Talk:Emily Oster

Untitled
Shouldn't this article mention that, according to Dubner and Levitt, Emily Oster first gained notice as "Baby Emily", the subject of the book Narratives From the Crib? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.149.173.208 (talk) 21:01, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Emily Oster and her new book--Jessica A Bruno (talk) 04:49, 3 September 2013 (UTC) Expecting Better controversy/ies
Basically, all of this is based on all of my own reviews of her and her book so far.

Heres another article (Pregnant, and Disputing the Doctor: After having a child, Emily Oster wrote “Expecting Better,” a book that challenges the conventional wisdom on pregnancy) that I have found awhile back. I mean the day it came it out. I'm currently in the midst of reading this particular book. Its not like what the reviewer thinks it is. Well, at least not in the intro and 1st part of it, but the rest of it. But at the same time I have found that it was lacking certain areas. Like beyond basic conception, elective c-sections, freestanding birth centers, parenting, and maybe others. In which I highly the other book that I'm in the midst of reading Parenting Without Borders: Surprising Lessons Parents Around the World Can Teach Us, Christine Gross-Loh. Again, this is like a book that I have read earlier this summer, The Business of Baby: What Doctors Don’t Tell You, What Corporations Try to Sell You,  and How Put Your Pregnancy,  Childbirth,  and Baby Before Their Bottom Line, Jennifer Margulis. At the same time have mentioned as well. In which both of these books and their authors like another book that I have read Homeward Bound: Why Women are Embracing the New Domesticity, Emily Matchar. Have also mentioned this book.

Back with even more observations of the book and its author Ms Oster. I totally forgot mentioned about postpartum aka fourth trimester, not labor and delivery. At least as I know of from my previous learning and researching regarding all of this. Have found that I have a love and hate relationship with both the book and her. I for one really prefer both Jennifer Margulis, Sarah J Buckley, their books Business of Baby, Gentle Birth, Gentle Mothering. Over her, Annie Murphy Paul, Randi Hutter Epstein, their books Origins, Get Me Out. At the same time heres some authors Jennifer Block, Tina Cassidy, Martha Brockenbrough, their books Pushed, Birth, It Could Happen to You!. In which I have a love and hate relationship with them and their books. This also applies all other mainstream authors and their books that are out there. I really prefer alternative ones more then anything else or at least mixed of both alternative and mainstream ones.

Think thats it for now.

Thank you, again, in advance.

Jessica--Jessica A Bruno (talk) 04:48, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Improper use of sources?
My reading of one of the references cited in the controversy section leads me to believe that "Fetal Alcohol Exposure and IQ at Age 8: Evidence from a Population-Based Birth-Cohort Study" is being used incorrectly. The article is referenced on a claim that moderate amounts of maternal drinking may be correlated with decreased cognitive cognitive.

However, the paper indicates (most clearly in the summary tables) that while some genetic variants are associated with lower cognitive scores than others for mothers who drink moderately, scores among mothers who drink moderately were generally higher overall than scores for mothers who didn't drink at all (likely due to age and socioeconomic differences).

This indicates that the study should most certainly not be used to justify a claim that moderate maternal drinking has been proven harmful. It would be useful if someone with greater expertise in the area could verify my reading and update this article accordingly. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.160.242.197 (talk) 17:29, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

Alcohol and IQ - Lewis et al.(2012)
To build upon the comment above, "Improper use of sources," the study in question did not answer the question of whether maternal alcohol consumption reduces children's IQ.

As the previous commenter stated, the data shows higher IQ with moderate alcohol consumption. Yes there were confounding factors. Those confounding factors were not controlled for in order to answer this question.

The only thing the study was attempting to measure was the impact of certain genes on a child's IQ if their mothers consumed alcohol during pregnancy. They found a (frankly small, 3.5 point) effect.

Furthermore, the average IQ scores for all the groups of children studied ranged from 103.1 (from an abstaining group) to 107.5 (from a moderate-drinking group). All of these IQ scores are very normal. Clearly moderate alcohol consumption is not impairing children in any profound way.

I am removing the reference.

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Emily Oster. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070703224905/http://home.uchicago.edu/~eoster/hepb.pdf to http://home.uchicago.edu/~eoster/hepb.pdf
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130504072819/http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/gender/Sen100M.html to http://ucatlas.ucsc.edu/gender/Sen100M.html
 * Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20100118130724/http://home.uchicago.edu/~eoster/hbvnotecon.pdf to http://home.uchicago.edu/~eoster/hbvnotecon.pdf

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 11:04, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

Context Tag
Made some edits to help make the text clearer. Also removed a good chunk of text that confused the point and seemed unnecessary. Can we remove the context tag? Anything else that should be changed/added before removing? Balle010 (talk) 15:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)

David Gorski on the "amnesty"
Also, “amnesty” and “reconciliation are meaningless unless they apply to both sides and the ones calling for them are willing to admit their own errors. That’s not what Oster is about, though. She’s actually selling a kinder, gentler version of Kent Heckenlively’s assertion that he will “accept your surrender.” No wonder scientists and physicians said not just “No,” but “Oh, hell, no!” --Hob Gadling (talk) 06:43, 3 November 2022 (UTC)