amber bracelet so called teething aid

P_Cash

I'm annoyed with the ehs line on this

The creche just sent a letter out saying kids can't wear them any more.

While he will wear it while not in creche, and i think it's ridiculous when majority of kids in there are wearing them it's the wording that bothers me. It's even on the ehs web site "so called teething aids"
Clearly written by a non believer, not a parent of a young child anyway.

Our experience is positive, has had it from 3 months, didn't have one for a week when waiting for a bigger one and all hell broke loose.

He's 15 months Now, and doesnt know he wears it.

Problem now taking it off and on could Now be a dangerous thing rather than wearing it full time. He's going to know he's wearing it

Has anyone else been informed of this?

Neyite

I do think that its more to do with a safety point of view, and cant say I disagree. I used an amber chain but it was under his sock, never on the neck, never at night unless well under a babygro, and never when he was being supervised by someone else. He didnt wear it once he was dexterous enough to potentially pull it off.

For me, I was on the fence about its claims to help with teething, but I was trying all and any methods, Ultimately for me, safety wins every time.
I wouldn't have sent him into crèche with it on.

There are too many children to keep an eye on a ratio of 1:3 at that age, to much going on, and while your son might not spot it or interfere with it, if it broke off and another child who does have a habit of putting things in their mouth got hold of it, it could be dangerous for that child.

So, for the good of the little community, I'd agree its an appropriate safety measure. You can still put it on him under your supervision. Alternatively, maybe a childminder might agree to mind a child with an amber necklace on?

P_Cash

I agree, but when i asked is ther many of the other 15 kids with them the answer was yes, and i asked was there ever a safety issue, the answer again was no.

She did say it's a lot to do with unconfirmed, untested, unregulated etc product.

She even agreed a rosary beed is no different, or anything in that matter.

He always had it on ft until he got aware of it, so Now has it on neck. ,

Level of Safety though is each ones discretion.

She said a lot of parents will be unhappy, just wanted to see do many people use them on here.

I do a agree, one child can pull it on another, how they get to be aware it's there is another matter, u can't even see my lads one

pwurple

They can't be sold here, and our creche has seen them get pulled about by other kids so stopped them years ago. Only right.

They're unregulated quackery and obviously a safety risk. In my opinion parents are fairly thick to be putting any kind of beads on an infant. People need protecting from themselves sometimes.

Das Kitty

P_Cash wrote: »

Level of Safety though is each ones discretion.

No it's not when your baby is in creche. Your baby's necklace breaks and my baby chokes on one of the beads.

P_Cash

Das Kitty wrote: »

No it's not when your baby is in creche. Your baby's necklace breaks and my baby chokes on one of the beads.

My child was almost unconscious after pulling a timber heavy child high chair down on top of himself at 12 months.
Each person sees safety differently, including staff at a creche.

Something worn under clothes wouldn't worry me as much as other things

Das Kitty

So... if we can't totally eliminate risk, we shouldn't bother doing anything about the risks we can control?

pwurple

You could take the opportunity to bin it.

Tasden

P_Cash wrote: »

My child was almost unconscious after pulling a timber heavy child high chair down on top of himself at 12 months.
Each person sees safety differently, including staff at a creche.

Something worn under clothes wouldn't worry me as much as other things

But whoever is responsible for the children gets to decide how they view and deal with those safety risks and tbh I agree with the staff, why increase the risks/hazards when they can minimize them? There's enough accidents that can happen at any given time as it is, it's only logical that they try to eliminate the risks that they have some choice/control over.

Sligo1

Sorry but imo anything around a child's neck says to me DANGER DANGER DANGER. Whether under clothes or whatever. I hate to be judgemental here, but I can't understand why any parent would willingly put an item of whatever around their Childs neck. There's prob safety catches etc... But what if it was faulty....

2xj3hplqgsbkym

P_Cash wrote: »

I agree, but when i asked is ther many of the other 15 kids with them the answer was yes, and i asked was there ever a safety issue, the answer again was no.

She did say it's a lot to do with unconfirmed, untested, unregulated etc product.

She even agreed a rosary beed is no different, or anything in that matter.

He always had it on ft until he got aware of it, so Now has it on neck. ,

Level of Safety though is each ones discretion.

She said a lot of parents will be unhappy, just wanted to see do many people use them on here.

I do a agree, one child can pull it on another, how they get to be aware it's there is another matter, u can't even see my lads one

Luckily and thankfully there has not been a safety issue in your creche, and thankfully they are trying to prevent one happening, based on current guidelines and other incidents. Don't you think that it is better that they are being proactive instead of reactive?

Moonbeam

There is no scientific evidence backing their use,they are not a necessity and they pose a choking risk.

There is also no ehs so I am going to presume that you mean the HSE.
http://www.hse.ie/eng/health/child/childsafety/teething_necklace.html

There have also being recent cases of necklaces that when dropped the beads have shattered.

I am all for risks and kids need to be able to take risks but not this sort of risk.

Neyite

I think I'm more outraged that a government website has a glaring typo.
"chocking"

Orion

pwurple wrote: »

They can't be sold here, and our creche has seen them get pulled about by other kids so stopped them years ago. Only right.

They're unregulated quackery and obviously a safety risk. In my opinion parents are fairly thick to be putting any kind of beads on an infant. People need protecting from themselves sometimes.

pwurple wrote: »

You could take the opportunity to bin it.

Ok pwurple - we get it - you don't agree with amber beads. I can't say I disagree with you tbh. But it's irrelevant to the OP. Get off the pedestal and stay on topic please.

P_Cash

Interesting replies, from the looks of it either they aren't that well known or people seem to be risk conscious.

I didn't know about them either until our Lad was born, and i only know people who use them, think there great and wouldnt be without it, and then other people who never even heard of it at all.

I stuck it on him this eve and while he put his hands up originally he didn't bother with it at all a min later. Im suss though.

Might ween him off it.
For those that wonder why he has it, ull never see why, as u might not have needed to try ways to deal with teething, I've met loads like that, no problems so i guess never went searching.

Regards

Suucee

I use amber necklace on my 2. i double it over and they are worn under the sock and under babygro and grobag at night.
i find they work for me. my 2 are so used to them. they cant get near them anyway.

Every where you look amber beads always sparks a debate but we need to make our own decisions on whats best for our kids.

Saying that i totally understand the creches view on it tbh as its totally their responsibility. should another child grab your childs bracelet out of curiosity haven never seen one or even learn to open it. your son like mine is used to it so doesnt bat an eyelid to it. but its too tempting for others.

Katie79

pwurple wrote: »

They can't be sold here, and our creche has seen them get pulled about by other kids so stopped them years ago. Only right.

They're unregulated quackery and obviously a safety risk. In my opinion parents are fairly thick to be putting any kind of beads on an infant. People need protecting from themselves sometimes.

I swear by them – my two year old son has gotten through teething without a mumble with his teething necklace on. I actually notice it when i take it off rather than when he has it on. It is also ace to help with nappy rash and that dribble rash they get around their mouths.

Katie79

Das Kitty wrote: »

No it's not when your baby is in creche. Your baby's necklace breaks and my baby chokes on one of the beads.

For a baby amber jewellery should be bought ONLY from a trustable seller, who HAS CERTIFICATE varifying that the item has been tested and safe to use for under 36months.
Its an expensive process and time consuming of obtaining it, but I saw it in a few health shops displaying.
I personally will be far more confident that my baby wears the right -proper amber necklace or anklet.And of course supervision is required.

Das Kitty

Katie79 wrote: »

For a baby amber jewellery should be bought ONLY from a trustable seller, who HAS CERTIFICATE varifying that the item has been tested and safe to use for under 36months.
Its an expensive process and time consuming of obtaining it, but I saw it in a few health shops displaying.
I personally will be far more confident that my baby wears the right -proper amber necklace or anklet.And of course supervision is required.

I'd personally be far more confident if my child wasn't in crèche with yours while wearing one.

seventeen sheep

Katie79 wrote: »

For a baby amber jewellery should be bought ONLY from a trustable seller, who HAS CERTIFICATE varifying that the item has been tested and safe to use for under 36months.
Its an expensive process and time consuming of obtaining it, but I saw it in a few health shops displaying.
I personally will be far more confident that my baby wears the right -proper amber necklace or anklet.And of course supervision is required.

I don't care what "safety certification" it has (who exactly certifies it anyways?) - if I saw a child in my son's creche wearing any sort of jewellery, I'd be speaking to the manager immediately and asking for it to be banned. If my son's not allowed have raisins in case smaller children choke on them, I certainly wouldn't want beaded jewellery in the play area.

I've heard parents who use them saying that choking isn't a danger because they're designed with a knot between each bead, so if it breaks (and they are actually designed to break at a certain point of pressure, to avoid strangulation) only only bead will be loose, the others remain intact. How is this a justification - it only takes one bead to choke a child!

Neyite

Katie79 wrote: »

For a baby amber jewellery should be bought ONLY from a trustable seller, who HAS CERTIFICATE varifying that the item has been tested and safe to use for under 36months.
Its an expensive process and time consuming of obtaining it, but I saw it in a few health shops displaying.
I personally will be far more confident that my baby wears the right -proper amber necklace or anklet.And of course supervision is required.

Certified by whom? NSAI? Do any carry the CE mark? No, because by their very definition of having small, breakable parts, are unsuitable for infants, and only suitable for older children under supervision. So they fail any independent safety tests. A certificate printed by the manufacturer is just a meaningless bit of fancy paper. But if you can paste a link amber jewellery suitable for children under 36 months carrying the CE mark to prove me wrong, please do.

I've used them myself when desperately trying everything and anything to alleviate teething. But I was under no illusions that they could be classed as safe. And never expected others to be responsible for my child's safety when he wore one.

polydactyl

This mother thought they were safe too, sorry link wouldn't work so screen shots instead

Sligo1

polydactyl wrote: »

This mother thought they were safe too, sorry link wouldn't work so screen shots instead

. Awful! Poor little munchkin.

iguana

P_Cash wrote: »

It's the wording that bothers me. It's even on the ehs web site "so called teething aids"
Clearly written by a non believer, not a parent of a young child anyway.

As the parent of a young child who has suffered with teething and is currently suffering with his molars (and I mean serious suffering, his teeth play the hokey pokey, popping in and out of the gum for weeks before they stay out) I don't see anything wrong with the wording. Presumably you mean the HSE website, so you are talking about a state medical information resource. What are they supposed to call something making claims with no proof to back up those claims? Personally I'd have gone with "alleged" but I have no problem with "so-called" either, "supposed" would also work.

These necklaces are dangerous and the means they claim to work by are fantastical. I've never been tempted to use them for my son, despite almost everyone I know using them because while I hate seeing my son in pain putting his life at risk for what is almost certainly a placebo doesn't seem worth it. Banning them from creche seems sensible, tbh.

Katie79

Neyite wrote: »

Certified by whom? NSAI? Do any carry the CE mark? No, because by their very definition of having small, breakable parts, are unsuitable for infants, and only suitable for older children under supervision. So they fail any independent safety tests. A certificate printed by the manufacturer is just a meaningless bit of fancy paper. But if you can paste a link amber jewellery suitable for children under 36 months carrying the CE mark to prove me wrong, please do.

I've used them myself when desperately trying everything and anything to alleviate teething. But I was under no illusions that they could be classed as safe. And never expected others to be responsible for my child's safety when he wore one.

Safety of Toys - mechanical and physical properties, safety date sheets, estimation safety of toys.
The web is: areta.lt
The company can test amber necklaces according testing method indicated in article 8.4.2.1 of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011.

Conclusions: The Baltic Amber Baby Teething Necklace, 'BTN Cognac' which was tested according
to the test method, indicated in articles 8.4.2.1, 8.38 of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011, conforms
to the requirements of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011 as indicated in article 5.14 and to the
requirements of cord strength.
The tests above were carried out at the
Toys and Chemistry Items Testing Laboratory,
Savanoriu pr. 180, 03154,
Vilnius,
Lithunia.
Full Test Report available upon request.

I think that hair clips are far more dangerous to wear to creche.

Graham

Amber Teething Jewellery - warning from the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission:

Amber beads are often sold as so-called baby “teething” aids in the form of jewellery.
Never use amber teething jewellery such as necklaces, bracelets and anklets as relief for babies who are teething.
Amber teething jewellery products are unsafe for babies, and pose several serious risks:
Amber teething necklaces, bracelets and anklets pose a potential choking/inhalation hazard to any child under three years of age.
The jewellery normally contains many small amber beads which can come loose from the string and be swallowed or inhaled, which could cause choking.
Even if the parts do not break off, amber necklaces, bracelets and anklets are small enough to be swallowed whole by a small child or baby.
The amber beads used in this type of jewellery can very easily shatter into smaller parts which can lead to chocking.
You should never put any kind of cord, string or chain jewellery around a baby’s neck.

Suppliers and retailers are warned that the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission considers these products inherently unsafe and will take appropriate action to remove these products from sale.

If you become aware of a retailer selling these items of jewellery, please contact the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission's Product Safety Unit at 01-4025550 (or visit www.consumerhelp.ie).
Click here to listen to Fergal O'Leary on the Tubridy Show (29th January 2015) warning parents about the dangers of amber teething aids. Fergal is the Director of Communications and Consumer Health for the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission.
The HSE Child Safety Awareness Programme (CSAP) strongly advises that you do not use teething jewellery. If you feel you really must use these items:
Constant supervision is required.
Never place babies down to sleep, even for a short time, whilst they are wearing a teething necklace/bracelet/anklet, jewellery, or clothing with attached strings/cords.
Do not think you are playing it safe by using a teething anklet - a teething baby is very determined to get its hands and mouth on anything that can be chewed.
Keep your baby safe - do not use amber teething jewellery. Help with teething pain by using teething rings and/or gentle gum massage instead.

http://www.hse.ie/eng/health/child/childsafety/teething_necklace.html

seventeen sheep

Katie79 wrote: »

Safety of Toys - mechanical and physical properties, safety date sheets, estimation safety of toys.
The web is: areta.lt
The company can test amber necklaces according testing method indicated in article 8.4.2.1 of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011.

Conclusions: The Baltic Amber Baby Teething Necklace, 'BTN Cognac' which was tested according
to the test method, indicated in articles 8.4.2.1, 8.38 of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011, conforms
to the requirements of the standard LST EN 71-1:2011 as indicated in article 5.14 and to the
requirements of cord strength.
The tests above were carried out at the
Toys and Chemistry Items Testing Laboratory,
Savanoriu pr. 180, 03154,
Vilnius,
Lithunia.
Full Test Report available upon request.

I think that hair clips are far more dangerous to wear to creche.

You got that test report from the Baltic Amber website. Hardly an unbiased source. The areta.lt website makes no mention of it (in fact, the only products mentioned on this website seem to be paints and chemical stuff.

Also the bit of the report summary that you omitted was that the only test carried out was the breaking point. No mention of the risk of strangulation or choking on either a single bead that broke off, or indeed of a child attempting to swallow the chain whole if it did remain fully intact in the case of a breakage.

I've no idea whether hairclips are allowed in creches, although I wouldn't be surprised if they are banned in some, and I assume they'd be taken out for naps etc.

pwurple

polydactyl wrote: »

This mother thought they were safe too, sorry link wouldn't work so screen shots instead

Cripes those photos...! If that doesn't scare the crap out any parent putting necklaces on a baby, I don't know what would. Lucky to be alive.

cbyrd

My now 3 year old had one from about 6 months til he was 2. I was changing his bib about 15 -20 times and his top and vest about 5 times a day.. The drool was unstoppable. I looked into how they work and got one, within 4-5 days the drool started drying up and we could get his sore chin and neck to heal.
The amber has an anti inflammatory properties when worn close to the skin.
I never worried about him chewing it as it wasn't long enough to come over his chin. You can pump painkillers into babies but how do you stop drool? After a week with it on he was a different child. The one I had looked like the amber was set on the string..I gave it mighty tugs and it never budged.. He passed no heed of it as he was so used to wearing it. I took it off him about a year ago when all his teeth were up. Choking hazards are everywhere from buttons on clothes to things they pick up off the floor.
One funny thing that did happen, when we moved house and few months ago I couldn't find one of the receiver nuts from his bed, it looks like a tiny barrel with a hole through the middle.. found it in the loo and few days later.. Nuff said!

Katie79

Suppliers and retailers are warned that the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission considers these products inherently unsafe and will take appropriate action to remove these products from sale.

Shops don't sell amber for under 3 years old, it is up to a responsible party to buy it or no., who takes all the responsibility.

Choking hazards are everywhere from buttons on clothes to things they pick up off the floor.
Its not possible to remove all the hazards from the sale. And we cannot elliminate all of them from our lives.
I will not post other scary photos from all sorts of hazards. Just supervision for under 3 years is needed 24/7/365. and be positive!

Graham

Katie79 wrote: »

Suppliers and retailers are warned that the Competition and Consumer Protection Commission considers these products inherently unsafe and will take appropriate action to remove these products from sale.

Shops don't sell amber for under 3 years old, it is up to a responsible party to buy it or no., who takes all the responsibility.

Choking hazards are everywhere from buttons on clothes to things they pick up off the floor.
Its not possible to remove all the hazards from the sale. And we cannot elliminate all of them from our lives.
I will not post other scary photos from all sorts of hazards. Just supervision for under 3 years is needed 24/7/365. and be positive!

Most parents wouldn't deliberately attach a choking hazard to their child.

pwurple

Did he drool with the necklace off then afterwards cbyrd?

Mine both drooled like mad and then one day just stopped. Different ages, different number of teeth. It's just them learing how to swallow their own saliva.

First baby had 8 teeth before ever starting to drool at about 16 weeks, drooled to 26, then stopped. She had full set of teeth by 18 months. Second baby drooled before teeth. Drooled longer than first baby... But I remember someone gave me a pile of bibs way after she had stopped drooling, saying I'd need them for the remaining teeth. It's yet to happen after another 4 so far.

Drool is bog standard saliva. Salivary glands start to produce more some time after birth, but because they lack mouth control over it it spills out. They learn to swallow it at different ages, just like they crawl, walk etc at different ages.

When you think about it, wouldn't 6 year olds start drooling again when they get more teeth if it was in any way tooth related? Loads of people don't get wisdom teeth in til their late 20's, I'm pretty sure they don't drool.

kandr10

They're good points there pwurple. How would Amber stop drooling anyway? What's the science behind it? Even if you accept its supposed anti inflammatory properties, that has nothing to do with drooling.
I agree that there are choking hazards everywhere and you can't completely wrap babies up in cotton wool however I'm sure all parents try to minimise those risks as much as possible and putting beads on a child simply does not go hand in hand with minimising risk.
It's like the rock that keeps tigers away in the Simpsons...

pwurple

Katie79 wrote: »

Just supervision for under 3 years is needed 24/7/365.

Might want to reword that one. The only children I know who are supervised 24/7 are in intensive care. Parents usually sleep.

CarpeDiem85

Graham wrote: »

Most parents wouldn't deliberately attach a choking hazard to their child.

Most parents give their babies soothers for hours upon end though, another choking hazard but they're not near as controversial as these teething bracelets.

iguana

Are soothers a choking hazard? I never used one for my son but AFAIK, they can actually help reduce certain SIDS risks.

Graham

CarpeDiem85 wrote: »

Most parents give their babies soothers for hours upon end though, another choking hazard but they're not near as controversial as these teething bracelets.

Most parents give their Babies soothers bearing a CE mark indicating that they have been tested and certified as safe. That's a bit different to a string of small decorative polished rock jewellery.

Sligo1

CarpeDiem85 wrote: »

Most parents give their babies soothers for hours upon end though, another choking hazard but they're not near as controversial as these teething bracelets.

None of mine ever took a soother. But fyi research suggests that soothers may reduce SIDS.

pwurple

How are soothers either a choking or strangulation hazard? No tiny parts, no rope or chord.

Too large to fit in an airway, and how on earth would a soother wrap around a neck?

Any kind of jewellery on babies, amber or not, has all those risks.

sari

EVERYTHING can be a risk, we as parents are left with the responsibility to weigh up these risks and decide what is best for our family. Every family is different and what works for one may not for another.

Found this on soothers, most brands recalled are mam and avent probably the most common brands here too http://www.kidsindanger.org/2012/08/03/take-a-closer-look-at-your-babys-pacifier/

CarpeDiem85

sari wrote: »

EVERYTHING can be a risk, we as parents are left with the responsibility to weigh up these risks and decide what is best for our family. Every family is different and what works for one may not for another.

Found this on soothers, most brands recalled are mam and avent probably the most common brands here too http://www.kidsindanger.org/2012/08/03/take-a-closer-look-at-your-babys-pacifier/

Exactly, I agree with you. Everything can be a risk and a danger with young children and it's completely up to individual parents to make the call as to what what they want their child to play with, wear, eat, put in their mouths etc.

That's not to say that I agree with the bracelets. There is a mother at my child's play group who lets their child wear these bracelets but I'm not going to demonise the mother for letting her child wear the things! I'm vigilant with my child around this, as I am with the toys she plays with, the other children etc. That's my role as a parent, to mind my child 100%.

Graham

sari wrote: »

EVERYTHING can be a risk, we as parents are left with the responsibility to weigh up these risks and decide what is best for our family. Every family is different and what works for one may not for another.

Found this on soothers, most brands recalled are mam and avent probably the most common brands here too http://www.kidsindanger.org/2012/08/03/take-a-closer-look-at-your-babys-pacifier/

Just goes to show that even things that have been thoroughly tested and certified can present a danger. Imagine how many times riskier completely uncertified/unregulated products can be.

Sligo1

CarpeDiem85 wrote: »

Exactly, I agree with you. Everything can be a risk and a danger with young children and it's completely up to individual parents to make the call as to what what they want their child to play with, wear, eat, put in their mouths etc.

That's not to say that I agree with the bracelets. There is a mother at my child's play group who lets their child wear these bracelets but I'm not going to demonise the mother for letting her child wear the things! I'm vigilant with my child around this, as I am with the toys she plays with, the other children etc. That's my role as a parent, to mind my child 100%.

I agree with you here. However, if they pose risks to other children, eg. A necklace breaking in crèche or whatever and another child may choke... Then I do think policies need to be put in place to prevent this happening. What people do in their own home is completely their perogative. It's not for me however. and I would hope it would not impact on my child.

CarpeDiem85

Sligo1 wrote: »

I agree with you here. However, if they pose risks to other children, eg. A necklace breaking in crèche or whatever and another child may choke... Then I do think policies need to be put in place to prevent this happening. What people do in their own home is completely their perogative. It's not for me however. and I would hope it would not impact on my child.

I agree with the crèche banning them 100% but I don't think it's nice what some posters have said about parents who choose to give their child the bracelets as a teething aid. That's their choice and to be called thick is extremely rude in my opinion. Another reason why I reluctantly post on this thread these days.

cbyrd

pwurple wrote:

Too large to fit in an airway, and how on earth would a soother wrap around a neck?

I have twice taken the bitten top of an avent soother out of my then 18 months old boy. He's now 5, I guess just cos it has an official safety standard means I can be assured my little ones teeth won't bite through it.. not so.. it was his way of telling me he was done with the soother.

seventeen sheep

cbyrd wrote: »

I have twice taken the bitten top of an avent soother out of my then 18 months old boy. He's now 5, I guess just cos it has an official safety standard means I can be assured my little ones teeth won't bite through it.. not so.. it was his way of telling me he was done with the soother.

Sorry if it's an off topic question, but if it happened once, why on earth would you have ever given him an Avent soother again? That's a really serious choking hazard.

My son loves his soothers, it's the TT ones we use. If part of the teat ever came loose, he'd be going cold turkey from that day on! No way I'd risk using them again.

Sligo1

cbyrd wrote: »

I have twice taken the bitten top of an avent soother out of my then 18 months old boy. He's now 5, I guess just cos it has an official safety standard means I can be assured my little ones teeth won't bite through it.. not so.. it was his way of telling me he was done with the soother.

In fairness tho the same can be done with bottle teats....

pwurple

I watch the rubber/silicone on them when washing. There is usually wear and damage well in advance. They fill up with water for a start. I bin em if there is any damage.

cbyrd

pwurple wrote:

I watch the rubber/silicone on them when washing. There is usually wear and damage well in advance. They fill up with water for a start. I bin em if there is any damage.

The soother will fill up with water even brand new, squeeze the rubber bit and put it in the water..it has to have air in it to facilitate sucking.

Proving my point with the bottle teats too, really... anything that goes in a childs mouth is a choking hazard, even food.

The reason he did it twice is because he had more than one soother, in fairness. I thought it it had happened because it was damaged and I didn't see it . The second time it happened was with a brand new one out of the pack!

Just because you don't agree with something I do as a parent, doesn't mean that it is wrong.
I choose to use the amber necklace because it had such a huge effect on my son. And yes, I did take it off to see was it the amber or my wishful thinking. within a day or two his rosey cheeks were back and the drool started again, I'm not talking about little bit that hangs off the lip, I'm talking wet to his belly button in 5 minutes. 15-20 bibs on average per day.The reason I found the amber was on the same website I was buying the bandana bibs for extra soakage.

When babies are teething, the saliva is more acidic, enabling the softening of the gums to allow the tooth to breakthrough. The chaffing on my son's chin was raw. I had used vaseline during the day and sudocreme at night, it bled a few times.. This is why I have no problem using one again if it's needed,
I also made sure when he was older that it was under his clothes, he has 3 older siblings so the chance for it to be grabbed in play was bigger.. it never was.
Again I'll stress, you've never needed to use it, please don't diss the parents that do, what works for me may not work for you. That doesn't mean that either are wrong, just different. Choking hazards are everywhere, even brand new things.

pwurple

Sorry to disagree cbyrd, but the claims the things make are simply not true, and when they pose a danger, I think it needs to be corrected.

Saliva is not more acidic when teething, this is easily proven, go and get some litmus tests yourself. That's a myth. The chaffing is from being wet.

They are not legal for sale here, for very simple reasons, they are not safe. Children die all the time from strangulation and choking. It's not some minor parenting choice like types of nappy brand, it's potentially waking up to a dead infant in your house. If you've ever experienced that in your life (and I sincerely hope you have not) then you would not be so flippant about this being a parenting option.

Ms2011

Are there any stats available on the amount of injuries/deaths caused by amber beads used under socks/clothes/babygros??
This is how I used mine last time so would be interested to see how dangerous it is before I use them again on my next baby.