This is one of those studies that makes me think, really, we need researchers to tell us this. It’s common sense.

Nicer parents create a nurturing environment where positive social and emotional development flourishes.  Such emotional security paves the way for learning, as children’s energy can be placed education rather than emotional stress.  And it’s not just smarter kids that nice parents create, their kids are also healthier.

But thankfully, we have researchers to prove the point instinctually known by those that practice attachment parenting.

CafeMom’s The Stir reports:

This research came from Washington University School of Medicine in St. Louis. It says that school-age children whose mothers, fathers, and caretakers “nurtured them early in life have brains with a larger hippocampus,” which is the part of the brain that aids in learning, memory, and your response to stress.

The author of the study, Joan L. Luby, M.D., says it best:

I think the public health implications suggest that we should pay more attention to parents’ nurturing, and we should do what we can as a society to foster these skills because clearly nurturing has a very, very big impact on later development.

What can we do as a society? Oh I can think of a lot of things. Let’s start with better maternity leave, then add on paternity leave for fathers, then tack on some better work/life practices and balance. It’s no easy feat, that’s for sure. But I do think that by reducing a parent’s stress levels, that parent could be more nurturing to their child. It’s like giving us the tools to sort of “stop and smell the roses” kind of thing — stop rushing around, take time for those little hugs even in the middle of doing something else, like my daughter gives. Of course we can’t just wait for everyone else to help us reduce our parental stresses, we have to do it ourselves. Maybe try some yoga, meditation, breathing in and out to the count of 10 really slowly — don’t laugh, that works! It’s what I do.

I would add that it is important we find caregivers and educators that also nurture our children.

So quit spending money on private tutors, Baby Einstein (even Disney admits it does not affect intelligence), edutainment products like Leap Frog, etc. and JUST BE NICE TO YOUR KIDS.

Want a Smart Kid? Be Nice and Nurturing! is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Image via Wikipedia

With all of the attention and outrage caused last week by the Susan Komen’s breast cancer group’s removing funding from Planned Parenthood and then reversing this decision, the business of breast cancer awareness has been on everyone’s minds.

What if there was one simple thing you could do to lower your risk of breast cancer? Go BRALESS!

How many women do you know who have had breast cancer?  I can think of many survivors and some who did not in my circle of friends and acquaintances.  Many survivors live in fear that their death sentence has been written.  Could going braless have saved their lives?

Recently, a friend shared on Facebook an interesting idea:  bras contribute to breast cancer.  Cheeseslave reported  on the book Dressed To Kill: The Link between Breast Cancer and Bras:

The authors conducted a study of almost 4600 women. Half of the women had breast cancer and half of did not. They found that the more hours per day that a bra is worn, the higher the rate of breast cancer. They also found that women who do not wear bras have a dramatically reduced rate of breast cancer.

Now, I’m sure people are going to complain about the way they conducted their research. I’ll cover that when I write the book review. As I said, I haven’t finished reading the book yet. But I will say that I think, for me, there is enough evidence (and not just the study they did) to make me stop wearing a bra.

Here is the summary of their research:

• Women who wore their bras 24 hours per day had a 3 out of 4 chance of developing breast cancer (in their study, n=2056 for the cancer group and n=2674 for the standard group).
• Women who wore bras more than 12 hour per day but not to bed had a 1 out of 7 risk.
• Women who wore their bras less than 12 hours per day had a 1 out of 152 risk.
• Women who wore bras rarely or never had a 1 out of 168 chance of getting breast cancer. The overall difference between 24 hour wearing and not at all was a 125-fold difference.

So the bottom line is, according to the authors, if you must wear a bra, try to put it on as late in the day as possible and get it off as early as you can. And never sleep in a bra.

The concern with bras lies in the restriction of flow and pressure on the lymph nodes, which makes sense considering underwire bras can case problems when breastfeeding in restricting flow in the milk ducts. A less restrictive bra is better. You certainly don’t want the conical shaped ones on “Mad Men“, which I can’t help but stare at. I suppose today’s push up bras are not better for you body.

This may be hard advice for larger breasted women, and one woman I know who did suffer from breast cancer is always braless. There are alway exceptions to every case, and family genetics, as well as environmental concerns cannot be ignored.

I turned 40 this year, which means my doctor wants me to have my first mammogram. Even though new recommendations came out last year postponing regular mammograms until the age of 50, my doctor’s experience finding cases within this decade cause her to still follow the old protocol. I don’t know what I fear. I think it is the radiation.

I have no family history of breast cancer, I breastfed both my children over two years each, and I never wear a bra at home (unless we have company). I think my odds are pretty good.

Bras and Breast Cancer: Is There a Connection? is a post from: Eco Child's Play

army.arch /Free Photos

Schools are germy places, almost as bad as hospitals.  As a teacher, I’m suffering from my second illness this school year.

Children are in and out of class with various viruses and bacterial illnesses, but sometimes, those illnesses come from the school facilities themselves.

Astonishingly, “a third or more of U.S. schools have mold, dust and other indoor air problems serious enough to provoke respiratory issues like asthma in students and teachers.”

CNN reports:

Dr. John Santilli, a Connecticut allergist, says he has treated dozens of students sickened by school air. Even when children don’t miss school, he said, the medications they take for asthma and conditions like rhinitis, an allergic reaction to mold or dust, can make it harder for them to do their best work.

“They’re on antihistamines, they’re on nasal sprays, they’re on asthma medications, and this limits their ability to perform,” Santilli said. “These kids can’t concentrate. They can’t focus on what’s going on.”…

Researchers and others who follow the issue say school air problems have probably been exacerbated in recent years by funding cutbacks that have resulted in less money for building upkeep and maintenance…

Researchers at the New York state Health Department found a correlation between building maintenance at the public schools and hospitalizations for asthma. The condition of roofs, windows, walls and boilers were all related to the health of children at the school, researchers found.

A similar study in Boston schools found a link between asthma rates and leaks, mold, lack of repairs and visible signs of insects or rodents.

Children are particularly at risk because their bodies are still developing and they breathe in more air, pound for pound, than adults.

“Schools are more densely occupied than office buildings, and children aren’t little adults. They’re uniquely vulnerable,” said Claire Barnett, founder and executive director of the Healthy Schools Network, a nonprofit group focused on environmental health in schools.

1/3 U.S. Schools Have Serious Mold and Dust Making Kids Sick is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Image via Wikipedia

I just took my daughter to the dentist.  I have greened so many areas of our family life, and plastic bags do not enter our home.  Well, except from the dentist.

Why can’t I stand up to the dental hygienist and say, “No plastic bag, no tube of toothpaste please”.  No goodie bag!

I have no problem rudely interrupting a cashier and making them take my items out of a plastic bag.  What do I fear at the dentist?  Am I worried they will discover that I am an eco-freak?  Um, they probably already know that.

I vow next visit to the dentist, there will be no plastic bag. There will be no toothpaste or floss sample. There will be nothing that we will toss when we get home.

Green Failures: The Little Plastic Goodie Bag of Crap from the Dentist is a post from: Eco Child's Play

by Rachel Lincoln Sarnoff
Executive Director/CEO
Healthy Child Healthy World
www.healthychild.org

Last week Michelle Obama, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack and Rachael Ray announced new nutrition standards for school lunches, the first major change in school meals in over 15 years.

The program allots an additional six cents per school lunch—the first real increase in 30 years.  The new standards call for more whole grains and produce, as well as less sodium and fat, and are the first to be enacted as part of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, part of Michelle Obama’s Let’s Move! Campaign, which was signed into law last year by President Obama. It will affect the nearly 32 million kids who participate in subsidized school lunch programs each day—many of whom get half their daily calories from these meals.

What’s different? Milk goes low- or no-fat, portion sizes shrink to limit calories, and fresh fruits and vegetables are offered every day, among other recommendations echoed in the Eat Healthy section of our 5 Easy Steps.

What’s not? Potatoes are unlimited—although now the majority will be baked, rather than fried—and tomato sauce still makes pizza a vegetable. “It was a bit unfortunate that some groups had powerful friends in Congress and basically tried…create some confusion with these standards,” Vilsack said in a virtual press conference that I attended. “Our response was to set up minimum requirements. You have to have a minimum level of dark green vegetables, you’ve got to have a minimum level of red or orange or yellow vegetables.”

“OK, so Congress left pizza a vegetable,” Ray said. “But we are changing the game today. That [lunch] tray is going to have leafy greens and colorful fruit on it. If one of the other vegetables happens to be pizza or French fries in some schools that day, it doesn’t negate the fact that on the tray there…will include vegetables and fruits.” (For more specifics, check out WebMD’s excellent breakdown of the new standards.)

Regarding organics, Secretary Vilsack said they encourage organics but will leave the decision about integrating to the individual school districts. But he responded to my question about Genetically Engineered foods by saying they would leave this up to “consumer choice.”

I didn’t get a chance to ask him how we can have a choice, given the fact that GEs are not required to be identified on labels—yet are now in 80% of processed foods.

Or to ask if he was aware that 93% of Americans now say they want GE foods to be labeled. (Are you one of them? Sign the Just Label It petition today!)

Sigh. I guess we have to start somewhere. And these new standards are definitely better for our kids.

Hopefully that pizza will have a whole-wheat crust.

P.S. Congratulations from all of us at Healthy Child Healthy World to Mr. Wells’ 4th grade class at the Park School in Brookline, Massachusetts for changing Universal Pictures’ mind about eliminating green content from “The Lorax” movie. As our founder Nancy Chuda wrote last week, when the kids saw the trailer, they realized that the environmental themes–which, as any parent who’s read this story at bedtime knows, are the bedrock of the story–were largely missing. To restore the original meaning to the film, Mr. Wells’ class put together a video and petitioned Universal to add more environmental messaging to their website. And this week, after more than 57,000 people signed their petition, the Universal webpage was updated to reflect the students’ requests. Dr. Seuss once wrote, “Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot, Nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” We’re inspired by these kids, who cared enough to make it better. A lot.

School Lunches Get Healthier, But Pizza is Still A Vegetable is a post from: Eco Child's Play

When writing a review of a Baby Bjorn infant carrier, the carrier I used most for baby wearing my infants, a reader commented on the concern of hip dysplasia.  I had never even considered this a risk with any baby wearing device, and I was seeking my own comfort and the baby’s contentment when finding what worked best for us.

It turns out, it is not just baby carriers that increase the risk of hip dysplasia in infants, but it is also car seats, slings, walkers, bouncers, seats, et cetera.

My midwife posted the following article on Facebook from the International Hip Dysplasia Institute (IHDI):

Education Statement: The IHDI recommends healthy hip positioning for all babies to encourage normal hip development. Within the womb, a baby spends a long time tucked in the fetal position, in which both hips and knees are bent or flexed.

Baby in normal (fetal) womb position.

After birth, it takes several months for the joints to stretch out naturally. Babies that have been in the breech (bottom first) position may need even more time to stretch out naturally. The hip joint is a ball and socket joint. During the first few months of life the ball is more likely to be loose within the socket because babies are naturally flexible and because the edges of the socket are made of soft cartilage like the cartilage in the ear. If the hips are forced into a stretched-out position too early, the ball is at risk of permanently deforming the edges of the cup shaped socket (hip dysplasia) or gradually slipping out of the socket altogether (hip dislocation). Hip dysplasia or dislocation in babies is not painful so this may go undetected until walking age and may also result in painful arthritis during adulthood. The risk of hip dysplasia or dislocation is greatest in the first few months of life. By six months of age, most babies have nearly doubled in size, the hips are more developed and the ligaments are stronger, so are less susceptible to developing hip dysplasia.

The most unhealthy position for the hips during infancy is when the legs are held in extension with the hips and knees straight and the legs brought together, which is the opposite of the fetal position. The risk to the hips is greater when this unhealthy position is maintained for a long time. Healthy hip positioning avoids positions that may cause or contribute to development of hip dysplasia or dislocation. The healthiest position for the hips is for the hips to fall or spread (naturally) apart to the side, with the thighs supported and the hips and knees bent. This position has been called the jockey position, straddle position, frog position or human position. Free movement of the hips without forcing them together promotes natural hip development.

Some carriers, car seats, slings, etc. place baby’s hips and legs in unnatural positions for their age. The extended time period children spend in these devices can cause injury.

I am still not convinced the Baby Bjorn is harmful unless children are place in it wrong or spend too much time in it. Viewing the diagrams from IHDI are helpful in selecting and placing babies in carrying, pushing, or holding paraphernalia.  Remember, strollers and car seats are also potential hip and leg stressors.

A child must fit in whatever carrier, seat, sling, etc. you are using so that their thighs are supported and their legs don’t dangle.

Slings, Car Seats, Baby Wearing and the Risk of Hip Dysplasia is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Image via Wikipedia

Arsenic conjers up images of rat poison and soap opera poisonings. The truth is that arsenic does occur naturally in water. It is in the creeks and spring where I live. The EPA regulates how much arsenic is safe for drinking water:

Arsenic is a semi-metal element in the periodic table. It is odorless and tasteless. It enters drinking water supplies from natural deposits in the earth or from agricultural and industrial practices.

Non-cancer effects can include thickening and discoloration of the skin, stomach pain, nausea, vomiting; diarrhea; numbness in hands and feet; partial paralysis; and blindness. Arsenic has been linked to cancer of the bladder, lungs, skin, kidney, nasal passages, liver, and prostate.

EPA has set the arsenic standard for drinking water at .010 parts per million (10 parts per billion) to protect consumers served by public water systems from the effects of long-term, chronic exposure to arsenic. Water systems must comply with this standard by January 23, 2006, providing additional protection to an estimated 13 million Americans.

Arsenic, however, is not regulated by the FDA in beverages, and Consumer Reports has found it present in fruit juices exceeding drinking water standards.

Dr. Mercola reports:

Ten percent of the 88 juice samples tested by Consumer Reports had arsenic levels exceeding the U.S. federal drinking-water standard. A quarter of them also had lead levels higher than the 5 ppb limit set for bottled water…

There are currently no official limits set for arsenic in juices, but according to a 2008 FDA hazard assessment, 23 ppb of inorganic arsenic would represent “a potential health risk.” However, the Consumers Union (the advocacy arm of Consumer Reports) has warned that this level should NOT be used as a reference point for establishing a safety limit, because it does not take into account the now well-established carcinogenicity of inorganic arsenic.

The group has proposed the FDA set the limit for arsenic at three ppb—a far cry from the FDA’s stated “level of concern.”

The FDA has responded to the Consumers Union, indicating that the agency is considering creating a guidance for the permissible level of arsenic in apple juice. In a November 21 letter to the Empire State Consumer Project, the agency states it will collect and analyze up to 90 retail juice samples from across the US by the end of this year. However, the FDA already has data on arsenic in fruit juices. They’ve been sampling juices for several years, as part of the Total Diet Study (TDS). The results can be found on the FDA’s website.

In their letter, the FDA states “FDA monitoring has found that total arsenic levels in apple juice are typically low.” But is it low enough to protect public health?

Consumer Reports issues the following concerns:

• Roughly 10 percent of our juice samples, from five brands, had total arsenic levels that exceeded federal drinking-water standards. Most of that arsenic was inorganic arsenic, a known carcinogen.
• One in four samples had lead levels higher than the FDA’s bottled-water limit of 5 ppb. As with arsenic, no federal limit exists for lead in juice.
• Apple and grape juice constitute a significant source of dietary exposure to arsenic, according to our analysis of federal health data from 2003 through 2008.
• Children drink a lot of juice. Thirty-five percent of children 5 and younger drink juice in quantities exceeding pediatricians’ recommendations, our poll of parents shows.
• Mounting scientific evidence suggests that chronic exposure to arsenic and lead even at levels below water standards can result in serious health problems.
• Inorganic arsenic has been detected at disturbing levels in other foods, too, which suggests that more must be done to reduce overall dietary exposure.

Healthy Child Healthy World asked last month “Is there arsenic in my kid’s apple juice?“.  Unfortunately, the answer is most likely yes. Consumer Reports is continuing to raise this issue.

I think we should do more juicing from our own apple trees.

Via: Organic Consumers Association

Arsenic in Fruit Juice Exceeds U.S. Federal Drinking-Water Standard is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Between my two blogs, I receive a lot of natural beauty product samples.  Actually, I sort of resent these products.  I used to be a 100% Dr. Hauschka junkie, but I get so many samples that I am not able to buy or use my beloved products.

Recently, I  have switched to organic tanamu oil for all of my moisturizing.  The results have been amazing, thus I approached the Naturopathica 30 Day Skin Transformation Challenge with some trepidation.

I have problem skin, and it is finally under control.  I was worried taking on this challenge that my problems may return, but on day three, so far so good.

I am following the Naturopathica  REGIMEN KIT: NORMAL TO OILY

ALOE CLEANSING GEL: A foaming sulfate-free cleanser with a refreshing blend of Aloe Vera and Lavender gently clarifies the skin while maintaining natural moisture

OAT FACIAL POLISH: Soothing Oats and Jojoba Beads gently sweep away dry, flaky skin, removing impurities and leaving the face soft and radiant

PLANT STEM CELL SERUM: An ECOCERT certified organic concentrated serum, designed to significantly slow down the aging of cells due to inflammation caused by UVA photodamage and oxidative stress

ROSEMARY OIL-REDUCING MOISTURIZER: An astringent blend of Rosemary and Willow help to absorb excess sebum while nourishing devitalized skin with moisture

The Naturopathica Oat Facial Polish is my favorite cleanser now!  It is very gentle, but it contains a little exfoliant to keep your skin in great daily shape without leaving you feeling raw.  All of the products in this regimen smell wonderful!

My skin did feel a little bit dry this morning, and I didn’t want to do any extra moisturizing to break the regimen.  It’s feeling good now and still no blemishes.  I’ll keep you updated as the regimen continues.

Disclosure: The products described above were sent to us as free samples. Prior assurances as to the nature of the reviews, whether positive or negative, were not given. No financial payments were accepted in exchange for the reviews. The reviews reflect our honest, authentic opinions.

Holistic Health: The Naturopathica 30 Day Skin Transformation Challenge is a post from: Eco Child's Play

Image via Wikipedia

When my son was recovering from open heart surgery as an infant, another child came down with rotavirus in the NICU.  The nurses wanted us to trade places with this child and swore a “hard clean” would take care of killing the virus.  I refused to move.

My son had not been vaccinated for rotavirus, as it is not required and we were on a modified vaccine schedule, and it is transmitted through fecal matter. That’s right, fecal matter.  He wasn’t going to get rotavirus at home.  Considering the nurses changed all the baby’s diapers (the family was not present), there was only one way that child got rotavirus.

I loved our nurses, don’t get me wrong, but hospitals are full of germs and viruses. Another common place rotavirus is spread is in daycare.

Appropriate sanitation practices, like hand washing, can prevent rotavirus; however, instead of focusing on these simple measures, the CDC is now recommending mothers temporarily stop breastfeeding to ensure the rotavirus vaccine is effective.

Natural News reports:

Ten researchers from the CDC’s National Centers for Immunization and Respiratory Disease (NCIRD) released the ridiculous paper, entitled Inhibitory effect of breast milk on infectivity of live oral rotavirus vaccines, which claims the immune-boosting effects of breastmilk are a detriment to the efficacy of vaccines. The paper goes on to say that, rather than remove vaccines so that breastmilk can do its job, women should instead remove the breastmilk to allow vaccines to do their job.

The CDC researchers began their investigation by searching for answers as to why children from underdeveloped countries typically do not respond as well to the live oral rotavirus vaccine as children in developed countries typically do. They came to the conclusion that breastmilk, which is packed with immune-building immunoglobulin A (IgA), lactoferrin, lysozyme, and various other important immune factors, inhibits the vaccine from working.

Rotavirus can be life threatening to infants, as it causes sever diarrhea.  MedicineNet explains:

Rotavirus is a virus that infects the bowels. It is the most common cause of severe diarrhea among infants and children throughout the world and causes the death of about 600,000 children worldwide annually. The name rotavirus comes from the characteristic wheel-like appearance of the virus when viewed by electron microscopy (the name rotavirus is derived from the Latin rota, meaning “wheel”).

Almost all children have become infected with rotavirus by their third birthday.

Many other studies have shown the effectiveness of breastfeeding against rotavirus.  A study published in the peer-reviewed Pediatrics found:

Compared with other feeding modes, exclusive breast-feeding of infants was associated with significant protection against severe rotavirus diarrhea (relative risk (RR) = 0.10; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.03,0.34). However, during the second year of life, the risk of this outcome was higher in breast-fed than in non-breast-fed children (RR = 2.85; 95% CI = 0.37,21.71), and no overall protection was associated with breast-feeding during the first 2 years of life (RR = 2.61; 95% CI = 0.62,11.02).

Conclusions. Although exclusive breast-feeding appeared to protect infants against severe rotavirus diarrhea, breast-feeding per se conferred no overall protection during the first 2 years of life, suggesting that breast-feeding temporarily postponed rather than prevented this outcome.

Postponed may not be prevention, but at least children are older when they contract the inevitable rotavirus and thus the risk of death is limited.

Peaceful Parenting shared a study done in Mexico and Brazil comparing rotavirus vaccine and breastfeeding:

“Rotavirus vaccine cuts deaths of Mexican babies from diarrhoea by 40%,” states a January, 2010, British Medical Journal headline summarizing two studies.(1) Yet, a study of Brazilian children finds that exclusive breastfeeding cuts diarrhea cases in this similarly developing nation by a whopping 90% (1 / 9.41), versus a diet of formula and/or other foods.(2)

Dr. Steele answered the question on iVillage “Can breastfeeding help prevent the rotavirus infection?”:

You are absolutely correct that breastfeeding not only decreases the chances of the baby getting the rotavirus infection, but it also decreases the risk of severe diarrhea should the child get rotavirus. However, just as medications are not always 100 percent effective and immunizations do not always give complete immunity, breastfeeding does not ward off all disease.

The effect that breastfeeding has on decreasing the rotavirus infection only lasts for as long as the child is breasfeeding. This may seem like an obvious point, but many people think that as long as the child was breastfed, the protection against rotavirus infection will last. As it turns out, there does not seem to be any long-lasting effect from breastfeeding against the severe diarrhea from rotavirus.

Does my child need the rotavirus vaccine?
Yes! Rotavirus is the leading cause of severe acute gastroenteritis (vomiting and severe diarrhea) among children worldwide. Two different rotavirus vaccines are currently licensed for use in infants in the United States.

CDC: Delayed Breastfeeding Increases Rotavirus Vaccine Effectiveness is a post from: Eco Child's Play

As a teacher, I have attended a few workshops on power brain activities for children. With similar activities as S’cool Moves, Power Brain Kids: 12 Easy Lessons to Ignite Your Child’s Potential by Ilchi Lee highlights 12 activities founded in neuroscience that help children learn and focus.

According to author Ilchi Lee, every child possesses a marvelously capable brain. Using its full capacity is simply a matter of accessing and supporting the rich potential that lies beneath the surface. In Power Brain Kids, you will find a child-appropriate and parent-friendly guide to Lee’s world-renowned Brain Education (BE) method. Each lesson focuses on a particular aspect of mental ability, including concentration, creativity, memory, and emotional control. Through the book, straight-A and struggling students alike will be challenged to apply full brain capacity toward the creation of a genuinely happy and successful life. Power Brain Kids features colorful design and full-color photography to help keep your child interested and involved with the lessons. Let our charming group of Power Brain youngsters demonstrate correct posture while your kids build flexibility and strength. In addition, the brain-building exercises and games will provide hours of constructive fun for you and your child. Power Brain Kids is perfect for any teacher or parent of children ages 6-12. In twelve simple lessons, help your child:

• Develop better concentration.
• Improve memory skills.
• Gain tools for emotional self-control.
• Activate creativity and imagination.
• Establish connection between mind and body.
• Cultivate confidence and self-discipline.

The layout of this book is very user-friendly with great photographs and explanations. Many of these moves are reminiscent of yoga, which I think is also important for children to practice. Dance is also an integral part of brain activities with the brain-body connection being fostered through movement. This book also includes meditation, and a super cute “breathing buddy exercise”, where children lie in savasana with a stuffed animal on their abdomens. Breathing gently, they notice their buddy rise and fall with breath.

Would I buy this book? Yes. I think it has great ideas! Unfortunately, the book itself has no eco-friendly properties (recycled paper content, etc.), but the exercises are all natural and can help children avoid medication for attention and sensory issues.

Disclosure: The products described above were sent to us as free samples. Prior assurances as to the nature of the reviews, whether positive or negative, were not given. No financial payments were accepted in exchange for the reviews. The reviews reflect our honest, authentic opinions.

Power Brain Kids: 12 Easy Lessons to Ignite your Child’s Potential is a post from: Eco Child's Play