What’s your take?
A new review has found that there is “no proof” that a glass of wine can harm your baby when you’re pregnant.
After many research pieces about the affects of alcohol when pregnant received backlash over worrying mums, Bristol University found that there is “surprisingly limited” evidence to suggest a baby will be harmed by alcohol.
The researchers recovered over 26 related studies, and found that there were “insufficient [findings] for a robust conclusion.”
Professor David Spiegelhalter said: “A precautionary approach is still reasonable, but with luck this should dispel any guilt and anxiety felt by women who have an occasional glass of wine while pregnant.”
However, earlier this year it was revealed that Ireland ranks in the top five countries for mothers giving birth to children with alcohol-related defects.
According to a study by JAMA Paediatrics, Ireland has one of the worst rates of babies born with Foetal Alcohol Spectrum Disorder (FASD), as a result of drinking during pregnancy.
The research states that the global average is eight out of 1,000 pregnancies, but Ireland comes in much higher than that, with 48 in every 1,000 Irish babies having FASD.
It further states that one out of every 13 women drink while expecting.
FASD includes hearing and seeing disabilities, physical abnormalities, learning disabilities and speech and language delays.
HerFamily contacted the HSE for its thoughts on the research regarding the article that states there’s “no proof” of alcohol-related problems.
It concluded that the study has its limitations.
“What the study group found is that there was insufficient data, from the published literature, for meta-analysis or to make robust conclusions on any pregnancy outcome measures apart from birth size and gestational age at birth.
However, it advises to pay attention to your consumption.
“As there was some evidence that even light prenatal alcohol consumption is associated with SGA (small for gestational age) and preterm delivery, guidance could advise abstention as a precautionary principle but should explain the paucity of evidence.”
