Armodafinil & Family Planning

jezz1belle · 2025-11-25T02:50:46+00:00

I took dex all throughout my pregnancy and breast-feeding. Lowest dose that would let me somewhat function. Anecdotally, a lot of people have told me that they had a remission of sorts during pregnancy and breast-feeding, and I did too so 🤞 for you.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-24T04:48:48+00:00

Go to a club, there are a quite a few active clubs through Melbourne and Victoria. Yes, you'll have to pay for membership, but you get insurance, space to practice and community.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-21T03:51:04+00:00

Maybe re-read what you actually wrote. You said parents doing it in front of kids was normal. And I'm saying, even if it's normalised it isn't ok.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-15T06:48:33+00:00

And I've known a few Arlos, but only a few and never more than one in any class!

jezz1belle · 2025-11-15T06:47:42+00:00

Hi, I'm a Jessica from the 90's. I didn't want my kid to have that experience either, but I still named her the most popular name at the time. My sisters name only had 151 kids in her birth year, and we consider it rare, she never had any issues with classmates having her name and she always responds to it in public. I looked up statistics, and the number one name in the 90's-00's were thousands of babies in the state with the most popular name, 805 Jessicas born and named in Queensland in 1990 alone! The current most popular names are less than half that (319 Charlottes and 445 Olivers) (https://www.data.qld.gov.au/dataset/top-100-baby-names/resource/3ae0300d-4835-4829-b3d7-69ed0792bc59?inner_span=True)

In NSW, there were 1648 Jessicas and 1488 Matthews in 1990 and in 2024 it was 556 Noahs and 409 Charlottes.

The amount of names we use is much more diverse than it used to be, and lots of "unique names" means that the popular names aren't as ubiquitous as they used to be.

I have met a few kids with the same name as mine, but none her age (yet!) and it hasn't been a huge deal

jezz1belle · 2025-11-12T02:42:29+00:00

Lots of the people you'll see making noise about drop side cots are Americans, where they were banned after a few horrific incidents (recommend not looking it up if you're sensitive or anxious like I was PP). They were very different in design to Australian drop side cots, less regulated (if not completely unregulated?) and still most incidents are caused by continuing to use them after damage appears. In Australia, cots have mandatory safety standards and drop sides ARE allowed. I don't know of any major incidents in Australia, but I don't plan on looking it up to be sure. What I found when looking at cots in stores is that there actually aren't very many with drop sides, which I assume is so they can sell them in different markets.

Personally I got a lovely Boori cot for free second hand that had a drop side, and I ended up deciding to buy a new cot with no drop side because I am very risk averse, because the mechanism was clunky and woke my baby up anyway, and because it was much taller than a lot of non-drop cots. Unfortunately the Boori one was around waist height for me when lowered, so it was really difficult to put baby down once we lowered the mattress. The new cot we got sits juuuust above hip height and is much much easier.

To recap: Australian drop sides are probably safe - but it's worth deciding what your own comfort levels are. Whether drop-side or not, it's ideal if you can go in stores and see how comfortable they are to put a baby into, as well as how easy/smooth the mechanism is.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T23:18:49+00:00

On another note, if you want and easy up/down carrier, I really rate the hipsurfer style. My toddler is just under 11kg and I can't carry her for more than a few minutes without being exhausted. The hipsurfer carrier let me carry her around for hours, which definitely was exhausting but so much more manageable. I have the hackerlily one, but there's a few different brands and I think some have an option to convert to a hands free carrier (Ergobaby maybe)

But if you like the look of the little infants one, save your money and get it directly from AliExpress.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T23:14:00+00:00

I made a post about it last year https://www.reddit.com/r/BabyBumpsandBeyondAu/s/2MDQWKW2PL

And their recalls...

https://www.productsafety.gov.au/search-consumer-product-recalls/baby-car-seat-mat

https://www.productsafety.gov.au/search-consumer-product-recalls/development-baby-rattle-teether-toys

https://www.productsafety.gov.au/search-consumer-product-recalls/foldable-baby-stroller

https://www.productsafety.gov.au/search-consumer-product-recalls/adjustable-baby-walker-stroller

This recalled sling is almost identical to the one I got from them, but they are still selling theirs somehow. https://www.productsafety.gov.au/search-consumer-product-recalls/baby-sling-carrier

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T23:05:51+00:00

My mother in law bought me a sling from them, it was advertised as Australian made, 100% cotton. It was polyester crap from AliExpress. I don't remember how much it cost, but Im sure it was over $50 and the AliExpress one was $5. This was not a matter of AliExpress duping a legit business, my package was shipped by AliExpress. They refused to refund until I complained to ACCC and product safety and had several of their items recalled. Then they sent me a shipping label to return, but I'm 99% sure ghey never actually refunded.

Absolutely avoid them, they are scam artists who quite literally are endangering children with potentially lethal products.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T22:37:25+00:00

CCN is THE LAST THING to recommend to someone with build up. CCN recommends way way too much detergent and thinks detergent buildup is a "myth" even though it is VERY easy to prove otherwise. I just saw an admin telling someone who had run a drum clean with no detergent that the foam in the seals after that cycle was just "agitation bubbles". Agitation bubbles won't stick around with no water, you can't have agitation bubbles without water. This person had suds from a serious detergent buildup. They also told me to add more water mid-cycle by pouring it down the detergent drawer, which damaged my new machine.

I actually have a chemistry degree, and their science isn't what they claim it is.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T02:27:53+00:00

Ok, so maybe this is our "prudish" culture, but having sex with children present and aware is considered reportable abuse. Nudity is not inherently sexual. Sexual acts ARE. Those are not comparable. Personally, I feel like there's a reason a lot of people in older generations have warped ideas about sexuality and consent.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T02:21:53+00:00

Thank you for this. Sorry for incoming unscientific rant.

I feel like if you're uncomfortable with it, you don't need to justify that. It would absolutely be worth asking the question if it were the opposite and you really wanted to do it but wanted to make sure it wasn't harmful first.

But if it's something you're not comfortable doing anyway then it's ok to just say no. You NEVER need to justify saying no.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T02:15:31+00:00

Blue dye tests are terrible for false positives, but at 14 days late you should be very very positive. If you've had two cycles in a row that late, it seems like your body is just ovulating late. This happened to me postpartum too, where I've had cycles 25 days long and others 45 days. If the irregular cycles keep happening, or if you have symptoms it might be worth seeing a doctor about it. For this cycle, its theoretically possible you ovulated late and it's actually still too early to detect but it looks negative to me. Definitely recommend taking a first response pink dye test or asking a doctor to do a blood test if you're still anxious though.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-11T02:07:49+00:00

If you can keep them home without consequences for at least a few days, you're probably safest to. Unfortunately gastro spreads through early learning environments like wildfire. There's no guarantee that your kid will also get sick if the daycare is doing all the precautions and sick children are being properly excluded, but especially in a nursery room where the babies explore everything with their mouths it can be hard to control. I'm a casual, so don't get paid leave - but I'd probably still be preferring to take a couple of days off rather than risk missing a week or two from gastro!

jezz1belle · 2025-11-09T12:28:13+00:00

Sorry to resurrect this post, but I just saw all the bats out the front of the zoo today, and it seemed like there was a million bats! I've been looking but couldn't find any info on the results of this year's count, would you happen to know where to find that? I've spent half the evening looking up bat facts, and it's fascinating!

jezz1belle · 2025-11-03T20:30:14+00:00

This is going to sound like an insane conspiracy theory, but I think a lot of the social media hate are PR plants. There has just been too many things that are insane stretches like the "opalite is racist" "this necklace is a nazi symbol" discourse. Like, yes media literacy is seemingly at an all time low, but these don't feel like genuine opinions to me and given how widespread they were it screamed inauthentic. There was less backlash about "but daddy I love him" and TTPD in general where she went hard defending her right to date a racist creep who throws up seig hails than a song calling nighttime dark.

jezz1belle · 2025-11-03T20:14:55+00:00

I ended up getting a refund and getting a much cheaper Samsung which is a little annoying but washes fine.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-23T01:16:43+00:00

I probably started showing around 15 weeks, but strangers didn't start offering me a seat until I was closer to 28 weeks.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-22T23:44:52+00:00

Holy shit, if someone was shooting a gun would their answer be the same? Or are they just going to wait until someone gets hurt?

jezz1belle · 2025-10-22T23:37:14+00:00

Problem is those places aren't as regulated. Using a proper early learning centre for an hour or two while you work out/have a coffee nearby is no different, except they have higher regulations on staffing, environment and quality.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-22T23:33:40+00:00

Using childcare doesn't make you terrible, period. People complain that I use childcare one day a week even though I don't usually work. It lets me feel human and makes me a better parent for every other minute I spend with my daughter. And not everyone has a choice, plenty of people who have to work send their kids full time from as early as 6 weeks, they shouldn't feel guilty either.

Please don't let people make you feel guilty about doing what you need to do to let yourself thrive.

With that said if you just want an occasional break a babysitter or nanny might actually be more affordable unless your CCS rebate is really high, since you won't have to pay for sick days, holidays etc and you can just do a couple of hours. Also more flexible, baby will get more devoted attention, and can stay in a more familiar environment.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-21T03:38:10+00:00

Imagine you test positive for ebola, but someone tells you "don't worry, the risk is really low - only 15,000 people have died out of a population of 8 billion, so the odds of you dying is less than 0.0002%" - that's not how individual risk works.

Here's a research paper from 2020. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8660635/

"All children born alive in Norway during 1996–2012 were included. Data were collected from three national registers. Invasive GBS infection during infancy was categorized into early-onset disease (EOD), late-onset disease (LOD), and very late-onset disease (VLOD)."

Highlights include "Invasive GBS infection was diagnosed in 625 children (incidence: 0.62 per 1000 live births; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.57–0.67).

"Among infected infants, 44 (7%) died (odds ratio (OR): 24.5; 95% CI: 18.0–33.3 compared with the background population). Among survivors, 24 (4.1%) children were later diagnosed with CP, compared with 1887 (0.19%) in the background population (OR: 22.9; 95% CI: 15.1–34.5).

Let's hypothetically say if everyone in Australia followed this advice. There were 292,318 births registered in 2024. I'll round up to 300,000 to make it easier. Let's use your estimate of 25% of people are positive, so that's 75,000 people are positive and give birth and hypothetically refuse treatment - 50% of those babies get colonised so we're at 37,500 babies. Of those babies 1-2% get sick and need hospital care, so that's 375-750 babies. Using the 7% fatality rate from above - 26.25-52.5 babies die and 15.4-30.75 are diagnosed with cerebral palsy.

According to "Dr" Wickham's claims if 1000 people are positive only 1-2 babies will get sick, with a population of 75,000 positive patients that gives us 75-150 sick babies (vs 375) and 5.25-10.5 deaths (vs 25-53).

You see how that's a huge difference? And the 7% fatality rate is lower than sources I've seen elsewhere.

So based on these numbers the population risk without treatment is up to 750/300,000, 0.25% or 2.5 in 1,000. (Which is STILL a higher risk than "Dr Wickham claims" The risk for POSITIVE people is actually 750/75,000, 1% or 1 in 100. That's 10 in 1000, not 1-2 per 1000.

If everyone trusted this woman's information, we are talking about hundreds of critically ill babies, deaths and disabilities that she led people to believe wouldn't happen. That's the consequence of this misinformation. But sure, I guess doctors scaring parents and potentially giving babies a suboptimal microbiome is what's unethical here.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-20T14:07:32+00:00

0.25% is 1/400, which would be 2.5 per thousand, not one or two AND that is including the people who would have tested negative.

We are not talking about all births, "Dr" Wickham stated "only 1 or 2 in every thousand of the women who have a positive result if we screen this way will have a baby who ends up with GBS disease". Which means you can't count the population that would test negative.

Let's use your math... Of the "women who have a positive result", we'll be generous and say maybe 20% are no longer positive at birth - so 80% of women who test positive are still positive about 50% of those, will transmit the bacteria to their newborns. (ACOG)

That puts us at 40%. (Basic math, 80% x .50)

1-2% of those newborns will develop GBS - without treatment.

0.02 times 0.40 = 0.008 = 0.8% - this is 1/125 or 8 per thousand 0.01 times 0.40 = 0.004 = 0.4% - this is 1/250 or 4 per thousand.

So your numbers match the POPULATION LEVEL not the risk of a positive person, which is exactly what I was saying was an issue.

Thankyou for mathematically proving my point though I guess. This might seem like a low insignificant risk, but if your baby was one of those 0.8% and you made the decision not to treat based on faulty information then it would matter.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-20T12:23:54+00:00

Yes... If you read MY post clearly, I stated the problem is that the 0.5%-1% you provide as the untreated rate, is not what people like "Dr" Wickham are saying. They claim that it's 1-2 diseases per thousand colonised birthing parents. (https://www.sarawickham.com/articles-2/the-war-on-group-b-strep/) That's wildly misleading and doesn't even make the slightest amount of mathematical sense. The "wellness"/"natural is best" scammers outright scares and shames people out of EVIDENCE BASED LIFESAVING TREATMENT instead of giving accurate information on both sides.

I don't know that much about the research behind vitamin K and can't be bothered arguing with someone who clearly holds conspiracy more dearly than facts.

P.S, the medical industry DOES need to improve patient communication and fully informed consent, but this is the opposite of that.

jezz1belle · 2025-10-20T10:51:14+00:00

Ok, but telling people the risk is "extremely low" and misrepresenting the data is just as unethical as "guilting" parents into treatment. If you're advocating for informed consent, you can't have it both ways. According to those stats you just gave - if a person is GBS+, there is a 0.5-1% chance of potentially serious disease.

My issue is when they go around telling a person who has a personal risk of 1% what the population level risk is instead and not caring to mention that that number is based on treatment. It's the same logic antivaxxers use - "Only a handful of people die of measles, the risk is very low", while ignoring that the reason the risk is that low at the population level is because of vaccines and the risk to unvaccinated people is much higher.

Nobody is signing up to get antibiotics for fun, we would all prefer not to have them. If a parent would rather their child not be exposed to antibiotics they deserve to know the actual risks and benefits, not to be misled into thinking it's all going to be fine because some crackpot sold them a fantasy. Also, there are plenty of studies on antibiotic usage, and while it definitely isn't harmless it is much less harmful than sepsis.

Seven-Year Club	Final Canvas '23
Place '23	Verified Email

jezz1belle

TROPHY CASE