And he wasn't a new born baby. He was three months old. However, your link is more informative than the other article on the subject.
Thanks for the heads-up -- sorry about the mistake; there wasn't any malicious intent meant to circumvent your submission. I did do a search first to see if it was already mentioned; however, the terms I thought would indicate it was already at Slashdot, such as: (baby, tracheal and variations of the original sources of U of M & New England Journal of Medicine) failed. I thought it was sufficient, since the submission was being done within a day of the publication.
My definition of a new-born was a mistaken invention on my part, and was based on my understanding about the difference between the age of a new-born vs the age of a baby vs the age of a boy. The comment about the informative links is appreciated; in the future, I'll take extra care to keep this from happening again -- especially since there was stuff I would have preferred doing instead of working an hour or so on a failed submission.
Perhaps it was for the best, since it avoided creating a major issue with the internet. On a rereading after pressing submit, I did a face-palm; which was thinking that the Editors would miss seeing or wouldn't care seeing that there instead of their was used and publish my submission as-is anyway.