing there is a probable link between vitamin D deficiency and diseases like diabetes and cancer.

The answer, of course, is not to stop breastfeeding, but rather to augment a child's nutrition by adding vitamin drops, or, my favorite, cod liver oil (yummy!). The other pretty obvious answer is that if a woman is deficient in something, so, too, will be her breastmilk. Mothers should be getting plenty of vitamin D themselves in order to pass on the right amount to their infants. That should be good news to those of us who are committed to breastfeeding exclusively for as long as possible. Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and my own pediatrician recommend supplementing with the vitamin D drops.

Thoughts? I for one drink enough milk while pregnant and nursing to keep a small dairy in business. Is it enough? Who knows. Did you supplement breastfeeding with vitamins for your infants or enjoy a little cod liver oil?

Pic by timtom.ch [surfin' USA].

Jason Lee, star of such films as Mall Rats and lead in the wildly popular My Name Is Earl series, is a daddy again. Apparently the birth was kept under wraps as sources say the child made her debut August 10th. What's more exciting about this birth is really what Mr. Lee plans on naming this kid.

Lee's first child, a four-year-old son with ex Beth Riesgraf, has the infamous distinction of being named Pilot Inspektor. No, not a typo, that is indeed the child's name. (She must have been on some serious medication to have agreed to that.) Ever since then we've been waiting for the other shoe to drop. And now it has.

The name of the tot, a girl, was not available as of this writing. Let's hope Lee's new partner Ceren Alkac is able to convince him toward something a little less...well, you know...unusual. Not that unusual is bad. And let's just say Lee has some big shoes to follow--not only from his own son, but now too with the birth of Zuma Nesta Rock Rossdale. That's going to be a hard one to follow up. Let the naming games begin!

Mr. Ripley might be talented, but he's is also getting grossly outnumbered by the fairer sex in his household!

The addition of a new daughter to the family means Matt Damon will now have to negotiate with four women in order to get a little time in the bathroom: wife Luciana, stepdaughter Alexia, two-year-old Isabella, and newborn daughter Gia Zavala.

Little Gia was born on Wednesday. Damon's rep reports that the newest Damon girl is healthy and beautiful and that she and her mother are doing well.

As for Matt Damon, the sexiest man alive doesn't appear to mind living in an estrogen-filled environment in the least. "[I'm] taking the rest of the year off," he told USA Today. "I'm just hanging out with my family."

Now that's some sexy talk right there!

If reports are to be believed, Gwen Stefani has had her baby. The tot, sex and name unknown at press time (and if Perez Hilton don't know then nobody knows!), was born to the singer this Thursday in California. Not sure if anyone actually cares that Stefani is a mom again, what with all the media frenzy surrounding the Jolie-Pitt twins, but I for one am excited to see Gwen take on motherhood X 2.

Stefani checked into the hospital and delivered the new arrival via C-section. Gwen's other child, Kingston, who she had with husband Gavin Rossdale, was born at the same hospital two years ago via the same procedure. You know what they say--it ain't Hollywood if it ain't a C-section. And they won't seem to let you have a VBAC even if you are interested in a natural birth after you've already had a C.

According to sources, the name of the baby is Zuma. You know, like Zima only with a "U." I seriously doubt that's the kid's name, but given the climate in la-la land these days anything for a name goes. Maybe she'll go hog wild and name the kid Jane or something.

Updated to add: The wee one's name is indeed Zuma -- in fact, it's Zuma Nesta Rock Rossdale. That's a mouthful, but it's a mouthful with meaning; according to The Baby Name Wizzard, this is a nod to a new trend in naming. And People has the full dish on where the name comes from. Just in case you're really curious.

In a draft report recently issued, the Federal Drug Administration has concluded that Bisphenol A is safe --at least when used in food containers. Commonly known as BPA to consumers, the chemical can be found in all sorts of children's products as well as cars, plastic food containers and lining aluminum cans.

This most recent study was one of two funded by the industry itself. Gee, of course any study funded by the industry that stands to make money off it is going to come out with data supporting a chemical's safety. There rationale is that people are exposed to so little of it that it won't do them harm. In other studies BPA has been found in 93% of testees' urine and has been known to cause cancer and behavioral disorders in lab animals. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) supports the findings as well.

Opponents of the decision say the study agencies don't have enough data to support their findings that BPA is safe. The country of Canada has banned the use of BPA and products containing the chemical, and national retail chain giants Wal-Mart and Toys R Us are set to remove all children's merchandise containing the chemical from their shelves as of January 2009.

Several studies in a recent New York Times article entitled "Honey, I Plumped the Kids" seem to be pointing in that direction. As we all know by now, human beings are getting bigger--and by bigger, I really mean fatter. In 2005 it was estimated there were 400 million obese people on the planet. Yes, 400 MILLION. And, in what is a recent phenomenon, some of those obese people happened to be women who then became pregnant and gave birth. The result? Well, if the studies are to be believed, a pregnancy for an obese woman can lead to her children being obese as well.

Similar news to this has been circulating for some time now. It's also no news that being obese, whether or not you're pregnant, can have dramatically harmful results. Cancer, diabetes and heart disease are just a few of the pleasantries headed your way if you happen to be obese. But, what does being obese mean for your unborn child? In one of the studies cited in the Times article, women who gave birth to children before they had surgery to correct their obesity were more likely have an obese child; once the women had the surgery, the children they later bore tended to not be obese. Hence, the obesity doesn't on the surface seem to be due to genetic predisposition, but rather to the mother being , well, fat.

One theory as to why this is concerns the fact that people have access to an overabundance of sugar and fat. As a direct result, so do their fetuses. In another study pregnant female rats were allowed to have as much as they wanted of either human junk food or regular old rat food. Those who had access to the junk food ate 40% more food than their rat-chow eating buddies. The baby rats born to the junk food rats were more inclined to eat such food and were more likely to be overweight as a result of consuming too many calories.

So what does this mean for all us preggies out there? Perhaps that we should listen to our doctors and cut back on the sugar and fats. Pregnancy cravings aside, the article and the studies make a good case for being even more healthy when you're pregnant--for you and your baby.

Pic by armchairgeek.