Benefits of bf exadurated?

[socitycourty]

I read a website frequently called the Skeptical OB. She says that a lot of the benefits associated with BF are also due to economic status, especially in the USA. Many low income moms go onto formula as they have to work right away. So you have to figure that a mom who has time to BF for a year also has the resources to pay for lots of other things that can contribute to the child's health and IQ.

either way IMO the IQ thing is garbage, you'd never know I was FF and also all of my generation was FF and none of us have low IQ, etc. I think it's a very vague "link" so to say. Also with the gastro/ear infections thing. My mom said we were rarely ill as little kids, I only had 1 or 2 ear infections, 1 or 2 episodes of stomach bug.

Also a woman who bf for that long is probably a SAHM and her child is not exposed to bugs as a working woman's child would be at daycare. Those are some common sense factors behind these statistics, IMO

 

[momofone08]

I think that BF is great for babies, but I highly doubt that FF is "poison" like some BF'ing pushers like to say. I BF both my children for the first month that way they got the immune boost from my shots that I had gotten. I can not get them to latch, so me and baby were frustrated so I switched to FF. It is completely YOUR decision and if you feel better FF then do so! Wishing you and your princess all the best.

Me and both my daughters are extremely close even though they got formula.

 

[bubbles123]

I believe BF reduces your chances of breast cancer by around 1% for every year you do it. This is from memory though, I could be wrong so please correct me if I am. There are many things in the west that also lead to us having higher breast cancer rates than other countries, including obesity, increased alcohol consumption and most importantly oestrogen based contraception and HRT, which raises breast cancer rates. For every 10,000 women 100 women will get breast cancer by 45 years old on average , for those who take the pill it goes up to 110. So following a healthy diet, exercising, avoiding eating too much red meat, avoiding excess alcohol, avoiding hormonal contraception and breast feeding all play their part in reducing cancer. So as part of a bigger picture not breast feeding is just one of the reasons breast cancer rates are higher in the west.

 

[socitycourty]

BTW I don't want this to come across as rude but there is a separate FF section for a reason, right? We don't need BF moms to come and tell us for the millionth time how great BF is. God forbid we went into the BF section and tried to say anything. I know I stay away from there now.

 

[Liesje]

I read a website frequently called the Skeptical OB. She says that a lot of the benefits associated with BF are also due to economic status, especially in the USA. Many low income moms go onto formula as they have to work right away. So you have to figure that a mom who has time to BF for a year also has the resources to pay for lots of other things that can contribute to the child's health and IQ.

either way IMO the IQ thing is garbage, you'd never know I was FF and also all of my generation was FF and none of us have low IQ, etc. I think it's a very vague "link" so to say. Also with the gastro/ear infections thing. My mom said we were rarely ill as little kids, I only had 1 or 2 ear infections, 1 or 2 episodes of stomach bug.

Also a woman who bf for that long is probably a SAHM and her child is not exposed to bugs as a working woman's child would be at daycare. Those are some common sense factors behind these statistics, IMO

I wonder if the studies actually account for the parents IQs as well as education, income, etc. it's no secret that lower income families are also generally less healthy.
My OH was formula fed and I was breastfed but if you compared our IQ, I believe his is significantly higher (shhh! No one tell him I said that lol)

 

[midori1999]

I read a website frequently called the Skeptical OB. She says that a lot of the benefits associated with BF are also due to economic status, especially in the USA. Many low income moms go onto formula as they have to work right away. So you have to figure that a mom who has time to BF for a year also has the resources to pay for lots of other things that can contribute to the child's health and IQ.

either way IMO the IQ thing is garbage, you'd never know I was FF and also all of my generation was FF and none of us have low IQ, etc. I think it's a very vague "link" so to say. Also with the gastro/ear infections thing. My mom said we were rarely ill as little kids, I only had 1 or 2 ear infections, 1 or 2 episodes of stomach bug.

Also a woman who bf for that long is probably a SAHM and her child is not exposed to bugs as a working woman's child would be at daycare. Those are some common sense factors behind these statistics, IMO

I'm pretty sure that no study has ever said that FF gives a 'low' IQ. The difference was quoted at around 5 points, but even that is debated. I don't think IQ is relevent tbh when discussing the benefits of BF.

Studies relating to the benefits of breastfeeding are conducted worldwide, not just in the USA. Just taking the developed world into account, in Sweden it's usual to take a year off work and breastfeeding rates are some of the highest in the world there. In the UK maternity leave is up to a year. So it is not just Mum's who are well enough off to have the luxury of not working that are taken into account. As I said before, stduies do control for economic status, amongst other things.

I believe BF reduces your chances of breast cancer by around 1% for every year you do it. This is from memory though, I could be wrong so please correct me if I am. There are many things in the west that also lead to us having higher breast cancer rates than other countries, including obesity, increased alcohol consumption and most importantly oestrogen based contraception and HRT, which raises breast cancer rates. For every 10,000 women 100 women will get breast cancer by 45 years old on average , for those who take the pill it goes up to 110. So following a healthy diet, exercising, avoiding eating too much red meat, avoiding excess alcohol, avoiding hormonal contraception and breast feeding all play their part in reducing cancer. So as part of a bigger picture not breast feeding is just one of the reasons breast cancer rates are higher in the west.

It's actually quite a lot more than that, but I don't really want to start getting into a debate about the benefits of breastfeeding. However, Cancer Research UK feel that the breastfeeding is significant in reducing breastcancer risk.

BTW I don't want this to come across as rude but there is a separate FF section for a reason, right? We don't need BF moms to come and tell us for the millionth time how great BF is. God forbid we went into the BF section and tried to say anything. I know I stay away from there now.

It's not rude. However, I personally think it would be better to have one 'feeding' section anyway, as having a BF and a FF section only really serves to segregate Mothers by the method with which they feed their baby, creating a 'them' and 'us' divide, which I don't think is that helpful when a divide is already felt by many. I don't think there are 'FF Mum' and 'BF Mums', but just Mums that happen to feed their baby by whatever method. Plus, what about Mums who do both, where do mixed feeders belong? Are they welcome in both sections? What about Mums that have BF but are now FF or the other way round?

I've never seen anyone in the BF section complain or comment negatively about Mums who are FF coming over there to comment or offer advice.

I strongly feel that women should be able to make informed choices about how they feed their baby. Trying to say the benefits of BF are 'exaggerated' or playing them down doesn't really allow women to do that, just as pretending benefits (such as the IQ thing!) that don't or may not exist is not helpful either.

 

[midori1999]

Als, for the record, I have been very careful not to start quoting statistics etc on this thread because I am aware of how some people feel and I don't want to do anything to worsen that. However, surely none of it is news to anyone who has researched how they are going to feed their baby anyway and surely we have all done that?

Lastly, I am not sure what people think health professionals have to gain by exaggerating the benefits of breastfeeding? Our government makes a lot of money from formula sales in taxes and training provided for health professionals by formula companies etc. The only thing they have to gain by promoting breastfeeding is a reduction in costs to the NHS and better public health and if the benefits are being exaggerated then they won't get that, will they?

 

[Ktothema]

Just because the nhs promote something doesn't mean it's not exaggerated nor is it in the public interest. Notably the nhs' own website carries info on breastfeeding benefits with reduced likelihood of obesity, asthma and excema, all of which arent scientifically proven. There's so many cases of guidelines changing that really should hammer that one home, not just with babies either. They tend to take their sources from particular places. For instance, dopamine agonists are very often given to Parkinson's sufferers - nhs get their guidelines from nice who stated that certain side effects did not exist. I helped with a study that got that changed, though nice still play it down a lot.

 

[Lady_Bee]

Increasingly these days I get the impression that this all comes down to what you want to believe. Kind of like religion.

From my reading, it seems there are quite a few good reasons not to take all of these breastfeeding studies at face value.

Suggesting that breastfeeding is not the panacea it is so often held up to be is not an attack on breastfeeding! It is what it is. There's nothing between the lines.

 

[midori1999]

One would also wonder why formula companies spend so much time and money trying to make their product as much like breast milk as possible...

 

[Lady_Bee]

One would also wonder why formula companies spend so much time and money trying to make their product as much like breast milk as possible...

Erm. Maybe because breast milk is the ideal infant food? Nobody here is saying that breast milk isn't the best food for babies. We keep saying that, but you seem to be hearing something else.

 

[skunkpixie]

I disagree that there should be just one section that covers feeding in general. There is another very well known, very popular forum that does this. The posts are 95% about breastfeeding and some of the formula feeding post actually ask "no judgement please" in the title. So I definatly think it would scare people away. xxx

 

[Liesje]

I'd imagine if the forums were merged, anyone who asked a question about formula would get 95% "I wouldn't know because I'd never give formula" responses.

 

[vintage67]

Formula feeders aren't welcome too many places on the internet regardless of why they are doing it. A facebook friend just had her baby about 3 weeks ago and is formula feeding due to the fact that she has MRSA, a decision she, her boyfriend, mother and doctor all felt was best. I warned her about the repercussions and already the snarky comments to her on facebook have started. In addition to that, the poor girl had a c-section as well, so the claws have come out on that too.

The internet is very much dominated by certain parenting creeds. I realize that what you encounter in real life varies widely depending on your family, social circle and where you live. But online you had best be having a natural birth, breastfeeding, babywearing, and now baby led weaning is added to the list. I don't have anything against any of those things but every single one of them is a complex decision involving individual circumstances.

It's the internet; everything is exaggerated.

 

[Saphira]

One would also wonder why formula companies spend so much time and money trying to make their product as much like breast milk as possible...

Erm. Maybe because breast milk is the ideal infant food? Nobody here is saying that breast milk isn't the best food for babies. We keep saying that, but you seem to be hearing something else.

Yes, I've also said breastmilk is of course the ideal food for baby in his or her first months of life especially. But, not everyone has the ideal circumstances to breastfeed for many different reasons, so why wouldn't formula companies continually look to make formula as close to breastmilk as possible? I think it's a wonderful thing.

This whole thread was started asking if the benefits of breastfeeding are exaggerated, and I believe they are when developed countries only are taken into consideration. As for what could directly affect us moms or our babies, the higher breast cancer risk and ear infection risk examples I'll take again, are minuscule risk increases that I don't find should be used as scare or guilt tactics for moms who had to or want to formula feed.

 

[midori1999]

Just because the nhs promote something doesn't mean it's not exaggerated nor is it in the public interest. Notably the nhs' own website carries info on breastfeeding benefits with reduced likelihood of obesity, asthma and excema, all of which arent scientifically proven. There's so many cases of guidelines changing that really should hammer that one home, not just with babies either. They tend to take their sources from particular places. For instance, dopamine agonists are very often given to Parkinson's sufferers - nhs get their guidelines from nice who stated that certain side effects did not exist. I helped with a study that got that changed, though nice still play it down a lot.

That's interesting actually. Are you a health professional?

Presumably the NHS interpret the various studies to mean that breastfeeding does reduce the risk of those things? Or do you think the NHS is lying about it? What do you feel it would gain from this?

Obviously there is always more research to be done and guidelines will change accordingly, I don't think that would be news to anyone. However, we can't really ignore current evidence on the basis it may change in the future.

I disagree that there should be just one section that covers feeding in general. There is another very well known, very popular forum that does this. The posts are 95% about breastfeeding and some of the formula feeding post actually ask "no judgement please" in the title. So I definatly think it would scare people away. xxx

I suspect I know which forum you mean and I also suspect that is as much to do with the demographic of that forum as anything else. I've never seen anyone there judge anyone for not breastfeeding though, whatever their reason.

Formula feeders aren't welcome too many places on the internet regardless of why they are doing it. A facebook friend just had her baby about 3 weeks ago and is formula feeding due to the fact that she has MRSA, a decision she, her boyfriend, mother and doctor all felt was best. I warned her about the repercussions and already the snarky comments to her on facebook have started. In addition to that, the poor girl had a c-section as well, so the claws have come out on that too.

The internet is very much dominated by certain parenting creeds. I realize that what you encounter in real life varies widely depending on your family, social circle and where you live. But online you had best be having a natural birth, breastfeeding, babywearing, and now baby led weaning is added to the list. I don't have anything against any of those things but every single one of them is a complex decision involving individual circumstances.

It's the internet; everything is exaggerated.

If your friend is getting comments about how she feeds her baby on Facebook, perhaps she needs to find new friends? I don't know a single person who would comment negatively on Facebook about how someone fed their baby. In fact, I doubt it would even cross most of their minds.

As for 'formula feeders'. They are just Mums like everyone else, why would how they feed their baby even come into it?! Ironically, you are hugely exaggerating. Not welcome 'too many places on the internet'? What, like Ebay, the Money saving Expert Forum? Parenting Forums even?

One would also wonder why formula companies spend so much time and money trying to make their product as much like breast milk as possible...

Erm. Maybe because breast milk is the ideal infant food? Nobody here is saying that breast milk isn't the best food for babies. We keep saying that, but you seem to be hearing something else.

Yes, I've also said breastmilk is of course the ideal food for baby in his or her first months of life especially. But, not everyone has the ideal circumstances to breastfeed for many different reasons, so why wouldn't formula companies continually look to make formula as close to breastmilk as possible? I think it's a wonderful thing.

This whole thread was started asking if the benefits of breastfeeding are exaggerated, and I believe they are when developed countries only are taken into consideration. As for what could directly affect us moms or our babies, the higher breast cancer risk and ear infection risk examples I'll take again, are minuscule risk increases that I don't find should be used as scare or guilt tactics for moms who had to or want to formula feed.

Why do you think people use breast cancer risks or ear infections as 'scare or guilt tactics' for Mum who FF? It's presenting evidence, surely?

 

[Lady_Bee]

Why do you think people use breast cancer risks or ear infections as 'scare or guilt tactics' for Mum who FF? It's presenting evidence, surely?

Perhaps. Depends on the context of the conversation, surely?

(You know, most of the time, IMO, it's actually more just beating a dead horse. )

 

[Saphira]

Why do you think people use breast cancer risks or ear infections as 'scare or guilt tactics' for Mum who FF? It's presenting evidence, surely?

The question is, should I really consider that evidence so great, as in a leading factor which leads to these illnesses (formula), when in reality so much more plays a role (again, environment, genetics and lifestyle!). I just think it's silly to put so much of an emphasis on how breastfeeding reduces the chance of every illness and paves the way for a brighter outlook on a child's future when in reality it's all blown out of proportion because formula fed babies can easily live the same healthy, bright future. So, I do see these obesity, cancer, lower IQ, ear infection, asthma, etc. risks when formula feeding being used as scare and guilt tactics, yes, because I have done a lot of reading and the doom atmosphere placed around FF is very real.

But, that doesn't mean I'm anti-breastfeeding or think breaskmilk isn't ideal for babies either so please don't misunderstand me.

 

[Ktothema]

That's interesting actually. Are you a health professional?

Presumably the NHS interpret the various studies to mean that breastfeeding does reduce the risk of those things? Or do you think the NHS is lying about it? What do you feel it would gain from this?

Obviously there is always more research to be done and guidelines will change accordingly, I don't think that would be news to anyone. However, we can't really ignore current evidence on the basis it may change in the future.

I'm a statistician with vast experience in both nhs and pharma. Both have a long history of picking what suits them best and in the nhs case it's generally whatever allows them to cut costs. Just for a visible easy on the surfce reason - the major push of breastfeeding is allowing them to withdraw formula from hospital except for emergencies (which I don't actually disagree with, if you're going to ff then provide it yourself).

For every study tht shows there's some minimal increase there's others that show none and a lot that skew towards who's paying for them. In the case of asthma and excema there is research into a theorised link and some data has pointed that way, other data hasn't but it's been leapt on. All the studies have the same basic flaw of having to be reverse data anyway, which isn't the best start to any scientific research. But the problem is there is no current evidence for a lot of these claims. Just small junkets. I'm not saying that breastmilk isn't worth while, because there are real benefits that have been proven but asthma, excema, diabetes, leukaemia, obesity, intelligence to name a few - no evidence.

And if the benefits of breastmilk are going to be extolled, which they should be, they should at least be the real benefits.

 

[socitycourty]

I was shamed off of mothering.com

around that time my BIL's coworker/friend had her baby. 2 weeks later she was in the hospital after a suicide attempt. because she could not BF. i realize it's an extreme example for some people but postpartum is a very vulnerable time and it kind of turned me off of the "lactivist" movement even more. I live in a very "crunchy" area and I have been told that a csection isn't "giving birth". BF is best and natural and I should have started buying donor milk. Said person mowed me over when I tried to explain why my LO can't have BM. finally I told her, well I guess we should have just died. honestly it was rude but I was upset and tired of this ridiculous pressure for all things to be "natural".
I know that is my personal example but I can't stand to see other people being upset by these things as I know how it feels.

My mom said no one ever questioned her choice to FF (she ws going back to work in 4 weeks) and she never thought twice about it. She could not understand why I was so upset about the whole BF/c section thing until I explained to her how I felt and she nicely but firmly told me I was nuts, and to stop doing that to myself. If I hadn't been so obsessed with everything being "natural" (none of it worked out BTW) I wouldn't have had such a horrible time postpartum. I'm still not doing well.

I badly wanted a natural birth. I caved after 24 hours of pretty hard labor and got an epidural. I went another 8 hours after that. My LO was not even head down and I went through all the pain for nothing, only to have a c section because she wouldn't come out and I was ill from the whole thing. all it got me was a harder recovery.

that was long and rambling but my whole point was there is too much "mompetition" in so many areas. It is already hard enough, i don't know why it has to be made so much worse by these things.

And it is hard to have a thick skin when you're suffering from PPD, anxiety and BF guilt at the same time. Trust me, even offhand comments on the forum have me in tears at times, not to mention things I hear IRL

just my .02