Of course, I would never deny that people should do their own research. Based on my googling, they would probably find that there's a lot of research to back up the doctors' advice, and plenty of anecdotes to back up co-sleeping advocates.

Certainly the default position should be that medical professionals know what they are talking about for folks who are not inclined to do the actual research.

> Certainly the default position should be that medical professionals know what they are talking about

In general I agree with you. When you're faced with a large amount of literature from many doctors and specialists in the field you should be able to assume that someone has done the research, and that most of the medical profession agree.

It'd be great if more people could read and understand research. But we're stuck with sub-optimal reporting, and people struggling to understand what is really meant by "50% reduction in risk" or "20 times less likely to die".

Having said all that: Here's an off topic rant.

There are very many examples of doctors not using scientific method but relying on their "expertise".[1]

This has caused significant harm to many people.

Doctors tend not to talk about stuff that is obvious nonsense, and a lot of their interventions sound plausible. But that's the sneaky danger! We know woo is woo, and if people want to fund research into it good luck to them. But for things that sound plausible? That's exactly when we need good research, because common sense and expertise is fallible.

This isn't from doctors trying to deceive people. It's from good clinicians who are not aware of their limits.

[1] A great example is "Arthroscopic Knee Surgery No Better Than Placebo Surgery", from about 2000.

A person with common sense would look at the mass of a baby, and the mass of an adult human. They'd consider their tendencies to sleep heavily, and perhaps conclude that the adult could easily roll over on the baby, and kill it. Or knock it off the edge of the bed, and kill it.

Hell, if you do the research there are plenty instances of people punching their sleeping partner in the face during sleep, because they were having a dream (I almost did it once, with my fist landing right next to my girlfriend's head in her pillow. I thought I was having a fist fight, but I was dreaming)

So, could a human kill a baby by sleeping with it? I don't know. Could a swallow carry a coconut?

> A person with common sense would look at the mass of a baby, and the mass of an adult human.

Weight/mass has very little to do with it. The baby is never 'crushed' it is 'smothered'.

Also when you smother a baby (accidentally or intentional) it squirms. So common sense would indicate the key factor is how heavily you sleep, and how easily could you role onto the baby.

If the babies head is the same level as your head, the chances of rolling on top, would require some pretty intense dreaming.

Knocking a baby off the bed is very unlikely to kill a baby (they are in a relaxed state, and have flexible bone structure/skull).

Research indicates co-sleeping is dangerous when the adult has consumed alcohol or drugs (i.e is sleeping very heavily).

I personally would be a horrible co-sleeper.

I can set 5 alarms and hear none. I only wake up at the end of a sleep cycle, no matter what's happening around me.

Incidentally I just read the child rearing chapter of Jared Diamond's latest book about traditional societies. Turns out they all tend to co-sleep, but usually they sleep on the ground or on hard mattresses. As JD points out, it is easier to notice that you have rolled onto your child with a hard mattress.

This is an excellent point.

I just bought a new mattress and I can say for sure, after having slept on a $100 target futon for the past 2 years, that I'd not know if a baby was underneath me on this one...