IANAD, I don't have kids but I'm curious why melatonin properly dosed would be seen as worse than crying to sleep. From what I've learned about melatonin it seems to me you did the right thing
because people don't know what effects that would have on a growing baby. (I'm not saying scientists but just random people)
questions that would worry them would probably be things like what if the baby start depending on them and their bodies reduce/ceases to produce melatonin naturally, and that this permanently affects the baby.
I haven't looked into the findings for theses kind of questions, but even if you look into it you'll also have to be condident of the reliability of the results. maybe it's harmless for adults but not for 2 year olds. Maybe the pediatrician you went to see didn't prescribe them for a reason.
Because it's a chemical! A hormone! Because you're dosing your kid with a drug! You're taking the easy way out! You're using a shortcut to cover for your inability to endure the first few days of ${sleep training method}!
While I reserve any judgement on GP’s use of melatonin to help their child sleep, I think the tone of your comment indicates a confidence in pharmacology that is difficult to justify, or at least betrays significant immaturity about the complexity of these sorts of decisions…
> I think the tone of your comment indicates a confidence in pharmacology that is difficult to justify,
Hey, being condescending about magical thinking and pseudo-reasoning does not automatically imply a special confidence in pharmacology. That said, I do have perhaps above-average confidence in pharmacology, based on some experience and paying attention to details. Much like scientific papers, pharmaceutical products have specific effects and ranges of applicability. If you're aware of those and the trade-offs you'll be making, then pharmaceutical becomes a very effective tool - one that works reliably and consistently, unlike magical / naturalistic thinking.
> betrays significant immaturity about the complexity of these sorts of decisions…
I think it's the other way around. The example responses I provided are, to me, how immaturity looks like in the reasoning department. A lot of complexity in these sorts of decisions is created by people giving such replies, as now parents have to also trade off effective solutions against being judged by others.
I think the argument is more along the lines of a lot of people automatically assuming something like this would be bad without any direct justification.
The same people that will then feed their kids heaps of antibiotics for a viral infection.
Well, no. Melatonin does affect things other than sleep. That said, you do what you need to do as a parent. I would only (silently) judge someone if they jumped right to that and kept at it. Messing with hormones should be a last resort, even if it seems benign.
1) "Last resort" doesn't mean "don't use, ever". A lot of the commentary on baby sleep issues would have you delay trying this until you've tried everything else repeatedly - or, in other words, indefinitely. But sleep deprivation of the entire household is no joke, at some point trying the same methods that didn't work again and again is just torture, and the negative effects far outweigh trying a hormone supplement.
2) Most advice around this topic is based on magical thinking, examples of which I included. Yes, bodies are complex, bodies of developing children even more so. Yes, hormones in general are hugely impactful and messing with them is dangerous. But it's not magic, it's not tainted by evil or something. We do have some idea about what the risks are.
The underlying idea behind the examples I provided (real and widely spread, unfortunately) is a knee-jerk rejection of anything man-made, of any intervention that wasn't available to our great grandparents, or their great grandparents. It's irrational and dangerous and annoying, and usually comes bundled with thinking in absolutes (instead of trade-offs).
I think this is born out of puritan ethics attached to counter-culture “pure” living. Essentially all desired outcomes must be earned through righteous, hard work. Anything short of this effort is cheating.
For me, it’s out of respect for the body’s natural methods of dealing with problems. Obviously there are some cases where it’s useful to interfere with the body’s processes.
But in general humans are extremely complex. We tend to think that we have a better understanding of things than we actually do. The human body does things that we still don’t understand fully, and unless there’s an incredibly clear understanding or benefit of some treatment, I’m hesitant to try to change it. Mostly because of how much I know that we don’t know yet.
If we don't know how the human body works, then surely we don't know that melatonin is better or worse for the body than not taking it. Perhaps it is worse, or perhaps it is better, but either way it has at least one positive effect.
The primary concern is its (potential) effect on natural production. Most human hormone production is governed by the hypothalamus-pituitary-adrenal axis. Internal feedback loops suppress natural production for extended periods of time if exogenous hormones are introduced.
One of the most common examples of this is exogenous testosterone. If you take it long enough, the LH/FSH feedback hormones drop, the leydig cells in your testes atrophy and go dormant, and your natural production could be suppressed forever. Nearly all retired bodybuilders (and other athletes who use gear) are dependent on TRT for life, for this reason.
The open question is whether introducing exogenous melatonin to patients whose natural production is already very high (as it tends to be in children) could lead to lifelong dependency on it. That's the concern.
questions that would worry them would probably be things like what if the baby start depending on them and their bodies reduce/ceases to produce melatonin naturally, and that this permanently affects the baby.
I haven't looked into the findings for theses kind of questions, but even if you look into it you'll also have to be condident of the reliability of the results. maybe it's harmless for adults but not for 2 year olds. Maybe the pediatrician you went to see didn't prescribe them for a reason.
Edit: a quick Google search in English mostly found positive articles about it, while the same search in french found negative articles warning about the potential risks like this one: https://www.vidal.fr/actualites/29656-melatonine-non-sans-da...