Link: https://slate.com/technology/2026/08/pregnancy-drinking-wine-emily-oster.html?tpcc=reddit-social--pregnantwine-

The health information landscape has transformed since my first pregnancy in 2012. Back then, only 9 percent of American adults used Instagram; today 50 percent do, and 37 percent use TikTok. Advice from physicians and public health agencies now competes with influencers and content creators, nearly two-thirds of whom have no listed health credentials. A majority are women, many of whom draw on their experience as parents; this matters because people often seek health information from others whose experiences resemble their own. And although 85 percent of Americans still get health information from healthcare providers, 4 in 10 adults—and more than half of women age 18 to 49—also get it from influencers or podcasters.

At the same time, a justified pushback has grown against the one-size-fits-all and sometimes paternalistic advice public health hands out, especially to pregnant women. Emily Oster’s 2013 book Expecting Better is perhaps its best-known expression. She argued that the case against drinking during pregnancy was paper-thin and patronizing and there was no good evidence that light drinking harms a baby. According to her, one or two drinks a week in the first trimester and then one drink a day thereafter was fine: “Drink like a European adult, not like a fraternity brother.” This advice, as anticipated, received backlash (which Oster defended herself against in Slate), but that didn’t stop it from also receiving a deluge of coverage and being amplified across the internet to this day. I have since wondered and worried about the impact of this and other messages contrary to public health advice, especially against the backdrop of growing skepticism of public health recommendations and the proliferation of questionable health information across social media and from influencers.

The new study found that drinking during pregnancy was more common among women who were older, college educated, and employed; this group was also least likely to binge drink. That demographic profile mirrors the woman to whom Oster’s argument speaks most directly. It resonates in part because pregnant women are routinely handed absolutes with little explanation and expected to comply, so permission to have a little leeway is a welcome relief. There aren’t any studies that assess exposure to that advice and drinking during pregnancy, so we can’t conclude that it is among the reasons drinking during pregnancy has increased. But the overlap is hard to ignore.

Medicine and public health have long communicated like a scold, especially about women’s bodies. But a lenient countermessage framed as female autonomy is no better. It, too, considers only fetal outcomes, reducing the woman to the same thing existing guidance does: a baby incubator. An empowering message isn’t one that recommends the opposite of long-standing guidance. It considers a woman’s own health, not just the baby’s, and communicates risk without shame or a heavy hand.

Drink as a European adult, not like a fraternity brother.

This sentence alone sent shivers down my spine. It tells too much about the drinking habits of Americans.

yeah go ahead. drink while pregnant! your kid will thank you.

/s

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fetal_alcohol_spectrum_disorder?wprov=sfti1

the drinking habits of Americans.

Which pales in comparison to the drinking habits of the British haha

But did you read the article?

No one is arguing for giving their children FAS.

I said, go ahead and drink. do what you want. theres consequences to your choices.

its ok to have a couple cigarettes too! maybe a little bit of weed? a little meth? in moderation of course.

That's not the topic the article is covering.

its all good! dont discourage pregnant women from drinking. I got you.

Read the article.

I'm not encouraging pregnant women to drink.

i did.

The article is talking about how medical professionals advise pregnant women not to drink. It's not a debate about whether pregnant women should drink or not.

You are bypassing what the article is about to bash on pregnant women. The exact type of thing that the article is highlighting pushes people away from good advice.

Nuanced, engaging public health communication takes training, skill, and savvy. Without it, messages lean toward absolutes, because getting nuance wrong can be a liability—and also because health and medical leaders have long relied on the public listening to them simply because they know more than the rest of us. The people leading health campaigns and creating and sharing messages should be trained in and have experience with health communication, which draws on behavioral science, sociology, and marketing. Those disciplines are integral to public health, not beneath or beside it.

Public health does not need a firmer hand, especially now. A medical degree and an air of authority no longer work in getting people to follow recommendations that are, at their core, meant to help them be healthy. Our field needs to recognize the importance of and invest in more health communicators, behavioral scientists, and adept practitioners who understand that being right is only part of the task. Until public health puts the right people in charge of messaging, people asking questions will keep getting their answers somewhere else, and the trust we need and our hard-won public health gains will keep slipping away

im not bashing pregnant women. not sure where youre getting that from

bashing pregnant women who drink? yeah, agreed.

Again, you've completely missed the point of the article. Come back when you have something useful to add to the conversation.

you replied to me. what useful things have you added beyond “read the article”?

Yeah, I'm the OP of the post. You replied to my post.

I was hoping to have a discussion about how we approach medical advice for women and how we can move away from the patronizing tone of the medical field. How we can convince women to trust medical advice again in a world where doctors are increasingly distrusted by women because of the horrible approach to women's health that we've had historically.

This wasn't a post about bashing women. It's a post about education and messaging and women's health care.

It's clear you're unable to handle the nuance of such a conversation.

you keep saying “bashing women”. Thats incorrect. Reread my comments and actually consider what im saying.

how is “dont drink” patronizing?

The vast majority of pregnant people are women.

how is “dont drink” patronizing?

Read the fucking article. It answers this question.

this has been a fun circle. enjoy screaming into the void

i encourage you to maybe engage with the comments rather than accusing me of bashing women.

I did engage with you multiple times before accusing you of attacking women and not reading the article.

Consider reading the article so you have something worthwhile to bring to the discussion.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/65792614/27124639

https://sh.itjust.works/post/65792614/27124694

https://sh.itjust.works/post/65792614/27124737

hence. fantastic circle. you attacked me in your first response. thats not engagement.

https://sh.itjust.works/post/65792614/27124639

But did you read the article?

No one is arguing for giving their children FAS.

That's an "attack"?

Why are you arguing with someone that clearly just want to piss you off for fun?

Why not? They're wrong on the internet and how could I possibly let that go?

Well that and I did want to talk about the core message of the article and I'm not one to allow mindless bashing of women to go by without comment. That happens entirely too much around here to be honest.

NO ONE HERE HAS BEEN BASHING WOMEN

bashing pregnant women who drink? yeah, agreed.

You already admitted you are.

The point of the article is that being militant about advice during pregnancy pushes people away from that advice. You're contributing to the problem.

Nuanced, engaging public health communication takes training, skill, and savvy. Without it, messages lean toward absolutes, because getting nuance wrong can be a liability—and also because health and medical leaders have long relied on the public listening to them simply because they know more than the rest of us. The people leading health campaigns and creating and sharing messages should be trained in and have experience with health communication, which draws on behavioral science, sociology, and marketing. Those disciplines are integral to public health, not beneath or beside it.

Public health does not need a firmer hand, especially now. A medical degree and an air of authority no longer work in getting people to follow recommendations that are, at their core, meant to help them be healthy. Our field needs to recognize the importance of and invest in more health communicators, behavioral scientists, and adept practitioners who understand that being right is only part of the task. Until public health puts the right people in charge of messaging, people asking questions will keep getting their answers somewhere else, and the trust we need and our hard-won public health gains will keep slipping away

aaand we go back to the beginning. alrighty friend. youve taken the entire wrong point every time. are you doing that on purpose?

I'm trying to talk about the article while you're bashing pregnant women. I'm not sure where you got lost there.

jfc

The average European begins drinking regularly anywhere between the ages of 14 and 16.

It'd be 18-21 years old for the average American.

Nuanced, engaging public health communication takes training, skill, and savvy. Without it, messages lean toward absolutes, because getting nuance wrong can be a liability—and also because health and medical leaders have long relied on the public listening to them simply because they know more than the rest of us. The people leading health campaigns and creating and sharing messages should be trained in and have experience with health communication, which draws on behavioral science, sociology, and marketing. Those disciplines are integral to public health, not beneath or beside it.

Public health does not need a firmer hand, especially now. A medical degree and an air of authority no longer work in getting people to follow recommendations that are, at their core, meant to help them be healthy. Our field needs to recognize the importance of and invest in more health communicators, behavioral scientists, and adept practitioners who understand that being right is only part of the task. Until public health puts the right people in charge of messaging, people asking questions will keep getting their answers somewhere else, and the trust we need and our hard-won public health gains will keep slipping away

Nuanced, engaging public health communication takes training, skill, and savvy. Without it, messages lean toward absolutes, because getting nuance wrong can be a liability—and also because health and medical leaders have long relied on the public listening to them simply because they know more than the rest of us. The people leading health campaigns and creating and sharing messages should be trained in and have experience with health communication, which draws on behavioral science, sociology, and marketing. Those disciplines are integral to public health, not beneath or beside it.

Public health does not need a firmer hand, especially now. A medical degree and an air of authority no longer work in getting people to follow recommendations that are, at their core, meant to help them be healthy. Our field needs to recognize the importance of and invest in more health communicators, behavioral scientists, and adept practitioners who understand that being right is only part of the task. Until public health puts the right people in charge of messaging, people asking questions will keep getting their answers somewhere else, and the trust we need and our hard-won public health gains will keep slipping away

yes. that is a section of the article.

Did you comprehend it?

That medical advice messaging shouldn't be delivered in absolutes and that there's more involved in getting the public to adhere to medical advice. THAT is the conversation here. HOW do we get women to lessen their drinking while pregnant after it has gone up because of distrust in medical advice.

shouldnt be delivered in absolutes

a little alcohol while pregnant is ok? the absolute “dont drink while pregnant” is the problem? doctors should recommend a little alcohol is ok?

All of your questions are answered in the article :)

🤦‍♀️

😘

Hell, the entire medical field tends to a paternalistic and shitty view of women, even when the doctors and nurses are women.

I have dealt with some of the worst fucking doctors and nurses in pain management in specific when it comes to female patients. Some of the best too, but the worst in pain management tend to be so fucking horrible and condescending to women above and beyond the already shitty way male patients are treated in that specialty.

Why the fuck would a pregnant woman believe that the condescending, smarmy doctor or nurse that's been a pain in the ass would be a trusted source? I wouldn't, and I actually know enough about the medical side of things to be able to tell when a doctor is full of shit. But nobody knows everything, so when your experience with your obgyn starts off with them preaching down to you, it breaks the trust necessary to accept advice.

And yes, I'm pointing at nurses here too. They tend to get a lot of leeway they shouldn't in regards to following a doctor's lead even when the doc is wrong, and they definitely partake in the smug party when doling out best practices. So, yeah, they're part of the problem too.

So, of course women are looking outside of mainstream medicine. Their needs are already dismissed across the board. Their pain is treated with less attention. Their illnesses get dismissed, their symptoms downplayed. Again, even when the doctor is a woman too. Now that woman that's had a shit experience is pregnant and assumes she'll get exactly the same level of care. And she's right.

Like, I lose track of how many people come to me wanting some kind of understanding of the shit their doctor, or nurses, spewed at them. I've lost track of how many times I've had to stop a doctor or nurse and explain exactly why they need to slow the fuck down and listen to whoever it is I'm with. That's the norm that breaks trust with the medical establishment. That's the norm that leads to people rejecting vaccines or thinking some random oil is going to cure their cancer.

It pisses me the fuck off.

This entire comment is spot on. I can’t tell you how mad I am at how women have been treated by the medical field as a whole.

It took many years for my own autoimmune disease to be diagnosed and the way I was treated through those years by medical professionals was appalling.

I completely understand why women mistrust doctors. There’s got to be a way to work towards being more understanding of women and their health issues without treating them like they’re undeserving children.

You get it. The establishment lies to us, and it ruins their credibility, then they wring their hands when people don't trust them when they are telling the truth, like on vaccines, or a new virus.

Weed while pregnant is fine. I suspect moderate drinking in early pregnancy is as well. The authorities could not have less credibility on alcohol and weed so they and their studies can fuck all the way off until we get a credible source.

Euros drink more than americans I bet. Not more than I, but still.

you do very well at completely ignoring the situation and rage baiting through misogyny, whats your secret?

My country is a traditional vacation destiny for brits and it is widely known the behaviour they have while abroad. They are really heavy drinkers.

Don’t do drugs.

I have too many years of internet forums reading americans admiting that alcohol is a mandatory part of "relaxing", along with too many stories of how alcohol is still saddled with the tabu of the Dry Law years.

Binge drinking was an imported phenomena here. Guess from where.

You've got the patience of a saint. I've blocked breadsmasher because of the way they were talking to you.

Power drinking too much?

Are you serious?

Are you seriously trying to suggest binge drinking was imported from the U.S. to Europe?

That is quite possibly the dumbest Eurobrain thing I've ever seen.

there was no good evidence that light drinking harms a baby.

Right. So is this a position you're willing to gamble the health of your unborn child on, for the benefit of being able to have one glass of wine?

If the answer is yes, then maybe you should consider whether parenthood is really right for you.

How bad does your relationship to alcohol have to be to be unable to abstain for 9 months?