I have doubts that as parents we fall for this stuff as easily as the toy companies believe. In some ways I’d suggest it’s a game of don’t-ask-don’t-tell; We buy the toys because we think they are good toys. Or — more likely — we buy the toys because our kids think they are good toys. Sure, we read the product claims on the side, maybe react somewhere between a disbelieving laugh and approving nod, thinking ‘well, what could it hurt…’ Sure. But then like every other aspect of skeptical bunk-busting, there ARE true believers, particularly when said claims go beyond vague promises of infant development.

I hope that I promote strong, responsible parenting through this blog, so putting the responsibility of the decision on chance or the child’s so-called choice is not an option.

Apparently, modern rubber ducks are quite impressive. Hmmm?

How does one set a baseline of intelligence in kids against which to measure, how does one differentiate between causation and correlation (which I think is more likely the real answer), and what does the risk/benefit comparison have to say on the topic?