quote:

Originally posted by Nickycky:
Sorry Jet, I wasn't going to criticise you, as I do understand that you could get rather phobic about bf after the "blood and gunge" story. But then you said you don't believe breast is best, just because neither you nor your children have, as yet, shown any problems. But don't kid yourself into thinking that means formula is as healthy as breast milk. The earth is not flat, and breast milk is better than formula. I can't prove either of these statements to be true or false myself - but other people have done so.

If you don't like the smoking analogy, try this one: Russian roulette. The gun could have as many chambers as you like - if you bf, there's only a bullet in one of them, if you ff, there's 2 bullets. Whether there are 6 chambers or 6,000 - the risks are always going to be greater with ff. You have decided to take that risk, your choice, the risk may be tiny, but don't kid yourself that it isn't real - you will make yourself look foolish. You may not want it shoved down your throat - but I found the article Moogy posted fascinating. I'm afraid that if people are going to post that they don't believe breast is best, there is all the more reason for people like Moogy and Olive to keep on posting these links to combat that ignorant attitude.

firstly, how dare you call me ignorant. secondly it is important for both mother and child to be healthy and happy, it has a knock on effect if either or both are unhappy, so i should have emotionally damaged my children for the sake of their health (which isn't even an issue)? as we have established, people who have been BF still get ill, still have things that are apparently linked to FF so whatever we do for our children, there is still a risk involved. and ur analogy still sucks.

When it comes to immunities there are many factors that influence the health of FF and BF babies. My son was FF from 4 weeks onwards, but my friend F until her daughther was about 16 months, which is great, she only chose to stop because she still wouldn't sleep through at night.
They both attended the same nursery until I finished on maternity leave 5 months ago.
They both caught the bugs that float around in the nursery invironment, and I can't even say that she fought it better. But again you have the issies of how ilness is treated and with what. My son is allergic to penecillin, like myself and partner, so doesn't have it. But my friends daughter isn't. so she canb use it.
I think the fact of the matter is, unless there is an extensive survey done on FF and BF children to moniter the health for a decade or 2, we will never know the answers for definate.
All I can say is that I have a lovely healthy 20 month old boy. Who is at home with me.
My friend's daughter is healthy too, but still at the nursery and is currently beaing treated for an ear infection.

Jet - I called your attitude ignorant because it IS ignorant. Your good luck does not mean there is no risk. I made no such suggestion that either you or your children should have had your emotional health damaged. I was actually understanding of your not bfing - irrational phobias are not uncommon, and have serious effects on those who suffer from them. You clearly did not understand my analogy - it accepts that all children are at risk, whether bf or ff. Only the level of risk differs.

The smoking analogy is really the clearest though. Some smokers don't get cancer. Some non-smokers do. This does not negate the link between smoking and cancer.

There seems to be no point debating this further. You bury your head in the sand if you like. I refer you to your own signature.

[QUOTE]
I think the fact of the matter is, unless there is an extensive survey done on FF and BF children to moniter the health for a decade or 2, we will never know the answers for definate.
QUOTE]

Hi Hysteria, My apologies for the v long reply, but this is a subject I'm v interested in. The kind of study you are referring to is a cohort study, and many of these studies have been done over the years and that's where we get most of information about the health benfits of breastfeeding vs the disadvantages of formulafeeding. You take 2 cohorts, as evenly matched as possible except that one group of babies has been breastfed and th other hasn't. You then followup them up for a number of years. In some cases (the most famous being the Dundee study of babies born in 1983) there is data going back years, though you will gradually lose people to follwup. I'm sure I remeber another study started in the 30s, but can't remeber the details. There is another huge study that is ongoing, the Millenium studay, which is following up babies born in 2000. By comparing the two cohorts you can derive statistics about health effects of breastfeeding. That's the only way you can see real differences; comparing one formula fed baby with one breastfed baby is fairly meaningless but by comparing 5000 formula fed babies with 5000 breastfed babies you can see even v small differences. For example although it's very rare (1 in 1000), a baby fed on formula is twice as likely to develop type 1 diabetes (the insulin dependent type)in childhood. Of course that doesn't stop breastfed babies getting it too, but overall there will be fewer cases of this dreadful disease if there was more breastfeeding.

Different studies come up with slightly different results partly because of the influence of mixed feeding and introduction of solids (in the Dundee study few babies were exclusively breastfed beyond 3m). But you can still compare studies of similar quality.

For example this is ebnormous meta-anlysis looked at over 400 different studies, and compared them, specifically looking at longterm effects of breastfeeding on blood pressure, cholesterol, obesity, type 2 diabetes, and school achievement, years and years later. Some of the of the outcomes, although statistically significant (ie couldn't have been by chance) were still relatively modest because when you are comparing huge numbers you can measure quite small differences between groups.

For instance they found that being breastfed dropped you blood pressure by 1-2 points. Interestingly while this doesn't make much difference between individuals it could still have public health implications, lowering the prevalence of hypertension (high BP)by 17% and reducing coronary events by 6%, and stroke by 15%. But the effect is still smaller than achieved by other interventions (such as diet, excercise, salt reduction etc).

However with reducing population incidence of childhood obesity and type 2 diabetes, the effect achiened by breastfeeding is greater than that achieved by other interventions, particularly with obesity (22% reduction)

It's only when you look at the whole UK population that you really start seeing huge differences. Another study that looked at lots of diffferent long-term studies came up with this interesting conclusion: that out of a total of 596 112 UK babies born in 2002, 33 100 cases of asthma, 13 639 cases of obesity and 2655 cases of coeliac disease could be avoided over 7-9 years by eliminating "no breast feeding" as a risk factor.
http://adc.bmj.com/cgi/content/abstract/92/6/483

Imagine how much money that would save the NHS!

Hi again, for some reasons half the links I included didn't appear in the post.

The big meta-analysis I referred to is by Horta, published by World health organisation, and you can download the pdf (If you're intersted, it's 57 pages long!)
The abstract is here:
http://www.who.int/child-adolescent-health/publications...BN_92_4_159523_0.htm

Anyone interested in looking at research papers, and meta-anyses, a good place to start is babyfriendly.org.uk or kellymom.

One more point, though I know this debate will run and run....

Despite my good intentions I know I do lots of things that aren't the best for my health, even though I know there is evidence to the contrary. I knoweating less meat and exercising more is good for my health, but I still eat bacon sarnies and take the bus instaed of cycling. No point in denying the evidence though. I know that it reducing my carbon footprint is good for the environment, but when its cold I still use the tumbledryer and jump in the car for short trips. Pathetic I know, particularly when I know there is solid evidence that should make me change my ways, but I still do it anyway.

I don't see that choosing to ff is really any different (with the crucial exception that it is near impossible to change your mind, whereas you can always eat better and use less energy tomorrow). By all means choose to ff, just don't pretend there's no difference. When you look at the health of the UK there's a HUGE difference, just as if we all tried to save energy there would be a HUGE difference to the UK's carbon emissions.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by jet the jinx:
Hi Dippy it's been agessssssss! We're all great thanks. How are you getting on? i read the baby is now 6 months old! time has flown!

hes 7 months today, the lil monster is growing up to fast, lol
we are getting on really good thanks
nice speaking again

I haven't had children yet, but have thought about this issue a lot recently as I feel quite broody (sigh), plus OH is 5 years older than me and he feels he'd prefer to be a younger dad.
The way I see it is this: I'll give it a go, as ultimately it is probably easier than having to sterilise bottles and spend money on formula and all that jazz. Even if I can only manage it for a week that would be better than not at all as apparently all the most essential nutrients are got from the first week's worth of breast milk. Plus, I would like to be able to bond with my baby in this way.

However, my main struggle with it is the fact that many mothers do find it painful. Stories of cracked bleeding nipples do not exactly fill me with enthusiasm - plus, after putting my body through the mill with pregnancy I'll be looking forward to getting my body back. Not to mention that I would feel really weird knowing that sexual foreplay and feeding my baby were now linked by the same organ. As a woman you're not just a mother - you're a sexual being as well and as selfish as it sounds I feel that breastfeeding would inhibit my sexual experiences mentally and physically. Breastfeeding also means that the dad cannot help with the feeding.

So in short I suppose I would try it and see how things went but I can't pretend the prospect exactly fills me with joy. Overall I would be inclined not to breastfeed at all - while breastfeeding is the ideal, it's certainly not an absolute, and I get really mad at all this guilt-tripping pro-breastfeeding propaganda that the government has going on. It only serves to make women feel like they're being bad mothers when that ISN'T the case at all. - I wasn't breastfed and neither was my sister, we're both extremely healthy and one of us is at Oxford University and the other one of us is in training to be a doctor! So I personally wouldn't worry about the choice not to breastfeed adversely affecting my children.

*sorry to go on but C4 won't let me edit my own posts, grr*

I'm sorry to read about those of you that have had problems through formula feeding. The way I view it is this: there is no set rule for these things. There will always be exceptions. Since the smoking analogy has been brought up, I'll use it again: by sod's law, there will always be people that smoke 20 a day for 40 years and will not die from that - they'll live into their 90s! Equally, there are those who don't smoke any and still die of lung cancer.

As for my own personal reticence, I also have quite small breasts and can imagine that breast-feeding would be painful, in addition to what I've already expressed above.

And as others have already said, this is all about choice. It is not about forcing women to breastfeed. Whether or not you choose to breastfeed, and whether or not that is the right or wrong choice for your child, is dependent your needs and the needs of your child. Nobody else has any right to judge you for your choice or make you feel bad about it.

Angelil :
"However, my main struggle with it is the fact that many mothers do find it painful. Stories of cracked bleeding nipples do not exactly fill me with enthusiasm - plus, after putting my body through the mill with pregnancy I'll be looking forward to getting my body back. Not to mention that I would feel really weird knowing that sexual foreplay and feeding my baby were now linked by the same organ. As a woman you're not just a mother - you're a sexual being as well and as selfish as it sounds I feel that breastfeeding would inhibit my sexual experiences mentally and physically. Breastfeeding also means that the dad cannot help with the feeding."

1. It doesn't always result in pain and, if it does, it only lasts a few days.
2. Breastfeeding does get your body back into shape, that's what you store up extra fat for during pregnancy, you'll find it easier to shift by breastfeeding.
3. Babies don't tend to make your life that simple no matter how you choose to feed them so good luck on getting a sex life back on track as soon as you think you'd like to. You may find you're too tired to even care, hard to tell before you've actually got a new little person about.
4. Dads can do a lot of other things, taking baby out for walks, changing nappies, or you could express milk to feed from a spoon (yes, babies are good with spoons!)

"As for my own personal reticence, I also have quite small breasts and can imagine that breast-feeding would be painful, in addition to what I've already expressed above."

Size is not an issue, it makes no difference at all. This said from someone who isn't exactly endowed and successfully breastfed 2 children for 18 months and about 12 months.

Angelil - try it and see is a sensible attitude. I'm sure that a woman of your intelligence, if and when you get pregnant, will read about it and realise that a few of your assumptions are incorrect (breast size makes no difference, dads can feed babies expressed milk, bleeding nipples are not common, etc) and see the advantages of bf. You are still missing the point of the smoking analogy though: Sod's law is not an actual law! You won't take up smoking on the basis that you knew a smoker who lived to 90, will you? There will always be children who run across roads without looking and don't get run over, and children who follow the green cross code and get hit by a drunk driver - doesn't mean you should let your kids play in the road now does it??

Oh, and as you may have heard, they have now isolated the gene that links breastfeeding and intelligence. You may have an IQ of 150 being formula fed - if you'd been breast fed, chances are it would be 159!

I am so fed up of hearing about choice. You'll probably have heard about the Jehovah's witness mother of twins who choose not to take a blood transfusion and died. That's her legal right, agree with it or not. But if it had been the twins who needed a blood transfusion - would she still have the right to deny them that chance of life for the sake of HER beliefs? I know bf v ff is not a life or death situation - but it is still a choice that doesn't just affect the mother. It is NOT about choice - it is about INFORMED choice. It's not about making women feel guilty for not bf, it's about encouraging them to do so in the future. The guilt is an unfortunate by-product - but NOT as unfortunate as the millions of babies who are not getting the best possible start because their parents don't understand that breast is best.

Hi Angelil.... Don't worry about the size of your breasts, mine were never big or even average, but they certainly were a few days after my son was born.
Like you say, give it a go, the first feeds are important and some is better than nothing.
I fed for a week and then expressed and was then told to give my son formula aswell, but that is another story. But he had all I had to offer him.

The way I think when it comes to this debate is that my mum couldnt breastfeed due to family history of breast cancer, so was bottle fed from birth. And I am absolutely fine! I did well at school, wasnt particularly naughty, have great realtionships with my parents and was never a 'sicky' baby. At the end of the day whatever a parent feels or can do is right. Forumla worked for my family as dad could feed as well and meant I slept better (as the story goes, bottle fed babies sleep better) and as was prem my weight and daily intake could be monitored easily. When I have children I wouldnt rule out formula milk, as I think that it isnt a 'bad' option and too much emphasis is placed around the bonding and closeness of breast feeding; while this is true and as a nanny I have seen it, thats not to say bottle feeding doesnt provide closeness. Having been a nanny and been the one to attempt to put a bf baby into a routine when there previously hasnt been one as he has constantly been placed on the breast whenever cried, I can say bottle feeding has its positives, as does breast feeding. Its about choices, and not judging or blaming those who do it differently to you.

quote:

Originally posted by Nickycky:
Jet - I called your attitude ignorant because it IS ignorant. Your good luck does not mean there is no risk. I made no such suggestion that either you or your children should have had your emotional health damaged. I was actually understanding of your not bfing - irrational phobias are not uncommon, and have serious effects on those who suffer from them. You clearly did not understand my analogy - it accepts that all children are at risk, whether bf or ff. Only the level of risk differs.

The smoking analogy is really the clearest though. Some smokers don't get cancer. Some non-smokers do. This does not negate the link between smoking and cancer.

There seems to be no point debating this further. You bury your head in the sand if you like. I refer you to your own signature.

and most non smokers have been proven to get it through passive smoking so it really isn't the best thing to compare it with

i don't have an ignorant attitude, if people wish to BF, then i'm happy for them, if they don't, then i'm equally happy for them, i just believe in choice.

and yes, you should give up now because you are appearing to be the kind of person my sig refers to.

quote:

Originally posted by Angelil:
However, my main struggle with it is the fact that many mothers do find it painful. Stories of cracked bleeding nipples do not exactly fill me with enthusiasm -

Hi Angelil, being openminded is the most important thing. There are people who have horror stories to tell (the same is tru for birth!) But there are really good stories too. I had a lot of difficulties breastfeeding my first, but managed to get the right help that turned the experience around and luckily never looked back. my second and third were no trouble at all, largely I think thanks to the first experience.

And sex has never been affected by breastfeeding in my expperience; I have never felt sexier than when I'm pregnant, and despite three children I feel that as I've got older sex has got better and better and the fallow period directly after the birth of each child has got shorter. And size of breasts doesn't make much difference either, though its fun going form an A cup to a C cup, albeit temporarily!

And re your bit about the first week being most imprtant, it's more a case of being dose dependent: the bgreater the dose the greater the benefit. The biggest benefit is from exclusive breastfeeding, any breastfeeding at all will confer some benefit, though 1w only the benefit will be very modest.

And finally perspective is imprtant, being parent is a HUGE thing and how you feed your baby is, ultimately, only one small part of it.

PS I actually teach medical students, Angelil, and part of my job is to teach them how to read a scientific paper, so understanding risks is a big part of it. You say we shouldn't promote breastfeeding cos it makes women feel guilty, should we also not tell women about the risks of smoking in pregnancy or putting a baby to sleep in their front for fear of making women feel guilty, when the increased risk of cotdeath (a rare but tragic event) is well known? Of course not. So it would be extraordinary not to encourage women to make an INFORMED choice on the basis of the scientific evidence out there, as nickycky says.

I came across a mum the other day who was LIVID that no-one had told her the link between formula feeding and eczema, and felt that in retrospect her choice hadn't been informed at all. She had recently come this country from Africa, and as she hadn't seen anyone breastfeed in the UK, simply assumed it wasn't done here and no-one spent any time explaining the benfits of breastfeeding, just assumed her decision to formula feed was an informed choice. She determined that with her next baby she would definitely breastfeed, because of her terrible experience with her daughter's eczema.

Stethno - I can accept what you are saying....my dd did have bad excema from about 2 weeks...I was bf at the time...after 3 months they advised me to put her onto soya formula....I did and what an improvement......no-one knows what causes and triggers excema...if they did it would be dealt with and the problem would not exist. My first dd who is now 8 and who was pretty much ff (because of sever tongue tie) has hardly ever had a days illness in her life - no chicken pox, no skin problems - has immaculate perfect teeth and is very healthy....my second dd is completely different...so what does this tell me???

I guess it tells us that you have 2 beautiful gorgeous girls who are very different, but other than that you can't really draw any conclusions!

I guess what all we know about eczema (and although I am a HP I am no expert)is that a) it runs in families (but then, one child will have it nd another won't , just like in my family of three bf kids!!) and that b) in some cases eczema is food related and will be exacerbated by cow's milk protein, (present in formula and less so in breast milk too)and c) breastfeeding confers some protection, but really, you can only measure this effect when you look at large populations. As it's been mentioned before, that doesn't realy make much difference when you consider individuals. You can't have 20% less eczema, or 40% less coeliac disease, you've got it or you haven't.

Stethno - you are correct - you either have it or you haven't......which is why I think that some illnesses/diseases are down to genetics and NOT whether you are bf of ff.

Hi stheno.... just saying thanks for the reading, always good to see tha facts.

quote:

Originally posted by Nickycky:
Sod's law is not an actual law!

Funnily enough, I never said it was.

quote:

Originally posted by Nickycky:
Oh, and as you may have heard, they have now isolated the gene that links breastfeeding and intelligence. You may have an IQ of 150 being formula fed - if you'd been breast fed, chances are it would be 159!

OMG, a whole 9 points. Hardly enough to make a difference.

You may not like the idea of choice, but it does exist. Making an informed choice is not about brainwashing parents into making a certain choice: it is about presenting parents with both options and leaving them to decide, and I can't believe you actually agree with guilt-tripping new parents about this when they're already insecure.

I'm also finding it quite ironic that despite her username, Hysteria1983 is actually being more reasonable than you...

Hysteria1983, stheno and dawni3: Thanks for your reasoned posts. As I've said, I will give it a go when I do have children, but I REFUSE point-blank to be made to feel guilty if I can't manage it in the end. The way I see it is that if formula milk was really so bad for babies, they wouldn't be allowed to sell it.

stheno - I don't disagree with breastfeeding being promoted as such, I just disagree with the guilt-tripping way in which it is currently promoted. If the NHS changes its strategies then I will be more than happy.