Study: Breastfed babies get higher grades in school

I should probably have saved this story for a "Friday off-beat" news item, but I figured some of us could use a Tuesday diversion.

Reuters Life! (honestly, I have trouble trusting news sources with exclamation points in their name) ... anyway, Reuters Life! reports:

Breastfed babies seem more likely to do well at high school and to go on to attend college than infants raised on a bottle, according to a new U.S. study.

Professors Joseph Sabia from the American University and Daniel Rees from the University of Colorado Denver based their research on 126 children from 59 families, comparing siblings who were breastfed as infants to others who were not.

By comparing siblings, the study was able to account for the influence of a variety of difficult-to-measure factors such as maternal intelligence and the quality of the home environment.

The study, published in the Journal of Human Capital, found that an additional month of breastfeeding was associated with an increase in high school grade point averages of 0.019 points and an increase in the probability of college attendance of 0.014.

Frankly, those infinitesimal gains don't impress me. They seem well within the margin of error. But hey, a study that promotes breast feeding as good thing? That's fine with me. Especially considering what passes for "health news" these days.

Essay: Christopher Tollefsen explains why torture is wrong

I'm very happy to see Public Discourse taking up this important topic, much in the news these days:

The recent publication of the Torture Memos and of the International Red Cross report on the treatment of high-level detainees in the aftermath of 9/11 has returned to national prominence the discussion of the morality of torture and “enhanced interrogation” techniques. It is important to be clear, as a moral matter, on what boundaries should be accepted in interrogation of human beings; a responsible and non-politicized discussion is essential on this difficult issue.

[Read Tollefsen's essay here.]

Some folks have left comments asking why AmP has not talked about the morality of torture. A significant reason for this lacuna was that I had not yet found a satisfying treatment. I look forward to their feedback now.

Pope Benedict "lashes out" against laws that contradict Natural Law

The AFP starts us out:

VATICAN CITY (AFP) - Pope Benedict reportedly lashed out against laws that he said threaten the family and social order, saying none "can overturn that of the Creator."

"No law made by man can overturn that of the Creator without dramatically affecting society in its very foundation," said the pope, according to the I-Media news agency, which reports on Vatica affairs in French.

The pope's remarks to a delegation attending a conference on "natural law" at the Pontifical Lateran University came as Portugal moves to liberalise abortion and Italy plans to grant legal status to unwed couples. [More...]

Now, I could see a variety of verbs that might describe what Pope Benedict did, but "lash out" just isn't one of them. "Lashing out," to me at least, connotes an uncontrolled, violent reaction to something one cannot handle rationally or unemotionally. Does this sound at all like the Pope Benedict we know?

I think the phrase "sternly rebuked" or "strongly asserted" would be far more appropriate. But I don't compose the copy.

Dom found another doozy in one of those ever-humerous and overly-histrionic British tabloids:

"Portugal yesterday voted to sweep away centuries of moral domination by the Roman Catholic church in a referendum allowing the government to reform one of Europe’s most restrictive abortion laws."

Goodness!

Perhaps what they are really scared about are these words, quoted from a far more balanced CWNews report:

"We must have the courage to remind our contemporaries what human beings and humanity are," the Pope said. As an example of that approach he mentioned the late Andrei Sakharov, the Russian scientist and human-rights activist. "If under the Communist regime his exterior freedom was fettered, his interior freedom, which no one could take away from him, authorized him to speak out firmly to defend his compatriots in the name of the common good,” the Pope said.

And some fascinating backstory:

"The Pope's choice of Sakharov as a model for the Academy's work was particularly significant because the Russian nuclear physicist was also a foreign associate member of the group. In fact, then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger was named to the Academy to fill the spot created by Sakharov’s death in 1989."

The question I ask myself is how the Pope's speech possibly relates/prepares for the expected CDF document that is going to be issued on Natural Law. This is one story I'll be watching eagerly.

Odd how someone who is prone to "lashing out" can simultaneously be working within a backdrop of such careful planning and drafting. It really makes you wonder which side is more disposed to "lashing out", doesn't it?

Finally, on a related topic, this article covers the Italian bishop preparing a statement against civil unions. Some statistics from that article:

Also, according to data released by the Italian agency Istat, fewer than 250,000 marriages were celebrated in Italy in 2005, a number that shows the continual decline since 1972, when just short of 419,000 weddings occurred. The information revealed more than 500,000 Italian couples living together outside of marriage. Istat also stated that 15% of Italian children-- 80,000 in 2005-- have been born outside of marriage. That figure is double the number for just ten years ago.

The average age at which Italian men now marry is 32 years old while for Italian women it is 30.