>
>
>I do have a study that showed in one tribal society, the babies
>who were described as "fussy or colicky" before the tribe went through a
>drought and famine were far more likely to survive the drought than the
>babies who had been described as placid and easy-going.
>
>Does this make sense to any of you?
>
It makes sense to me. A wise LLLL told me that the high-need baby always
gets his/her needs met. (Guess what kind of baby five of my seven were?
Oh yes, Teresa has met them... LOL)

Could you post the reference to the study? I'm interested in the
*perceptions* of the society in regards to what constitutes fussiness
(and who decided to "translate" it this way, both linguistically and
into research conclusions). As I've mentioned before, in my husband's
society light sleepers were valued as protectors. I am not sure what
kind of babies would be considered challenges, if this perception
exists... anecdotally, I'd have to guess it was the non-cuddlers (but
maybe that's my dh's individual, not societal preference...)

Jo-Anne

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html