Feeding Babies: A Place to Discuss

[BTB]

Out of respect for our beloved admin's (ahem, repeated) :o requests to keep the nursing room thread on-topic, I bring you:

A Place to Discuss All Things Pertaining to Baby Feeding!

Health policy, feeding studies, maternal rights, whatever. I know we can all play nice if we try. ;)

As an aside, though I'm writing the first post I in no way consider myself the "OP" of this thread - it's a continuation, really - and I may not even be around that much, if I manage to stop procrastinating on my residency application long enough to log off. :D

[ginadc]

Well, I wanted to reply to Carol's question in That Other Thread, so I'll respond to it here. In re: my comment about adopting a baby and knowing that my child will be looked upon with pity by "militant BFers" when I formula feed in public, you asked:

Hey, am I included among the "militant" here? Because let me tell you what: I would never assume anything.

I don't think so. I don't remember who, specifically, in various other threads, has made comments about feeling sorry for poor formula-fed infants when they see them in public, but I don't think you ever made those remarks. I'm referring to the folks who have said things like that. I recall reading comments about thinking of it as akin to child abuse, calling bottles "fake breasts" and other snide stuff. It was in a different thread and I don't remember who it was, but I know it was said--so now I know that at least some lactivists will likely be thinking those things about me and my baby. That was the point I was trying to make.

Let me ask this, in all seriousness. Here's the deal: breastfeeding rates, and especially breastfeeding continuation rates, are pretty low in the US, and this results in public health issues and costs to mother, baby and society. (Please don't make me argue this...) So, if you're in public health, you want to encourage more moms to breastfeed. How do you go about this? What would you say? Or should no one say anything? Should it all continue to be couched in "It's a personal choice"?

No, I think breastfeeding education is important. And I understand that overcoming negative attitudes toward BFing, NIPing, and so on requires a lot of work. What I object to is taking it to such an extreme that those of us who cannot breastfeed, for whatever reason, are made to feel like failures. There was plenty of talk in the previous thread that implied that those cases were few and far between, with the not-so-subtle implication that most people who say they can't breastfeed really just don't want to or didn't try hard enough and are making up excuses. I have read more than a few stories, here and elsewhere, from women who had a huge amount of trouble BFing even with lactation consultants and were made to feel like lousy mothers by LLL and the like.

Is it not possible to be positive and encouraging about BFing without actively denigrating those of us who will formula feed? As I said before, formula feeding has pretty clearly been shown not to be as good as BFing, but that doesn't mean it is a bad nutritional option. Couch things in terms of "BFing will improve your child's health in all these great ways," not "if you don't BF, it's the equivalent of smoking while you're pregnant." The second approach is just inflammatory and serves no "educational" purpose.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Regardless of whether you think the movement is truly militant or not, the perception is there. Look at these threads- the vast majority of us are in agreement that breast-feeding is best. There's a very sympathetic crowd here, and yet a number of us- I would venture to guess- would be a bit apprehensive about seeing a lactation counselor if the need came up. If what's been said so far is considered moderate, than what are we supposed to think that a militant person will be like? And wouldn't we imagine that, if anyone's going to be militant, it'll be a lactation counselor?

I mean, I have a pretty strong personality, and yet I find myself thinking, wow, if I have a baby I hope I don't have to see a lactation counselor. What if I just can't manage to work out BFing? I don't want to be told I'm a sucky mother, or not dedicated enough, or that I'm making excuses at the expense of my baby's health. If I feel that way, how is someone else who maybe doesn't have the advantages of self-confidence and a strong will going to feel? Especially when that person probably was not breastfed either, and feels that they turned out well-enough anyway?

[bamboo]

gina - the thing is, that as Carol said in the other thread, having a public health campaign focused on the "breast is best" message *doesn't work*. That's what's been going on for the last 10+ years, and breastfeeding rates are still dismally low nationwide. The Office of Women's Health is in the midst of running a new campaign. They did many focus groups around the country, across all socioeconomic and racial groups, to find out a) what women really think about breastfeeding benefits/information and b) what would be a more effective public health message. What they found was that women overwhelmingly think basically "breast is best but formula is really really good too". What they found would be a much more effective way to frame the issue, while also still being truthful is: "Formula feeding puts your baby at an increased risk for X, Y, Z". A negative spin on the situation was more effective than the positive one we've had for quite a while.

Believe me, no one is more concerned with the guilt issue than breastfeeding experts and physicians. Everyone is scared of "making moms feel guilty". What those focus groups also found though, is that moms overall did not. Those who wanted to breastfeed and were unable to, either from lack of support or a medical issue, felt badly about that of course. But they did not feel guilt from the truthful messaging, and neither did the women who just didn't want to breastfeed at all. Additionally, public health people tell mothers all the time what to do and often in very strong terms- physicians have no problems telling mothers not to cosleep (even though that's not supported scientifically), that they have to use a carseat with 50 bells and whistles, and so on. It's paternalistic to think that we should somehow try to protect women from accurately framed messages about the risks of formula feeding so that they don't feel guilty. We don't take that approach with other issues, so why with breastfeeding which is arguably the most important health issue for babies and children?

[carolc]

Couch things in terms of "BFing will improve your child's health in all these great ways," not "if you don't BF, it's the equivalent of smoking while you're pregnant."

As I said earlier, this IS the approach that's been being used. It isn't working very well. So where do we got from here? I recognize that my metaphor was a bit of a shock tactic. Many public health campaigns use these tactics to be heard. (Remember the seat belt campaigns that showed the crash test dummies basically exploding on impact?)

I'll say yet again that I am not actually equating cigarettes with formula. What I *am* saying is that, if you have the option to nurse, *choosing to formula-feed* is making an intentional decision that puts your child's health at increased risk.

LF, no, most lactation consultants are not going to be "militant." They wouldn't be very well-served by it, really--many of them are in private practice, and completely alienating your customers is not going to work well there. The ones you see at a hospital or ped's office are most likely going to err on the side of suggesting supplements, in fact. The LC we saw in the hospital asked us to use formula for the first couple of days as an "insurance" policy because "I didn't have enough colustrum."

Look...there may be someone out there who would tell me "I didn't try hard enough" to nurse and that I should have continued nursing Nora exclusively at the breast through terrible pain for as long as she wanted. Do you know what I'd say to that person? "I know what I can handle, and you don't. I made the right choice for me and my family, and I'm proud." Would their comment make me feel inferior, failed, or guilty? Hell no. I might be *annoyed*, but I would not be hurt or devastated.

My daughter is named after Eleanor Roosevelt. I'm not normally a "Shut up and deal" kind of person, but sometimes in these conversations I do think of this quote of hers:

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."

[carolc]

Ooops--x-posted with bamboo. Yeah, what she said. ;)

[EmilyBronte]

I read the other thread and really felt guilty for bottle-feeding, even though no one writing in it knew my situation (and especially since I never posted in it, as I just read it this morning).

My personal opinion on feeding (and any other child-rearing issues) is that parents need to find the best balance between their child's health and their own. To be a good mother, in my opinion, I need to take care of myself every bit as much as I take care of my child. To be a good mother, I feel I need to have a great relationship with my husband. There are many things that go along with being a good mother, and breastfeeding isn't the be all end all of being a good mother.

My son was 8-weeks premature and was fed via feeding tube for the first week of his life. Because he couldn't latch on (he couldn't suck anything at all, thus the tube) I started pumping with the hospital-provided pump about an hour or so after giving birth. My DS was born on Wednesday, and by Saturday I had only produced about an ounce total, pumping every 1.5-2 hours, even in the middle of the night). As soon as I would produce a bit, I would walk it down to the NICU to give to the nurses.

When he finally came off the feeding tube he would latch on for a second, but would never get a full tug. I had constant LC supervision in the NICU when I would try to BF. They knew my son's eating schedule and would meet me there. Once I left the hospital and my son stayed, I only tried to actually BF during the day, but as soon as I would be finished I would run and pump.

I did EVERYTHING the LC's suggested: drank gallons of water, ate cheesecake (odd, but seemed to help), ate a LOT - the LC's I talked to said you shouldn't lose weight while BF'g, although I've heard differently in many places. Each time I would pump I would produce between 1/2-1 ounce of milk. At first, that's all DS was eating so it worked out. The LC's said it would get better, and it got a little better. I finally got to where I could pump 2 ounces at a time.

Unfortunately, no matter how hard we (my husband, DS, me, and the LC's) worked at it, DS never learned to latch on. He honestly even had trouble with the bottle for a long time. It would take him an hour to drink 2 ouces of food. I would mix half preemie formula with half breastmilk since I wasn't producing enough. It got to where I did *nothing* but feed, in one way or another.

When he was 6-weeks old, I started pumping less and at around 7 weeks stopped pumping completely. I have been formula feeding ever since and I can't let myself feel bad about it. I *know* I did everything I could have done to try to get DS to breastfeed, and it failed. I see it as, at least he got as much as I was able to give him for that amount of time, and some is better than none. I talked to the LC's before stopping and they were not militant at all! They did encourage me and tell me I had tried hard (Lord knows they knew I had) and to not beat myself up about it (because I did).

Now my son is 7 months old and is eating homemade baby food. I do feel I'm doing a good thing by feeding him the stuff I make. I'm very conscientious about what he eats and how much he gets, etc. I use organic food so he doesn't get pesticides. Also, in 7 months, even being premature during winter, he has never, knock on wood, had so much as a sniffle. Hopefully I'll be able to say the same next year this time!

2 more things:

1. I think that positive reinforcement on the benefits of breastfeeding might help encourage it AND might help public perception of NIP. If there were commercials on TV advocating the positives of breastfeeding, and other widespread advertisement (heck, even a nursing bra company could benefit from this type of advertising) then maybe it would become a given that women will BF and it might just happen in front of you at dinner, for example. Also, hospitals could help by not giving out those diaper bags full of formula and coupons unless a mother asks for one. I was given one even though they knew I was BFing.

2. There seems to come a point where solely BFing could do a disservice to the baby, and let me tell you something I witnessed first-hand in the NICU while DS was there. A mom wanted to BF exclusively, which is great! Her son was admitted to the NICU for severe dehydration because he seemed to not be getting any nourishment after like 4 or 5 days of her trying. Anyway, the mom refused to allow the nurses to give the baby anything other than her breastmilk and even signed papers stating the hospital wasn't allowed to do so. The baby had an IV of something (not sure what) but it was something clear. Anyway, that IV was the only thing the baby was getting - no bottle, whatever he could get from the breast, which didn't seem much according to what we overheard. I'm not judging the mother, because I understand what she was trying to accomplish. But it does seem, to me, that a little formula, even through a feeding tube, would have been better than nothing. No real point here, just a perspective.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

LF, no, most lactation consultants are not going to be "militant." They wouldn't be very well-served by it, really--many of them are in private practice, and completely alienating your customers is not going to work well there.
That may very well be the case. But that's not the perception being created. You can argue all you want about how people should or should not feel, but what matters is how they do feel.
I'm not normally a "Shut up and deal" kind of person, but sometimes in these conversations I do think of this quote of hers:

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent."
Okay, but if your intent is to recruit mothers as breastfeeders, I don't think that'll be especially productive. That's, in fact, the sort of thing that makes me wonder whether these arguments are really about the welfare of the kids.

[Delta]

Emily - I am very sorry reading that thread made you feel badly. I know of someone else that felt bad after reading it too. But truly, it is not anyone's intention to make anyone feel bad. :( You do sound like a wonderful and caring mom and you don't have anything to feel bad about, IMO.

[flygirl]

Ironically, I had a dream last night that I tested BFP and delivered a 9lb. baby within the span of a day or so. And I was sent home within hours of giving birth. I neither knew nor had anything for the baby, including diapers, blankets, clothes, etc, and I didn't have any bfing assistance. I was walking around to different stores while trying to bf my newborn, looking for baby stuff anywhere I could find it. I finally found a BRU-type store with lots of lounge chairs outside for bfing, but they were all filled with women in very smart career suits chatting and smoking. I was NOT happy. :mad: ;)

Back OT :). As you can tell by my dream, I am very set on bfing & NIP when I have a child, and I want to do so for at least a year. I agree 100% that bf is supperior and is loaded with health benefits. I believe that probably 95% of studies comparing bf to ff show too many benefits to bf to count (the other 5% were "inconclusive," not pro-ff.....and I'm totally playing here; I really have no idea ;) ). IN FACT, I agree that promoting bfing is a public health issue and important to our society.

However, this does not mean that the child of a woman who cannot breastfeed is destined to be inferior. As many have already pointed out, there is enough anecdotal evidence to know that ff'd childred can and do turn out just fine. If a woman must take medication post-partum that would endanger her child, should she breastfeed anyway? Or should she ff? Should she not take the medication and greatly endanger her own life? If she's bombarded with all the risks of ffing she may choose one of the other two choices which (in my scenario) would be far more dangerous for her and her child.

Right now our society does not quite yet understand how beneficial bfing is, and the active supporters feel that a decade or 2 of campaigning the benefits has not been enough to change an entire social norm that took 4 decades to develop. It could be that we just need a little more time. However, we may also need to present the benefits in the form of risks to reach the public better. It's now a catch-22 because as much as we want our society to see bfing as the norm, promoting risks can also be harmful. Honestly, I don't have an answer.

But I do know that misrepresenting statistics can be detrimental to the cause. I know there was a lot of discussion about statistics in the other thread, but that was about studies basically showing that "statistically" babies fare better healthwise when bfd. On this we all agree. But the statistic that babies who are ff have 2x the risk of dying is NOT an accepted statistic, and it is certainly not supported by the NIH. Making that false claim makes one leery all the other true statistics, and the effort backfires.

The NIH did release a study that looked back at 1204 children who died between the ages of 28 days & 1 year. They stated that: "Children who were breastfed had 20% lower risk of dying between 28 days and one year than children who weren't breastfed. Longer breastfeeding was associated with lower risk. The effect was the same in both black and white children.". Their conclusion (emphasis mine): ""Although we knew that breastfeeding in the developing world was lifesaving, since it prevented diarrhea and pneumonia, we had no nationally representative data from the US on this very basic outcome. These data show that, even in the US, there is a modest decrease in mortality for breastfed children."

eta: The NIH's policy on who *shouldn't* bf:
A woman with certain health conditions, such as HIV or active tuberculosis, should not breastfeed because she risks transmitting the infection to her infant through her breast milk.
Women who actively use drugs or do not control their alcohol intake, or who have a history of these situations, may also be advised not to breastfeed.
Certain medicines, including some mood stabilizers and migraine medicines can also pass through the breast milk and cause harm to the infant.
Women with certain chronic illnesses may be advised not to breastfeed, or to take special steps to ensure their own health while breastfeeding. For example, women who have diabetes may need to eat slightly more food while they breastfeed, to prevent their blood sugar levels from dropping.
Women who have had breast surgery in the past may face some difficulties in breastfeeding.

[BTB]

BTW I thought you could drink when you are nursing. That isn't true?

Answering wendalah here, from the other thread:

yes, you can drink in moderation while nursing. That, I believe, is part of the reason people are upset with Denise Richard's comments: by stating alcohol as one of the reasons she gave up nursing, she perpetuates the myth that the two are incompatible.

I don't think anyone here would argue she can't, or shouldn't, make her own choices, just that in doing so she should not spread misinformation while doing so.

[ginadc]

Hmm. Sorry, but I'm skeptical of the "positive messages don't work so we'll move on to trying to make people who don't/can't nurse feel like they're failing their children" idea. I know that's not how you guys might see it, but look at it from the perspective of someone who physically cannot breastfeed--and, by the by, has had a whole hell of a lot else taken from me by the same thing that took away my ability to breastfeed and to have biological children. (I am not saying that all women are in my position; just providing this one perspective. BTW? Lots of women out there have babies after breast cancer and/or adopt after breast cancer. More and more, from what I read. And it's kinda hard to nurse if you don't have a breast anymore.)

But I digress. Anyway, as I say, look at it from my perspective for just a hot second. I'm already told that I'm not quite a "real mother" because I'm going to be adopting. I can't tell you how many "well-meaning" questions I've gotten already and we don't even have a kid yet. "What if they take the baby back?" "What if there's something wrong with the baby?" "Why don't you adopt overseas, it's safer?" On and on.

Now I have to hear "Your formula fed baby has TWICE THE RISK OF DEATH as a breastfed baby!" "It's like smoking!" "Your baby will probably have many more childhood illnesses than other babies!" Thanks so much. There's nothing I can freakin' do about that, okay?

Now, I guess I could see using those messages in carefully targeted settings, such as in lactation consultations with mothers/mothers-to-be who show no interest in breastfeeding for no apparent reason, or who were quickly discouraged away from breastfeeding when there were initial problems (although I still think that in this case, you're a lot better off working with her on solving the problems that made nursing difficult rather than guilting her). In other words, in specific, individual situations in which that information may not be known and actually may make a difference for someone who has a choice to make.

But using these messages broadly is just a scattershot dose of "You suck as a mother if you formula feed" at the general FFing population, a significant percentage of whom have little to no choice in the matter.

And yeah, yeah, I know, "No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." But you know what? If that's so, then why does everyone get so upset about complaints about NIPing? No one can make you feel inferior without your consent, right, so why is it so awful when someone says something negative about that? You can just ignore it, can't you?

The fact is, as I'm discovering even before I am an actual parent and am merely "paper pregnant," everyone judges your choices when you choose to parent, and no one does it more than other mothers. And while it's all fine and dandy to suggest that we just let criticism roll off our backs, especially if it doesn't "really" apply to us, I think it's much easier to make that suggestion when you're not the one, or part of the group, being criticized.

[BTB]

Gina - I can't speak for everybody here. Heck, sometimes I can barely coherently speak for myself. But I for one truly believe that what some perceive as 'militant' is honestly a sincere desire to spread accurate information about formula feeding, and while I can't truly appreciate how that makes FF moms feel, I know what it's like as a mom to feel bad about choices you may have been railroaded into by circumstance. Nevertheless, if it's fact, shouldn't it be 'out there'?

There are just so many myths about breastfeeding. I've been told I'm starving my daughter, that formula is better because it's made in a lab and scientific and all that. And for the generation before us, that's the way it was, without those facts being called into question - both my mom and DH's mom were told that formula is better for babies than breastmilk.

How else to overcome that myth, except with fact from the other side, even if it is stark?

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

Oh- whoops..
Certain medicines, including some mood stabilizers and migraine medicines can also pass through the breast milk and cause harm to the infant.
I forgot. Breastfeeding is a moot point for me anyway.

[amew]

ginadc -- I can only imagine how frustrating it must be to be bombared with the message that formula is harming your baby when you have no other choice. If it helps, I am positive that your child will be a heck of a lot more than twice as likely to thrive with you as a mom than if left with a woman who does not want a child or put in the foster system. I bet the NIH would agree with me, too.

[Delta]

littlefredpunkinhead - Where did you find that quote? I ask because yet again, the belief that women taking certain prescriptions can't breastfeed is yet another huge misperception and innacuracy about nursing. Dr. Thomas Hale at Texas Tech university is considered the expert on medications and mother's milk (the title of his book) and you can find information about pretty much all medicines and their effects on nursing babies in his book, or even on his website. Here is a forum that talks about some of the more common medications - http://neonatal.ama.ttuhsc.edu/cgi-bin/discus/discus.cgi?pg=topics&access=guest

ETA - I meant to say that while there certainly are medications that are contraindicated for breastfeeding, many of the ones that are widely assumed to be so, actually are not.

[Marisa]

Delta -- that quote is from the NIH's policy statement, I think it's the last post on the previous page.

But I also have to give props to Dr. Hale; LittleFred if you're at all interested in nursing your baby someday it'd be worthwhile to check his manual, Medications and Mother's Milk, since he not only has done fantastic research on the subject, he also offers possible alternatives for drugs that are absolutely contraindicated.

[Delta]

that quote is from the NIH's policy statement, I think it's the last post on the previous page.
Yeah, I googled it and found it.

[ginadc]

Delta, I think you overcome the "overall" myth by continuing to pound home the positive "breast is best" message. When I was working in gov't relations/communications for associations in DC, I remember learning that it took forever to get people to hear/understand/incorporate any given message into their thinking. In other words, just because a year or two or three after a particular slogan, campaign, public education approach begins, attitudes have only budged a bit, doesn't mean that the campaign isn't working; rather, it takes people awhile to "hear" you. (A lot longer than you think it should take, usually.) We used to be told that once you got sick of your own message, that was about the time that uninvolved people actually had heard it enough to think "Oh yeah."

I have absolutely no research to back me up on this point, but I would honestly think that the best way to use the negative messages--the "formula fed babies have twice the risk of death that BFed babies have" type of stuff, which is pretty stark, as you say--is in specific educational settings with particular people whose situations are reasonably well known. Some women could breastfeed, and don't, and while that is indeed their choice and I respect it, I think it's reasonably fair to at least try to acquaint them with the risk/benefit ratios of BF vs. formula feeding. But making it something that's thrown out randomly and indiscriminately--making the focus of general public education messages not "BFing makes your baby healthy!" but "FFing makes your baby unhealthy!"--seems to me more likely to alienate a lot of people who may well be quite supportive of BFing.

I am 100% suportive of BFing, and of NIPing, and have gotten in rather heated arguments with friends on the subject despite the fact that I have no dog in the hunt, so to speak. But when I hear/read comments that equate formula feeding with smoking while pregnant, and comments (again, not in this or the immediately previous threads, but others here) that indicate that some people walk around looking at FFed children with pity and as if they were abused despite knowing nothing of the mother's situation--that doesn't exactly make me feel all warm and fuzzy toward the lactivist movement in general, ya know?

[carolc]

Hey LF, I don't know what meds you're on, but very few of the antidepressants commonly taken today present a risk to the nursing baby. I know there are a few, but I think they're the old-school, really heavy-duty ones. I know many moms on antidepressants who nurse. Here's a page with more info:

http://www.kellymom.com/health/meds/antidepressants-hale10-02.html

Gina...all I can really say is that none of the ads to encourage breastfeeding are aimed at you or anyone in your situation. I understand that there is nothing you can do about it. Again, though, I must gently ask: what is gained, for the nation as a whole, by misrepresenting or obscuring the truth about an important decision that the majority of new parents will make?

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." But you know what? If that's so, then why does everyone get so upset about complaints about NIPing? No one can make you feel inferior without your consent, right, so why is it so awful when someone says something negative about that? You can just ignore it, can't you?

But comments about NIP never would have made me feel inferior. They just would have made me annoyed. Also, sometimes the comments are accompanied by "Please move or stop nursing."

If a woman must take medication post-partum that would endanger her child, should she breastfeed anyway? Or should she ff? Should she not take the medication and greatly endanger her own life? If she's bombarded with all the risks of ffing she may choose one of the other two choices which (in my scenario) would be far more dangerous for her and her child.

Again, this strikes me as "Let's not tell women the truth--it's too upsetting." Yes, of course a woman whose life would be in danger if she went off a med that precludes nursing should FF. I don't think you'd find a single person, militant or not, who would dispute that. I have faith that such a woman can know the facts of the situation and still understand what needs to be done. I think implying that she can't deal with the reality is, again, kind of paternalistic.

EmilyBronte, I'm sorry the thread made you feel bad. I still feel bad, too, that my child was not fully breastfed and that I weaned her earlier than I believe is optimal. But the reason I feel bad is not because people are out there trying to encourage BFing. I feel bad because it was a crappy, hard situation, and I wish things could have been different. I'm sorry if I am overstepping, but I wonder if maybe you just need to grieve the loss of breastfeeding a little more. It's not an insignificant loss for many women, and with a premature baby, you were dealing with so many other stresses. Here is a website that wa sof help to me when I was dealing with my own feelings of disappointment. Perhaps this could help some other moms who may be reading this, too.

http://www.internetbabies.com/mobi/

"MOBI is for women who are/were unable to breastfeed, feel unsuccessful in breastfeeding, are/were experiencing severe breastfeeding problems, or experienced untimely weaning."

Flygirl, bamboo may have mistakenly attributed the "double the risk" stat to NIH. However, there has been work done that shows the "double the risk" statistic. I linked to it before and can link to it again:

http://www.naturalfamilyonline.com/5-bf/312-formula-report-2.htm

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

I ask because yet again, the belief that women taking certain prescriptions can't breastfeed is yet another huge misperception and innacuracy about nursing.
Do you really wonder why some people view lactivists as the BF police? Do I have to pull out my prescriptions right now to prove to you that my medications qualify me for a pass on breastfeeding?

[SiValleySteph]

I'll be brave.

I do get upset when I'm out and I see baby after baby after baby being bottlefed. I spent an entire day at the San Diego Zoo and the only babies I saw being breastfed where my sister's and my own. I saw countless babies being bottlefed - maybe 50? I tell myself that some of these babies are probably getting breast milk in a bottle, some are probably adopted, some mothers probably had a difficult time breastfeeding. But I know that that cannot possibly account for all those babies. And it does upset me and frustrate me.

It's something I am working on, but I have struggled with this (judgemental aspect of parenting) since becoming a parent. I feel that breastfeeding is so important that I can't understand why someone who was able would not even try to breastfeed. My sister has to take her son to physical therapies and orthapedic specialists, etc. due to birth circumstances and she told me that when you see what some children/parents can have to go to you don't worry as much about the details (like breastfeeding). So I realize I am fortunate to have the luxury that this is one of my main concerns.

I feel more at peace over these things this week. ;) But I do feel like I would have a very difficult time being close (friend wise) with someone who would go straight to formula feeding without even give breastfeeding a try.

[Delta]

Do you really wonder why some people view lactivists as the BF police? Do I have to pull out my prescriptions right now to prove to you that my medications qualify me for a pass on breastfeeding?
:( I am sorry. I was just trying to be helpful.

My good friend I spoke about in an earlier thread was told she couldn't breastfeed because of a medication she was on. When she found out later that in fact it was perfectly OK to do so, it was too late. It angers her to this day to think that she got wrong information. I was just trying to help and clear up some more misperceptions. That is all.

[kam]

But I do feel like I would have a very difficult time being close (friend wise) with someone who would go straight to formula feeding without even give breastfeeding a try.

How would you know? Unless they said "there is no way I'll even try breastfeeding, never, ever, in a million years because I don't want to and no one can convince me to try once," chances are you won't know the intimate details of even your close friends. Some people, oddly enough, don't want to air out these issues to everyone they see. What you may see as "not even trying" could be your perception. Perception isn't always reality.

Again, when my SIL tried (she tried for 3 months with very limited success), when she mentioned going to bottle, she'd get the reaction "but you didn't even try!". In her perception, she tried for three months; she went to specialists, listened to every friend and family member who had advice to offer, went to more specialists, etc.. She went through hell, trying every which way, and it was folks who reacted in this way which only made it worse. In their perception, trying actually meant going through another 3, 6, 9 months of hell?


Do you really wonder why some people view lactivists as the BF police? Do I have to pull out my prescriptions right now to prove to you that my medications qualify me for a pass on breastfeeding?

Yes! Or it's mandatory breastfeeding for you, missy. Sorry. I've warned you.

[EmilyBronte]

OK I have a question...

How do you all feel about the mothers who pump in order to sell (or give, I'm not sure how it works) their milk to mothers who can't breastfeed? Is any breast milk best, or should a mother feed her child only her own breastmilk?

Carolc~ Thanks for the website. I'll have to take a look. :)

[RileyMom]

You know what I'm seeing? I'm seeing person after person come in here trying to clear up misperceptions, give good information, links to websites and what they are getting in return is snotty responses. I personally think its pretty rude, and I don't know why you ladies are even bothering anymore. Truly. No matter what you say, you are going to come across as "militant" because you are trying to educate. You are better than I am, because I would just give up. I see very few members in this thread who really *want* to hear what you have to say.

That said, carry on if you wish, but you are going to be miltant no matter what you say or do. :(

[carolc]

Emily, at this time, I believe you can't legally sell breastmilk, though you can donate it. I think women who donate are amazing. Yes, medically, another woman's breastmilk is better than formula. Sadly, it's very hard to get hold of donated breastmilk, and there just isn't very much of it. Interestingly, however, there is apparently interest in beginning to sell it. Here's an article someone passed along to me:




==

Move to commercialise breast milk

A US firm is looking to commercialise breast milk by selling it to hospitals for the treatment of sick babies.

Prolacta Bioscience, a small company just outside Los Angeles, also wants to carry out research to develop breast milk-based therapies.

Breast milk, with its minerals, digestive enzymes and antibodies, has long been credited with keeping babies healthy and boosting intelligence.

But experts said it would put pressure on mothers to sell their milk.

Until now breast milk donation in the US and UK has largely been confined to a handful of non-profit milk banks that collect milk on a local basis to provide it to premature and sick infants whose mothers struggle to breast feed.

But Prolacta is aiming to buy donated breast milk from independent milk banks and hospitals across the US, pasteurise it and sell it back to hospitals to treat low-birth weight babies.

It is also looking to supply it for babies with heart defects, who need surgery and are at risk of infection, and children who are being given chemotherapy for cancer.

And the firm wants to analyse the different components of breast milk - there are more than 100,000 although scientists only know what a few thousand do - to see if breast milk therapies can treat disease common to newborn babies.

Therapy

Prolacta chief executive Elena Medo said: "To our knowledge this is the first and only facility of its kind in the world.

"Human breast milk is really an incredible therapy. Let's try to develop processes where we can preserve every bit of its nutrients and the potent antiviral and all of its diseases fighting properties."

But the Human Milk Banking Association of North America questioned the "buying and selling" of human milk.

It said introducing the profit motive might pressure women and medical institutions to provide milk to a bank regardless of the needs of their own babies.

Rosie Dodds, policy research officer at the National Childbirth Trust, said she could understand the concerns.

But added: "There is a need for more mothers to come forward to give their milk, the whole issue needs to be valued more. I can see both sides of the argument.

"However, I don't think it would work in the UK as it would prove too expensive for hospitals."

[SiValleySteph]

How would you know? Unless they said "there is no way I'll even try breastfeeding, never, ever, in a million years because I don't want to and no one can convince me to try once," chances are you won't know the intimate details of even your close friends. Some people, oddly enough, don't want to air out these issues to everyone they see. What you may see as "not even trying" could be your perception. Perception isn't always reality.


Well, I wouldn't consider someone a close friend if I had no idea if they were breastfeeding or not. With all of my friends who have babies we've discussed breastfeeding and struggles with breastfeeding and formula supplements and whatever. I'm being honest here. I would have a hard time being close to someone who just went straight to formula from day one in the hospital just because they don't want to breastfeed. I would be surprised if I had someone that I considered to be a close friend who wouldn't just say I can't breastfeed due to medication or whatever if that was the circumstance. I wouldn't considering this airing out issues for eveyone to see if we are talking about close friends. :confused:

But now that I think about it, I haven't been in this situation. All my friends have breastfed, some having to overcome extreme difficulty. So it's possible that even though now I feel like it would impact a theoretical friendship, it would not.

[prudies]

Steph I would guess that a lot of those babies were being fed by caretakers.

There seems to come a point where solely BFing could do a disservice to the baby, and let me tell you something I witnessed first-hand in the NICU while DS was there. A mom wanted to BF exclusively, which is great! Her son was admitted to the NICU for severe dehydration because he seemed to not be getting any nourishment after like 4 or 5 days of her trying. Anyway, the mom refused to allow the nurses to give the baby anything other than her breastmilk and even signed papers stating the hospital wasn't allowed to do so. The baby had an IV of something (not sure what) but it was something clear. Anyway, that IV was the only thing the baby was getting - no bottle, whatever he could get from the breast, which didn't seem much according to what we overheard. I'm not judging the mother, because I understand what she was trying to accomplish. But it does seem, to me, that a little formula, even through a feeding tube, would have been better than nothing. No real point here, just a perspective.

Breastfeeding and the NICU is a tricky one. My baby was also born 8 weeks premature. I pumped and supplemented with formula until he reaches his due date. We saw a lactation consultant around then and she helped us get Elliott to latch (this LC is not a "militant lactivist" btw, more like a British nanny. They're mostly just nice and helpful!). I was pissed off for a while that the nurses had given Elliott bottles right away. So I called the hospital lactation consultant and asked about it, and she explained that the hospital's approach was to get the preemie to develop the suck instinct first. Not everyone agrees with this approach. I personally just wish the NICU folks would have talked to me about it. Help me come up with a strategy instead of letting me flounder.

I guess my point is that I needed support and information. I needed someone to say, you can do this! And I got that from the WC Breastfeeding thread ladies. If I am in any sort of "militant" camp today, it's because I want to be the person to give support now. To repay that debt.

Another point. One of the reasons lactivits/activists/BFing mamas are so vocal is that there is so much misinformation out there. Like whether or not you can drink, like what prescription drugs you can take. And I've read a lot of people here talk about what someone's OB or pediatrician says. Let me tell you, sadly, many pediatricians and OBs do not do their research on breastfeeding. Or even take the time to say, I don't know, but here's the number of a lactation consultant. So we have to be vocal.

Ok, I would love to write more about this, but instead of writing about babies, I have to go pay attention to my real life one!

[Delta]

Gina - I just noticed that you directed your last post to me but I think you perhaps meant to direct it at BTB?

[EmilyBronte]

Breastfeeding and the NICU is a tricky one. My baby was also born 8 weeks premature. I pumped and supplemented with formula until he reaches his due date. We saw a lactation consultant around then and she helped us get Elliott to latch (this LC is not a "militant lactivist" btw, more like a British nanny. They're mostly just nice and helpful!). I was pissed off for a while that the nurses had given Elliott bottles right away. So I called the hospital lactation consultant and asked about it, and she explained that the hospital's approach was to get the preemie to develop the suck instinct first. Not everyone agrees with this approach. I personally just wish the NICU folks would have talked to me about it. Help me come up with a strategy instead of letting me flounder.


I know, we experienced that "develop the suck instinct first" thing, too. They used a pacifier for DS to help develop that since he wouldn't take any nipple. It seemed to take him much longer than his due date for that sucking thing to click. We saw LC's, too, and I got tons of encouragement, but DS just wouldn't latch on. I'm so glad Elliott learned to latch on and you were able to continue to breastfeed.

[Delta]

EB and prudies - That was our experience in the NICU as well. Our baby was only in the NICU for 5 days but he was 4 pounds when he was born with IUGR. We tubefed him my colostrum for the first 2 days or so. Then we tried nursing at the breast but he didn't get it until we gave him a paci to develop that suck reflex for a day or so.

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

I am sorry. I was just trying to be helpful.
Well, c'mon, yesterday you tell me I'm getting it all wrong, and today the first thing you say to me sounds to me like I'm "yet again" spreading misperceptions. What's wrong with just saying something like, "Hey, if you're interested in reading about the latest studies on medications and breastfeeding, check this out"?
Yes! Or it's mandatory breastfeeding for you, missy. Sorry. I've warned you.
;)

[Delta]

Well, c'mon, yesterday you tell me I'm getting it all wrong, and today the first thing you say to me sounds to me like I'm "yet again" spreading misperceptions. What's wrong with just saying something like, "Hey, if you're interested in reading about the latest studies on medications and breastfeeding, check this out"?
I wanted to make sure that you and others reading did have all the info before you (or anyone else) definitely ruled out breasfeeding due to medication. If you know you can't then that is great. Maybe that link will help others too so that they aren't in the position of my friend I mentioned earlier.

[BTB]

Since the discussion recently has touched a couple times on framing: positive vs. negative, I wanted to share this article that for me was transformational in my thinking. Below is a paraphrased summary of the gist of it, from the Massachusetts Breastfeeding Coalition, and below is the link to the entire original article, titled "Watch Your Language."

MBC's "review":
Wiessinger inspired us with her essay "Watch Your Language". In it, she says that breastfeeding is not an "added bonus" compared to formula. Wiessinger argues that our society needs to change the way we think about breastfeeding. The American Academy of Pediatrics states that breastfeeding IS the normative feeding method and therefore, all other ways of feeding must be compared to breastfeeding as the gold standard. Language about the "benefits of breastfeeding" also presumes that formula is the normative feeding method. We must instead talk about the "risks" and "disadvantages" to not breastfeeding.

As Wiessinger says, we cannot hope to create a culture where breastfeeding is commonplace and accepted unless we change our language to move toward thinking that breastfeeding is simply normal and standard, and not just an "added bonus". We recognize this view represents a significant departure from the way our society has thought about feeding babies since the second half of the twentieth century.

Original article:
http://www.bobrow.net/kimberly/birth/BFLanguage.html

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

I wanted to make sure that you and others reading did have all the info before you (or anyone else) definitely ruled out breasfeeding due to medication. If you know you can't then that is great. Maybe that link will help others too so that they aren't in the position of my friend I mentioned earlier.
I realize that. But it doesn't have to be done in an accusatory way.

[Sarah]

I agree with BTB about the language being used. For example, if I had no carseat in my car and rode around with my infant in my arms, I bet no one would be concerned about making me feel bad if they encouraged me to use a carseat. I bet the approach used would be "your baby could die if she's not in a carseat" not "hey, carseats are great!" I really am willing to bet, although I can't back it up, that my kid's chances of being killed in a car crash are less than her chances of getting a dangerous disease, were she FFed.

The whole comparison to smoking thing confuses me, though. Maybe I am wrong, but I thought the reason not to smoke was low birth weight babies with some respiratory problems. Whereas FFing has been linked to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, leukemia, increased risk of breast cancer, other cancers, etc. Sounds to me like it's not such a bad comparison.

But I don't see anyone advocating messages of hatred or judgment here or anywhere, really. No one here thinks mothers are bad for not BFing; I think most of us feel sad that marketing and advertising is impacting what should be an informed decision. Most women who do not BF are not given enough support, information, or the means to BF. We are all lucky that this is even a choice- I certainly could never BF if I was working fulltime as a waitress for crappy wages, or in a factory. I think the message being encouraged by us BFing moms is not "you are bad if you don't BF" it's more like, "Look, FFing is not so hot for your baby. Let me help you get some good information and figure out how to nurse."

As for moms who cannot BF, these are few and far between. I think it's been estimated as less than 5%, probably closer to 2-3%. The rest are those who choose not to, or cannot because of lack of support, etc. These women are not to be ridiculed, and I don't think anyone said they should be. They need support and encouragement.

[ginadc]

Oops, sorry, Delta, you're right--I meant to reply to BTB.

Carol:

Gina...all I can really say is that none of the ads to encourage breastfeeding are aimed at you or anyone in your situation.

Well, whether we're talking about ads or general discussions like these or "messages" being spread by LLL or whatever--the point is that while they may not be intentionally "aimed" at people in my situation, or littlefred's, or kam's SIL's, or anyone else who genuinely is not able to BF for whatever reason: they hit us anyway. The discussion doesn't tend to incorporate us unless we loudly make our point. Instead, it moves in the direction of "Women say they can't breastfeed but they really are just making excuses or aren't educated--oh, but I didn't mean you, of course."


I understand that there is nothing you can do about it. Again, though, I must gently ask: what is gained, for the nation as a whole, by misrepresenting or obscuring the truth about an important decision that the majority of new parents will make?

And I must gently answer that if you consider ramming home an exceedingly negative message in a way that makes a significant percentage of mothers feel judged as failures for not doing something they actually cannot do to be a good way of presenting the truth, then we're going to have to disagree. I just don't think it's an effective way, broadly speaking, of presenting your point.

As I said, I think that approach might be used to some effect in very specific, one-to-one counseling situations by lactation consultants who know at least something about the person they're targeting their message to and what her situation is. I don't think it makes for a good generalized approach.

[Ole Miss Bride]

Just wanted to pop in and say that I find this discussion so interesting!

LF, I totally didn't find Delta's tone to be accusatory at all. Huh.

-Betsy

[LittleFredPunkinHead]

LF, I totally didn't find Delta's tone to be accusatory at all. Huh.
Without the context of previous comments directed to me, I'd agree.

[Sarah]

As for adoptive moms and moms with other issues which prevent nursing (although some moms BF adopted children, not that you should, just offering info), they make up such a small percentage of the population. And I know this sounds harsh, but honestly, should public health campaigns hinge on the feelings of such a small group? Should the Truth anti-smoking ads not run because they make people who have been trying to stop smoking for ten years and always fail feel bad? The truth is that FFing does increase the risks of XY and Z, and not saying that so as to protect people's feelings is ridiculous and condescending to women.

[Juniper]

ETA: I should have read the first two pages first because those Marisa and Delta already posted about Dr. Hale. He is super cool though, Anthony peds actually work out of his teaching hospital and are taught by him.


"Hey, if you're interested in reading about the latest studies on medications and breastfeeding, check this out"?

Dr. Hale is awesome if you really are interested in reading up on it.
http://neonatal.ttuhsc.edu/lact/

He is an awesome doctor who is doing alot of research and actually testing the amount of medicine that is transmitted in mothers milk.

I think what alot of people don't realize is that most doctors and RN's rarely even have to have a class or training on brestfeeding. Especially doctors that have been in practice for a long time.

My sons pediatrician not only told me that I could NOT breastfeed him while he was jaundiced, but he also told me that it would make him sicker. Well, not breastfeeding him made him sicker and he ended up in the NICU. For some silly reason I then went back to this doctor when I was out of my mind with post partum depression. He told me I could not breastfeed and take an anti-depressant.

For me this was like choosing between my left arm or my right arm. I could feed my son formula, or I could continue to breastfeed and risk ending up in a mental hospital.

This was one of the most agonizing decisions I ever made.

I stopped breastfeeding, went on the anti-depressants and then found Dr. Hale's research and learned that not only had the doctor I listened to been completely wrong about the meds I was on, there were EVEN safer meds he could have prescribed me.


I chalk it all up to a learning experience on my part. I don't trust anything that is told to me right off and I research on my own. You grow up thinking that doctors know what is best and sometimes that is just not true.



Honestly this thread and the last thread are really hard for me to read, because I do see so many trying to make valid good points that I agree with, but yet I am still a formula feeder. It fed my son when I couldn't and that is the bottom line. So even though the statistics about doubling the deaths are true it makes my stomach lurch to read it because I had no choice, or so I thought.


So I am in a wierd position on this. I have friends who have chosen to formula feed, and honestly it is so hard to see people give up what I longed for so much. That does not mean that I am judging them.

I do think the bottom line is that the evidence is overwhelming, and it is MY problem if it offends me because it is true. Formula is inferior. I made that choice and I have to stand behind. So while it is hard to read FF likened to smoking, I'm not going to take it to heart and get my son a pack of Marlboros. :)

[Delta]

LF - I honestly was not trying to be accusatory in the least and as I said I was trying to be helpful. Did I think that perhaps you didn't have all the information and was I concerned about not perpetuating the myth about medications and breastmilk? Absolutely.

[ginadc]

Great. Now by FFing my baby I'll be giving her an increased risk of breast cancer if it's a girl. You can imagine how that makes me feel.

Sarah, the comparison with something like carseats doesn't seem valid to me. It is never impossible to install a car seat in your car. It may be challenging--but all you need is some free help from your local fire department or police or hospital. (I understand many towns give them away free if you cannot afford one, as well.) It can be impossible to breastfeed, or so close to impossible as makes no never mind. I would bet that there are more women out there who physically can't breastfeed than the % you cited, and I'd be interested to see the statistics and sources--but even if there are only 5%, we'd like to be taken into consideration, thanks.

Your post talked about support and encouragement, which I'm all behind. What I am trying to say, and not very effectively, apparently, is that there is a difference between hearing "BFing can do all these wonderful things for your child's health!" and "not BFing will do all these horrible things to your child's health!" The former is encouraging, I would think, to those who actually might be physically capable of BFing, while not making someone like me (or kam's SIL, or littlefred) feel as if we're being told we're hurting our babies. I might think, "Wow, I wish I could give my child those added benefits," but I wouldn't necessarily feel like I was being painted as a bad mother for not being able to do so.

OTOH, hearing "If you formula feed, your child is at an increased risk of all these horrible things" just makes me feel like crap. I'm sorry, it does.

[carolc]

Juniper, I don't know if this helps or not, but I think the "double the risk" stat refers to the first year of life, which I know your son is beyond. I appreciate your post and I'm angry for you that you were given such misinformation.

I just don't think it's an effective way, broadly speaking, of presenting your point.

And of course you are entitled to your opinion. However, studies on this very subject, as bamboo and I have pointed out, show the opposite trend. "Benefits" talk does not work very well. "Risks" talk is more effective. What can I say? I'm a bit of a utilitarian. If the research showed that the "benefits" talk worked better than the "risk" talk, then I would be in favor of that approach.

Consider the possibility that you, and some of the others who have spoken up here about how they think these campaigns are terrible, are in the minority with your reaction. As always, one person's opinion or experience or anecdote does not a larger trend make.

Great. Now by FFing my baby I'll be giving her an increased risk of breast cancer if it's a girl. You can imagine how that makes me feel.

So, are you saying you would rather not know this? I guess I just don't get it. Some of this may be personality. :confused: I am the kind of person who always wants to have all the information about a situation, especially a medical one. Does it make me feel good to know that my child is at increased risk of type 1 diabetes because my brother has it AND possibly because I supplemented with formula? No, of course it doesn't. Am I glad I know this? Yes. It's part of my child's health profile.

[chefker]

We are all lucky that this is even a choice- I certainly could never BF if I was working fulltime as a waitress for crappy wages, or in a factory.

Unfortunately, if I were working in my chosen field (chef/caterer), I would have a hell of a time BF'ing, or even just finding time in the day to pump. I'd be on my feet 12 hours a day on the line. It's not a great job at all to be working while PG, even.

Right now I'm working an office job, where I get two days to work at home per week. It's a lot more family friendly, but I miss doing what I love. And it sucks that I even had to make that choice, between a career I enjoy, and a family-friendly job. And I know I'm lucky to HAVE this family friendly job in the first place--I don't mean to sound whiny, I'm just frustrated I guess.

I think it's cool that women donate breast milk--I honestly didn't even know this was done!

[ginadc]

As for adoptive moms and moms with other issues which prevent nursing (although some moms BF adopted children, not that you should, just offering info),

aAAAARRRGGHGHHHHHH!!!!!

Sarah, have you actually read my posts in this and the other thread? If you had, you would have seen that I'm quite aware of that. I have read quite a lot about it. It is extremely hard to induce lactation when you haven't been pregnant, and even the women who do so successfully almost all indicate that it doesn't fulfill all their child's nutritional needs--so they have to supplement with formula anyway. (So how much does feeding a child SOME breastmilk and supplementing with formula increase their risk of death?)

And for me, it would be extremely dangerous. I had breast cancer. Using hormones to stimulate lactation is something that would give my oncologist palpitations.

I know you were "Just offering info," but here again, there's the assumption that I maybe don't have that info and have not educated myself--when in fact I have, and specifically indicated that I did. That's the kind of thing that makes people like me feel put on the defensive in the BFing discussion; although there apparently aren't enough of us to warrant that we be taken into consideration.

[Delta]

The point of breastfeeding awareness campaigns is to give people the truth about the possible negative effects of formula feeding. They are *not* aimed at people who simply can't breastfeed for whatever reason be it medical or what have you. They are *not* aimed at mothers who've already formula fed their babies.

Many women out there, especially in at-risk areas, honestly do believe that formula is just as good or better. We cannot deprive them of the facts about formula vs. breastmilk for fear of making other mothers feel bad.

[BTB]

The issue of mothers who truly can not breastfeed has come up multiple times. There are circumstances when it is medically recognized that BFing is not the best choice: maternal HIV, CMV, or active TB infection (in the United States), certain kinds of chemotherapy, metabolic disorders in the newborn the require special supportive formula, some previous maternal surgeries, and a few (though surprisingly few) non-chemo maternal medications. I may be missing a couple contraindications here, Im typing fast since DD's nap could end anytime. :)

For those mothers who have a contraindication, I think no one here would disagree that it's a great thing that formula is there and will provide nutrition for the child. But we keep using those examples as reasons not to promote breastfeeding, or to promote it in a certain, quiet way - but those instances are rare.

In studies, though, the reasons given for both not starting and stopping BFing are mirrors. Other Children to Take Care of, Too Many Household Duties, Didn't Like Breastfeeding, Didn't Want to be Tied Down, Was Embarrassed to Breastfeed, Went Back to Work or School, Husband or Partner did not Want, and Wanted Body Back to Self all outnumbered "Could not Breastfeed" in numbers of responses. (ETA: in the 2003 PRAMS survey of North Carolinan mothers).

[EmilyBronte]

Maybe playing a *little bit* of Devil's advocate, but did the studies that show formula fed babies have a greater risk for obesity, heart disease, and diabetes include any other factors? Doesn't genetics, socio-economic status, fast food consumption (or overall diet), sugar consumption, lack of exercise, etc, have anything to do with it?

I know that breastfeeding is the *best* thing for your child, but I don't think that feeding your child formula is a death sentence, either. Some of these same moms who are so concerned with breastfeeding their babies allow them to sit in front of a TV or a computer all day and allow them to eat McDonalds anytime they want to as well. Isn't it being somewhat hypocritical for those moms to sing the praises of breastfeeding to moms who don't, or aren't educated on the subject?

Also, in my opinion, if you breastfeed but then pop open a jar of Gerber when it's time for your child to start solids, aren't you providing a disservice to your child by not feeding them something fresh? I don't eat canned vegetables, so why would I feed them to my child?

My point here is just that while I know breastfeeding is best, I think it doesn't end there. Whether your child is breastfed or formula fed, you have 18 years that you are responsible for their nutrition and you should use ALL of that time to help them develop the healthy habits that will last them a lifetime.

[chefker]

Actually, a HIV+ mom who BF's may actually be arrested for child endangerment . I read an article somewhere on this, which I'll try to find. I honestly don't know how they police that!

[ginadc]

But we keep using those examples as reasons not to promote breastfeeding, or to promote it in a certain, quiet way - but those instances are rare.

Waitasec--who's "We?" I am not holding those examples up as reasons not to promote breastfeeding just as loudly as you want. I think that's great. Please do. I am just suggesting that it be about promoting breastfeeding, not suggesting that you're dooming your child to a lifetime of health problems if you cannot.

But some have indicated that this doesn't work. I already posted about the whole issue of just how long and how much reptition it takes to get a message through. We will just have to agree to disagree on negative messages vs. positive messages (I remain skeptical about that research--not the medical research that "breast is best," but the "message" research, which is even more open to interpretation, spin and subjectivity than medical research).

Getting back to the original issue I posted way back in That Other Thread: please don't assume, when you see a woman formula feeding her child, that she a) is ignorant; b) is neglecting her child; c) is "choosing" not to breastfeed when she could. Please think before you post something about pitying bottle-fed babies you see in public places; I absolutely detest the thought that my child will be an object of someone's misguided pity simply because they don't know my situation. Yes, there's nothing you can do about people making judgments based on surface impressions--but I would think we who know that those surface impressions aren't always accurate can at least ask you to think about us before you judge and make comments.

[BTB]

In the US, yes, mothers with HIV are urged not to breastfeed. I've never heard of an arrest for this, but wouldn't be surprised, as there is legal precedent in this country for that.

You might (or might not) ;) be interested to know that in other countries, OTOH, it is actually statistically safer to receive breastmilk from an HIV-infected mother (rate of transmission around 25%) than to be given formula.

[BTB]

Gina - I know you must be feeling like a Christian surrounded by lions, and I don't want to add to that feeling! You're in an impossible BFing situation, and are doing the only thing you can. If you have time and are willing to share, though, I'd be interested in your thoughts on the "Watch your Language" article.

[ginadc]

Sure, BTB, and I appreciate your kind comments. I'll take a look at it, although I've been telling myself for half an hour or more now that I need to get my butt back to the article I'm writing. I can generate hundreds and hundreds of words on this subject and I can't focus on the words I'm getting paid for!

Anyway, I am going to try to discipline myself to be a good little writer and will get back to the "Watch Your Language" article later.

[BTB]

Waitasec--who's "We?" I am not holding those examples up as reasons not to promote breastfeeding just as loudly as you want. I think that's great. Please do. I am just suggesting that it be about promoting breastfeeding, not suggesting that you're dooming your child to a lifetime of health problems if you cannot.

Sorry, I missed this earlier, maybe it was the edit? By 'we', I meant just those of us discussing here. I know some feel framing from the negative is promoting breastfeeding, and some see it as more than promotion but antagonism - but was using 'we' to try to be generic, and non-divisive. :)

I need to get my butt back to the article I'm writing. I can generate hundreds and hundreds of words on this subject and I can't focus on the words I'm getting paid for!

I hear ya there - so hard for me to just shut. the. computer. off and go do other things (like housework) :D since DD will be up before I know it.

[amew]

This isn't about the relative merits of methods of spreading awareness of the benefits of breastfeeding, but it is about feeding babies. I have a question regarding breastfeeding -- something I have been wondering for a while. My DH has a slew of severe food allergies (peanuts, tree nuts, certain fish, chicken, all pitted fruits, carrots, peaches, pears, apples, kiwi -- he's a ton of fun to eat with ;) ). Some of these allergies are so severe that he goes into anaphylatic shock immediately upon oral exposure. Others cause swelling of the mouth and throat and breathing difficulty but no anaphylatic shock. I am very concerned about our future kids being saddled with their dad's allergy issues. In researching nut allergies, I have learned that mom's of kids with family histories of peanut allergies are recommended to refrain from eating peanuts while bfing. Does anyone know if the same recommendation holds true for other severe food allergies? I am very concerned about exposing my child to a potential allergen too early via bfing and thereby increasing his/her allergy risks -- which would be so unfortunate and ironic given that one of my major reasons for wanting to bf is do help reduce their chance of developing a crappy immune system like DH.

[prudies]

My point here is just that while I know breastfeeding is best, I think it doesn't end there. Whether your child is breastfed or formula fed, you have 18 years that you are responsible for their nutrition and you should use ALL of that time to help them develop the healthy habits that will last them a lifetime.

Great point, EB. I totally agree. Nutrition is huge in our house.

And I'm glad you found support in the NICU. That's all I want for other moms: to feel like they have people to go to. I felt so lost during our NICU time. Stiil, I think we were pretty lucky in that despite everything, Elliott had a pretty powerful rooting and sucking instinct.

[saathei]

A few thoughts.

First off, a comparison. My daughters were 6 weeks premature, which I know is pretty much par for the course with twins. However, there area bunch of studies talking about how prematurity and low birth weight is linked to stunted development and so forth. While I was on bedrest, I read a ton of stuff on the March of Dimes website about it, and when the doctors couldn't stop the labor the night before they were born, I felt really guilty about it. It pains me to know all the potential disadvantages my daughters may face, but there isn't (and wasn't) anything I can really do about it.

Now, this is not to say that I don't think that information should be out there, because it's important for parents and doctors to know. And it's also not to say that my daughters are irrovocably doomed, because I know there are many kids who were once premature who don't have health problems or developmental delays. The point is, I feel guilty over something that wasn't in my control, and at some point I need to just say "OK, this is the way it is" and move on.

I think that medically, this is a valid comparison with FFing, at least for moms who are unable to BF. The difference is that there is not one good place to go to get accurate information of how FFing affects a baby's health... and that other people don't give you crap if your baby was premature. Perhaps if FFing were treated a bit more like prematurity, we'd have better relations on both sides of the debate.

[Marisa]

I can't keep up with this thread but...

Gina, on behalf of Sarah I want to say that she probably did not realize your backstory from the other thread. Although she's is an outspoken lactivist ;) she is also the mommy of a week-old baby girl and I bet she didn't go through all 500 posts on the other threads. :)

amew -- I have heard differing advice on the allergy question. I believe that you can have the baby tested fairly early on to show whether certain common allergies are present -- I did not have to do this myself, but other moms on here have, and maybe they'll weigh in. A friend who's pregnant and whose first child is highly allergic is choosing to avoid certain foods during pregnancy as well. If that's something that you would choose to do, then you can continue the allergen-free diet for at least the first few weeks of life until blood tests can be run.

[BTB]

Perhaps if FFing were treated a bit more like prematurity, we'd have better relations on both sides of the debate.

Well, I see what you're saying. And it's really ironic that I'm not really seeing FFing as equivalent to prematurity (because, rare but important exceptions aside, FFing is usually something moms have some control over) but am agreeing with your conclusion on how it could be addressed: "Ok, so, this is the way it is." I understand how promoting breastfeeding can seem to be attacking bottlefeeders, but as long as that's the perception and not the intention, and fact, not opinion is being reported without just cutting people down, I don't know why it should stop. (P.S. I am a former 31-week preemie. From the 70's, when morbidity and mortality for preemies was even more abysmal). :D

[saathei]

ETA: I meant in the cases like Gina, or moms who are unable to breastfeed at all.

Continuing ideas from my last post

FTR, I breastfeed the girls and supplement with formula, so I often feel like I am on both sides of the debate. On the one hand, it totally astounds me that people will not BF just because their husbands didn't want them to. I've seen studies like the one BTB talked about, the ones that survey mothers and show that most women stop BFing not because it was physically difficult, but because of other reasons not at all related to the mechanics of it. There are a lot of mothers out there who could BF, but just don't.

I think you can repeat "Breast is best" over and over until you are blue in the face, but most people are going to see BFing and FFing as completely interchangeable unless they are presented with real medical facts. I don't think facts should be hidden just because they make people feel bad. We don't gloss over the risks of prematurity, or fetal alcohol syndrome, or laying a baby to sleep on his stomach, but we do with the FFing/BFing issue.

I think part of parenting is feeling guilty. No one can make absolutely perfect choices all the time, and no matter how hard we try, we will all fail our children in one aspect or another, whether we can help it or not. But personally, I don't want facts obfuscated just for my peace of mind.

Having said all that, I think formula is great. There are a lot of babies out there that would have died without formula as an acceptable alternative for nourishment. I take offense at the really militant BFing moms calling it "sludge" and "poison" and the like, because that is totally vilifying a good thing. And I think strangers who approach any mother to lecture her on her baby's eating habits need to be kicked in the shins! :)

[BTB]

Whoops, guess I jumped the gun. I am all on board with your second post. :)

[carolc]

Great post, saathei. :) Hey, I'll say it too: formula was a great invention. It has saved the lives of countless babies. I'm very glad it is available. I'm glad it was available to ME when I decided I could no longer cry and grit my teeth through every feeding and went to pumping instead (and couldn't pump enough).

[bookworm]

In studies, though, the reasons given for both not starting and stopping BFing are mirrors. Other Children to Take Care of, Too Many Household Duties, Didn't Like Breastfeeding, Didn't Want to be Tied Down, Was Embarrassed to Breastfeed, Went Back to Work or School, Husband or Partner did not Want, and Wanted Body Back to Self all outnumbered "Could not Breastfeed" in numbers of responses. (ETA: in the 2003 PRAMS survey of North Carolinan mothers).

I find this interesting. The reasons aren't "eh, formula is just as good"---these reasons address other life factors. You can think they are ridiculous reasons (sure, some of them sound better to me than others), but if these are the reasons given, why not focus of mitigating some of them?

Even if I, for example, think "husband did not want" is a rotten reason to do/not do almost anything, saying "you're making a Very Bad Decision" does not address the reason I'm making that decision. How about coping skills for addressing pressure from partners, or...yeah, I guess I don't know how to mitigate having too many household duties, or taking care of other children short of every "lactivist" offering to clean or babysit, but there are others far more innovative than I :).

Edited to acknowledge, as learned from carolc's earlier post, that there are communities of women working on the "make it easier" part as well. I just hadn't heard about them before :).

[BTB]

I find this interesting. The reasons aren't "eh, formula is just as good"---these reasons address other life factors.

It's true that "formula's just as good" isn't given as a reason. But might not those other factors be given much more weight by virtue of the fact that a mom believes the alternative is the equivalent (if in fact she does?)

[curlyq]

amew - just chiming in on the allergy bit. I nursed DD exclusively for 6 mo. At 8 mo. we gave her yogurt for the first time and she blew up like a balloon and broke out in wicked hives. We had her tested and she tested anaphylacticly allergic to dairy, eggs, and fish. At that age, upon first contact, babies won't necessarily stop breathing, but after that first reaction, we now have to carry around epi pens and monitor everything that we put in her mouth... fun times.

With that said, her ped allergist and pediatrician told me to continue nursing b/c chances are, a kid as allergic as she is would develop an allergy to soy if we switched to soy formula (plus, there's still some dairy in there). The hypoallergenic formulas were not an option for us as they are prohibitively expensive and my daughter refused to take anything from a bottle starting @ 4 mo. In order to keep her healthy (and hopefully stave off allergies as she got older b/c less exposure means that there's a good chance she'll outgrow them), I also gave up dairy, eggs, and fish. In the beginning it was difficult, but there are tons of regular things you can eat if you stay away from the big allergens. Actually, it's a healthier diet IMO and I felt really good. Needless to say, we nursed for 19 mo. until I was a few weeks into my next pregnancy (that I consequently lost) and nursing became painful (and she wasn't into it anymore).

ANYWAY (phew, this is getting long winded), I think I may be Marisa's friend she was referring to. I'm pregnant again and have been advised 2 completely different things from DRs. Some have told me to stay away from ALL allergens thorughout my entire pregnancy to keep the new baby healthy. Others have said that since mother and baby dont share a blood supply, it's just a crap shoot whether or not he'll be as allergic as his sister.

Your case, however, is a little different - here's why... if BOTH parents are allergic to something (dust, cats, foods, etc), then your kids have a 75-80% chance of developing an allergy to *something*. DH and I both have the run of the mill dust & cat allergies, in our case, DD was born with a food allergy and there's a good (even higher) chance that our next baby will develop allergies, we just don't know to what. If I were you, I'd probably just not go heavy on any food thorough your pregnancy/nursing time. I ate a LOAD of dairy daily and b/c of that she got lots of early exposure to that particular allergen. Also, listen to your instincts. I knew something was wrong far before she had the hives incident and my dr. told me I was suffering from "first time mommy-itis". :rolleyes:

This time, to avoid allergies, I'm weaning myself from the big 8 allergens (dairy, soy, peanuts, shellfish, and eggs) now that I'm in the 2nd half of my pregnancy. I'll completely avoid those foods while nursing for 6 mo., then introduce them slowly back into my diet (b/c many MDs think that it's through nursing exposure that they develop early allergies). Again, fun times, but IMO nursing is that important to the health of my children.

[curlyq]

amew, sorry, one more thing. As much as FF may sound easier than what I went through, chances are that if you nurse, you won't have the allergy problems b/c babies who breast feed have a MUCH lower incidence of developing allergies, however in our case, she did contract allergies, and I'm GRATEFUL that I was nursing b/c feeding her after she was diagnosed would have been near impossible w/ her health issues.

[linda_loo]

Just like any group of people, lactivists aren't all the same.

I really respect and admire those who aim their energy and attention to those who can be influenced:
The point of breastfeeding awareness campaigns is to give people the truth about the possible negative effects of formula feeding. They are *not* aimed at people who simply can't breastfeed for whatever reason be it medical or what have you. They are *not* aimed at mothers who've already formula fed their babies.

I have really thought a lot about those who aim their energy and attention to these sort of judgments:
Getting back to the original issue I posted way back in That Other Thread: please don't assume, when you see a woman formula feeding her child, that she a) is ignorant; b) is neglecting her child; c) is "choosing" not to breastfeed when she could. Please think before you post something about pitying bottle-fed babies you see in public places; I absolutely detest the thought that my child will be an object of someone's misguided pity simply because they don't know my situation.

FWIW, I think that those in the 2nd group are very much in the minority and I have long ago decided that life is too short to let their anger get in the way of me enjoying my children. It is one thing to be active and vocal with thoughts that are positive and have goodness and kindness behind them; ones that show society as a whole how breastmilk is the only choice. It is another thing to be active and vocal with thoughts that are nothing but judgemental and disrespectful; ones that target specific women and judge them based only on the type of milk in their baby's tummy.

ginadc - I don't know how old your child is, young I am guessing. I just thought I would say that in all likelihood, you will feel better about this some day soon. I realize your problem is more complex than others who could not bf... but at least some of these feelings will grow and change as time passes and your perspective changes. (I have hypoplastic breasts and was not able to bf either of my children)

Also - somewhere (I couldn't the exact quote), you asked about that 2-3% percentage. IIRC, that percentage is specifically those with hypolastic breast tissue. It does not account for individuals with your health concerns or adoptive parents. I am *sure* that the overall "can't" bf percentage is higher than 2-3%.

[ginadc]

Linda, I actually don't have a baby yet; I am "paper pregnant" in that we are in the process of adoption and waiting to be matched. (We had a match fail last month when the mother decided to parent, but for about three weeks I was "expecting" twins in September.)

I'll be back on the language thing and more of this later--really really gotta work!! :eek:

[amew]

Thanks for the advice, curlyq. Reading about your experience was very helpful and interesting. I am so sorry your DD is plagued with so many food allergies -- it is so tough. I agree that giving up foods while nursing is certainly well worth doing for the sake of a kid's health, and I am certainly willing to do so if that's what it takes.

As much as FF may sound easier than what I went through, chances are that if you nurse, you won't have the allergy problems b/c babies who breast feed have a MUCH lower incidence of developing allergies

I am so hoping that bfing my kids will help reduce their risk of becoming allergy monsters like their (future) dad. Incidently, DH was bfed for a little over a year and still developed his slew of deathly allergies. His mom now feels guilty about all the pb&j she ate while bfing because some doc told her that could be to blame -- hence my concern. But then again, maybe without being bfed for a year, he would have developed worse allergies. Maybe if he had been bfed for two years he would have developed less allergies. There's just no way of knowing. I just want to figure out the best way to reduce the chances of food allergies, and it sounds like bfing but avoiding likely allergens during pregnancy and while breastfeeding is probably the best route.

[amorey]

Does the mother eating peanuts while pregnant or BFing make it more likely that the baby will have allergies? My mom ate peanut butter toast for breakfast every dad when she was PG with me, and probably a lot while she was BFing. I was BFed for 3 years, but I still have awful allergies. Not to peanuts, though. I do have an anaphylactic reaction to hazelnuts, walnuts and pecans so bad I have to carry two epi pens at all times.

Maybe I would be much worse if I wasn’t BFed for so long. Both my parents have some mild allergies. My brother, who was BFed for 2 years, doesn’t have any.

[curlyq]

amorey - sorry you're ana to all those nuts. That stinks. What I've found is that dealing with allergies is like dealing w/ voodoo medicine. No one can tell you what is 100% right or wrong when it comes to food allergies - they can just give suggestions. So far, the only suggestion I've gotten across the board from our MDs is to nurse long and exclusively. Don't overdo it w/ any food (while pg or nursing), and don't introduce the "big 8" of allergy foods for a long time.

I agree that if you hadn't been nursed for such a long time, you may have had more allergies as the minute exposure to foods via the breast is what keeps most kids safe from anaphylactic food allergies.

amew - lots of doctors think that overexposure is a bad thing w/ food, so I'd say, just limit your pbj's to one a week. Also, as time goes on, kids who are no longer exposed to the allergens (ie mom keeps nursing and cuts out all foods that they're sensitive to), will *probably* grow out of them by school age (w/ the exception of peanuts and shellfish - they're usually life long), so nursing and avoiding is the best way to keep them healthy. if you have any questions, there's a great support group (and a whole section devoted to nursing I think - at least there used to be) at kidswithfoodalleries.org

Thank you re DD. It was difficult to wrap my head around, but thank goodness I was nursing and could easily change my diet to keep her healthy. Seriously, all my biggest anti-nursing family members/friends came to me afterwards and were like, "wow, I guess it was a good think you were nursing"... um, yeah!

[trefoil]

I really am willing to bet, although I can't back it up, that my kid's chances of being killed in a car crash are less than her chances of getting a dangerous disease, were she FFed.


Some people are saying that people who wish the lactivists would be nicer about the way they approach things are wanting to hide the facts behind a facade of "being concerned for the feelings of others." I'm one of the people who wishes that lactivists would be nicer and have no problem with the facts being shared. Researched statistics are fine and perfectly reasonable. Making comparisons that have no basis in research and are, seemingly, just used to put down those who FF, detract credibility from the person and her argument. So, while *facts* are fine, choosing to opine that FF is akin to smoking while pregnant or that FF is more dangerous than not putting a child in a carseat doesn't, in my opinion, help the position at all. The evidence of why breastfeeding is so good is abundant. Why not use that instead of making up comparisons that serve no good other than putting other people down? If that is what you do, i.e. focus on the facts, then great. That's all I ask. If you do decide to share your belief that FF is equivalent to having unprotected sex with strangers during pregnancy while shooting up heroin, people are going to discount you and your argument. It's fear-mongering and I don't see how it could possibly viewed as "educating." Again, educating is good, insulting people by making comparisons to awful activities that the vast majority of mothers would never ever do to their bodies or their babies is cruel. That's the difference, IMO.

I'll admit that I'm not a fan of negative advertising. I don't like it in politics. I stop listening to anyone who threatens my eternal fate in religious discussions. I just don't respond well to it. It feels like a swarmy tactic to me. Yes, I fully accept that others do respond to negative advertising. It's a preference issue. "Shock value" doesn't have much value for me. Yes, I think it is more considerate to FFers to phrase things in terms of why breastfeeding is better, not in terms of why FF is worse, but I don't really object to that. I object to the demonizing comparisons.

[ginadc]

Trefoil, I think I love you.

I went back and read the "Watch Your Language" article: color me unimpressed. I don't see actual research backing up this particular person's opinion, however educated and experienced, that negative messages about how awful FFIng is work better than positive messages about how great BFing is--either in her text, or from what I can garner about the subject matter of the reference articles she cites. Did I miss something else? (I admit that I might have; this discussion) has been moving pretty fast and furious.

I'm not saying that she doesn't make her points well and that they aren't worth considering; but what I was expecting to see was some sort of study showing that a negative "FFing is bad for baby" message improved the rates of BFing among a particular population more so than a "BFing is great for baby" did among a similar population, or something like that. Was there a cite like that that I didn't catch?

[chefker]

Trefoil captured much of what I am feeling/thinking.

[amew]

lots of doctors think that overexposure is a bad thing w/ food, so I'd say, just limit your pbj's to one a week. Also, as time goes on, kids who are no longer exposed to the allergens (ie mom keeps nursing and cuts out all foods that they're sensitive to), will *probably* grow out of them by school age (w/ the exception of peanuts and shellfish - they're usually life long)

No worries about the pb&j -- I already avoid all nuts anyway, as DH experiences serious swelling if I eat a nut and then kiss him before I have brushed my teeth or several hours have passed. ;) Oddly, my DH's allergies have gotten worse with age. We had a trip to the ER last week after he ate a peach and had severe difficulty breathing -- something that used to cause him only very minor swelling of the lips, if anything at all. I think I am still shaken up from that, which is probably why I am so concerned about figuring out how to best reduce our kids risks of developing the same allergies. DH is 29 years old and there are several foods that could easily kill him, including some that are I don't think of as common allergens (salmon? chicken?). It's just so darn scary, especially when he reacts to things he could previously eat. I think it would be so hard to have a child whose life is similarly precarious. I will definitely check out the website you posted. Thanks for sharing!

amorey -- Do you know about oral allergy syndrome? If you have severe pollen allergies and allergies to tree nuts, it is possible that's what is going on. That is what docs think my DH has (he has a severe reaction to birch pollen and severe reactions to tree nuts, among other things). We keep an epi pen in each of our cars, my purse, his backpack, our bedroom, and our kitchen.

[Marisa]

The car seat analogy that keeps getting brought up reminds me of something. I heard a different kind of car seat analogy a year or so ago, and I wonder what you guys think of this one?

The woman I was talking to said that making the decision on what to feed your baby is similar to the decision-making process that goes into choosing a car seat. (Not choosing whether to use one, but choosing what kind.)

Anyone who's been pregnant, especially who's hung around these boards or those other ones, knows the agony that goes into choosing a car seat. The fact is that any car seat on the market today is going to be acceptably safe for their baby to ride in. They all meet some kind of minimum standard, etc.

Yet moms pay lots of attention to safety ratings, Consumer Reports, and try to buy the safest, most highly rated car seat that is within their means.

What she thought, she said, is that mothers-to-be should be approaching their feeding decision with the same care and decision-making process that they did with the car seat. Not just "whichever" or "that one's fine, I'm sure", but "What's the absolute best I can do with what I have here".

In breastfeeding, the analogy doesn't obviously carry completely, because no amount of money is going to help some women who have physical limitations (i.e. an illness or an adopted child). It's more aimed at women who are not limited by this type of thing, but rather by their own inexperience with the topic, perhaps squeamishness, I don't know.

When I heard my friend's car seat analogy, it seemed pretty right on, but I'd be curious to know what you think as well. Perhaps I'm biased since I'm such a lactivist. :)

[carolc]

You know, I've been pretty much drawn and quartered for the smoking thing. I see why in one sense: obviously, cigarettes are just plain toxic, while formula can and does sustain life. I never meant to compare them in THAT sense, and if it seemed like I did, I apologize.

But I have to say, I actually thought about what would be a good comparison pretty carefully. I chose smoking while pregnant because, as any smoker knows, it is very hard to quit smoking. It's a serious challenge. There are many reasons why it could be very hard to stop, and many potential obstacles. (Similarly, there are indeed a number of reasons why breastfeeding might look hard or be hard for some women.) Yet I don't see anyone defending the practice of smoking while pregnant--even though quitting is potentially very hard and very stressful. (Don't they say it's easier to kick heroin than to stop smoking?)

I'm not sure what other genuinely risky behaviors FFing COULD be compared to less offensively. I actually have more sympathy for a pregnant smoker than I do for someone who doesn't buy a carseat, say, or leaves their baby in the car while they go into the store, or something like that.

I spent some time looking for some numbers, just out of curiosity. I did find that babies born to pregnant smokers have a 25% higher risk of dying in early infancy. However, remember that the presumably conservative NIH numbers say that FF babies have a 20% higher risk of death in the first year, and some studies say the risk is 50% higher.

However, that's not the only thing that can go wrong with pregnant smokers: the data say that they are at higher risk of miscarriage and some pregnancy complications. Obviously, these risks do not exist for FFers. So that risk is higher.

But then again, the risk of death in the first year is not the only risk of formula feeding, as has been shown. It also increases your child's risk of cancer, diabetes, and bowel disease. I can't compare these risks, statistically. Maybe the risk of fetal death is higher than the risk of later acquiring these conditions. I don't know.

The risk of SIDS is three times higher in babies whose mothers smoke. Not good. However, it is three to five times higher in babies whose mothers formula feed.

Smoking while pregnant increases the risk that your child will have asthma. Then again, so does formula feeding.

I can't assess the relative risks of each; maybe someone has done it, and if so, I'm very curious. I did see someone saying on a pro-BF site that smoking less than a pack a day while pregnant and then breastfeeding is "better" than quitting smoking and then formula-feeding. I don't know where she was getting that info, though.

The point is, I know the comparison sounds shocking. I'm not yet convinced, though, that the risks are all that different, statistically. I think it sounds shocking because societally, we have stopped "normalizing" smoking (and especially smoking while pregnant), whereas we continue to pervasively "normalize" formula feeding.

My MIL smoked while she was pregnant. She's a very nice woman, by the way, and very devoted to her children; not what you now probably think of when you think "pregnant smoker." At the time, this behavior was not considered ideal, but not too bad--I'd wager much as many see formula-feeding today. She later quit, but my husband was exposed to cigarette smoke throughout his childhood because his father smoked. Probably as a result (ironically, though, he was breastfed) he had many, many ear infections as a child. (Ear infections are associated with smoking in pregnancy and passive smoke exposure in childhood. Ear infections, btw, are also associated with formula feeding.) Anyway, he was given huge doses of penicillin multiple times as a young child till...blammo, one day he had a massive allergic reaction, was rushed to the hospital and almost died.

What am I getting at? Well, do you think perhaps my MIL would have liked to have known how risky exposure to cigarette smoke could end up being for her child? That, indirectly, it could almost kill him? I wager she would have--even if made her feel guilty. Certainly in hindsight. To this day she can barely talk about that incident.

Another story: my brother has type 1 diabetes. It has recently been tentatively shown that exposure to cows' milk before 4 months is associated with type 1 diabetes. My mom also breastfed, but she supplemented with bottles. She feels completely rotten that something she did could have contributed to his having this terrible disease. Would my mom have liked to have known (if it had been known at the time) that this was a risk, or would she rather no one talked to her about it, to protect her from being "guilted"? Well, what do you think? Would you have a better idea if I told you how many times her son has been taken to the hospital in insulin shock, and that he's half-blind as a result of the disease and may soon be completely so?

Personal anecdotes again. I said they're not statistically relevant, and they're not.

To me, the morally right thing is for people to know the risks.

[Dally]

I realize in this thread (and maybe on this website, too), BFing is pretty universally accepted as best, if the mother can BF. But I think something we're missing here is that this is not necessarily true of the general U.S. population! I think a lot of people out there think BFing is weird, shameful, too hard, or gross. OK, I have NO stats to back me up, I know. I'm basing this on completely anecdotal information as well as the dismal BFing rates in this country. I live in a pretty crunchy part of the country, but I almost never see women BFing. I don't hear much about it, either. Outside of my new mom's groups, I've heard women talk about how gross it is to hear a child ask to BF (that despite the AAP's recommendations). Inside my new mom's groups I've heard support for FFers and BFers :). But in the NIP thread, I saw a lot of hostility toward NIPers. The general idea seems to be that BFing is gross and most people would like to not think about it or see it. :(

So, I think we need a better campaign for BFing. What I think would work would be TV spots showing BFing women and more support/encouragement for NIP. Laws supporting NIP and pumping at work are essential, too. If more women (and men!) saw women BFing, it might be more accepted as "normal." KWIM? I mean, think about it, most of us were probably FF & we rarely see women BFing. On TV and in the movies, bottles are used and there is no mention of pumping. No wonder so many people never BF or lack support for it.

We need facts, of course, but I also believe a positive campaign would be better than a negative one because of the emotion surrounding this issue. Really, in addition to education, I think making BFing more acceptable publically would help tremendously!

And, if it matters, I have a three-month old that is now exclusively BFed. She was very small at birth and I supplemented her with formula for a little over two months (and I'm very glad it is there for those of us who need it). The LCs (absolutely helpful and not the least bit militant) and my ped recommended this. I did struggle with BFing because of latch issues, etc., but I was fortunate to overcome my issues with a lot of support from DH, the LCs, and this website. If I have listened to women I knew in real life, or even some of my well-meaning family members, I might have stopped BFing. The general attitude being, BFing is hard for you, so why not FF? I was FFed and I turned out fine. True, but hearing that all the time didn't help my BFing struggles.

So, in my very rambling way (I swear I used to be smart before I had a baby), I'm saying that, for me, facts, positive messages, and support helped me BF. What would make BFing much easier for me (and I bet others, too) is seeing it be widely accepted in public. I truly don't believe it is right now.

And, of course, it's NO one's business what's in the bottle. As a parent, I've been judged plenty (how many times I was berated for my plan to return to work, I can't tell you), so I don't believe in judging others. I hope we can promote BFing and make it "normal" without intentionally making some moms feel bad. (Most BFing promoters try very hard to do that, I'm sure.)

Aside: Gina, I think you are already a great mom to your lucky future baby. Anyone who would imply you are not a real mom because you are adopting is an idiot and should be disregarded.

[chefker]

Marisa ~ Interesting analogy. Of course me being a Consumer Reports junkie, I'll be all over those safety ratings when we go to buy baby stuff. :) Every appliance we've bought for our house, actually even my new car, I researched the heck out of safety ratings, customer satisfaction, all that fun stuff. I suppose I'm just a careful consumer.

And I'm betting many moms or moms-to-be DO research to the nth degree, car seats, BF vs. FF, daycare centers, et al. It's sad though, so many women in this country don't have the resources to DO this kind of research (including education on BF'ing or FF'ing). It would be nice if WIC would cover nursing bras and pads for example (they don't, to my knowledge, at least not in my state). Seems it's easier for the government to pay for formula for low-income mothers, rather than pay for nursing needs.

While I am NOT a 'lactivist', it does seem that at-risk mothers need more education on BF'ing & FF'ing.

[Dally]

I know, I know, I can't shut up suddenly. But I want to add that while I do believe that no one can make you feel inferior, it's not always easy for everyone to let negative comments roll off their backs. Kudos to you if it is easy for you.

I'm flipping this argument from how it appeared earlier in this thread because I feel like I am a "pariah" for NIP as opposed to bottle-feeding. See the NIP thread for anexample of what I mean. Do I still BF? Yes. Am I really hesitant to face the disapproving public? Yes. :( Bet some women give up BFing altogether because of public attitudes.

[EmilyBronte]

carolc~ Interesting statistics.

Not to make light of any of this, but reading carolc's post reminded me of something funny in a sad sort of way.... A friend of ours has an aunt who was a LC in the 60's/70's. Anyway, she used to help women learn to position their baby to breastfeed in such a way that they would be able to easily hold their cigarette so they wouldn't have to stop smoking while feeding! Crazy, huh?

I think that what Dally said is true - there needs to be more breastfeeding being advocated in a positive way and someone in our faces in order for people to begin to accept it as the norm. I think to do this effectively, the advertisers would have to plan their ads around the audience. Meaning, if they are playing the ad (and I'm assuming TV/Radio here) to appeal to the misinformed, then they should play up the positives of BF'ing. If they are trying to appeal to the poor, particularly those who are not on WIC and don't get formula for free but are still extremely strapped for cash, they should appeal to their pocketbook. They could talk about the cost comparisons between BFing and FFing. It costs alot less to buy a few nursing bras and a pump than it costs to buy formula for a year (especially when the formula needed is the preemie stuff that is $12 for the small can!).

I am an advocate for BFing, even though I seemingly failed at it (I still say 6 weeks is better than nothing), but I agree with others who have said that empowering the public with positive information about the benefits of BFing rather than the negatives of FFing is best.

[ginadc]

But I want to add that while I do believe that no one can make you feel inferior, it's not always easy for everyone to let negative comments roll off their backs.

Exactly, Dally. (And thanks for the props on my hopefully-soon-to-be motherhood skills...)

I admit that I probably am extra sensitive because I'm in the position of having multiple "strikes against me" so to speak--that is, things about me that might set me apart from the average new mom and open me up to tongue-clicking and so on. There's the adoption thing and all the baggage it entails, for starters, from surprising quarters. (I won't even go into some of the idiotic myths and ignorant prejudices my MIL has spouted.)

There's the BFing thing, or rather the not-BFing thing. And there's the fact that I will be probably closer to 39 than 38 by the time I actually have my first kid. (At least I'm in the NY metro area where that's not so unusual; at my 20th class reunion in the Midwest in July, many of my classmates had kids graduating from high school and one was recently made a grandmother; only one was expecting her first, and pretty much everybody else had kids who were at least 5 or more.)

Anyway, parenting and getting ready to do so opens you up for a whole boatload of insecurities anyway; if you're doing it in a substantially different way from the norm and hear demeaning comments from multiple quarters about your age, your baby-care plans, and how you're going to get said baby in the first place, you can't help feeling like everybody's got something negative to say about you. At least, if you're me you can't.

Which is really irrelevant to the broad topic at hand in this thread, but I just wanted to explain why I am probably more prickly than one might expect.

[Juniper]

But I want to add that while I do believe that no one can make you feel inferior, it's not always easy for everyone to let negative comments roll off their backs.

Oh, it is soooo not easy, but you really HAVE to learn how to do it. I have a 18 month old and you just get used to it. At the end of the day, I look at my son and know I have done the best for him that was humanly possible for me.


I think what many "lactivist" want is for women to at least come at this with knowledge. I live in a very rural part of the country, VERY rural Texas, so I see the way BF is "gross" to some, and "unnatural"??

While I totally sympathize with feeling guilty and helpless and all the stuff that goes on with not being able to breastfeed, I also see that there is a huge and great need to educate the public about the amazing things our boobs can do.

I also don't think formula should be villified, I do think that is counter productive.

I would hate to think that my guilt, and what are essentially my issues would stop people from speaking out for breastfeeding.




I do think that the place to start with BF awareness is with the medical community. I think that in alot of areas they are as much, if not more part of the issue, as moms who just think it is inconvienient. I had to ask at least 10 times for breast pump at my rural hospital. This rural hospital is also the one that serves 99% of the lower income and WIC participants in the county. The breastfeeding rate in my county is dismal.

My thoughts are kind of disjointed because I am trying to choose my words carefully. I do come from the perpective that I don't think formula should be pushed as "choice", but rather as a wonderfull alternative if you really really need it.

Before my son was born I got 10 cans of formula in the mail, then at the two hospitals we were at I got another 12, PLUS a bunch of little easy feeders that were I think 2 or 4 ounces. It made it sooo much easier to give up breastfeeding. When you are exhausted and sick and struggling with PPD, those cans are like a siren song. Its like the cans were saying to me "its soo easy to FF, just open me up and you can sleep, and baby will be well fed!!!"

Formula is a business, its a BIG business, that is why I only buy generic or store brand, then at least I am not giving enfamil or similac money to go out and entice more moms into FF. As much as their labels say that "breast is best" they are betting on your weakness, and essentially hoping you will fail. It means more profit for them.

Well, I have alot of points in there. I do with all of my heart, think that what you feed your baby in the first two years of their lives becomes a moot point when they are 15 and facing peer pressure, BUT I personally want to look back and know that I made the best, and most informed choices for them while I had more control.

I think that is what most moms want for their children and I think that breastfeeding awareness, and publicity, and acceptance, can do nothing but help other mothers who have less resources than I do, do the same for their children.

Propaganda, and harsh statistics are just NOT aimed at mothers who are informed and doing what they can, and while it is hard and hurtful to hear, it does not mean that I have chosen for my son to be obese or be sick, it is a side effect of a decision I made that I have to stand behind because there is no going back now. I am also now armed with this knowledge and can take ot