4 ms·

There's a lot of anecdotal evidence in this thread. I'll add something to that: I was formula fed and I am fine. So are lots of other people. Our kids were bot

There's a lot of anecdotal evidence in this thread. I'll add something to that: I was formula fed and I am fine. So are lots of other people. Our kids were bottle-fed with breast-milk. I'm not sure where that fits in the breast vs bottle debate, and I of course didn't do a double-blind controlled trial to work out whether there were benefits - it simply suited our situation. I have always been surprised at how judgmental people get of mothers and how they feed their babies. Some of the nurses in the maternity ward were amazingly self-righteous about it. Not every mother can breast-feed, for various reasons (eg mastectomy). Fortunately in many countries there is a viable alternative. The mothers can often feel very bad about it, and having someone ram the obvious benefits of breastfeeding down their throat can be less than helpful, or healthy at that time.

run4yourlives 16y ago
Very few mothers cannot breastfeed, in the grand scheme of things. The self-righteousness that exists is part of an ongoing effort to turn back 50 years or so of misinformation that existed in North America regarding formula vs. breast milk that caused women to turn away from breastfeeding in droves, mainly under the guise that formula was "better". Why I agree that the judgments are unwarranted,(in every case) the fact remains that it is scientifically proven that breast milk provides numerous health benefits over formula. If you were fed formula, you have, on average, a higher risk of everything from a childhood cold/flu to asthma to leukemia. While every mother needs to make the best choice in her particular circumstance, choosing not to breastfeed for the sole sake of some convenience to the mother and/or others is not a responsible choice, in many people's opinions.
- cromulent 16y ago
  I agree that breastfeeding should be encouraged, particularly in 3rd world countries. However, the mantra of "breastfeeding has been scientifically proven to have benefits" may be less solid than you think. There is a strong correlation between mothers who choose to breastfeed and lower incidence of many adverse conditions. However, does this imply causality? "Conclusions: A history of breastfeeding is associated with a reduced risk of many diseases in infants and mothers from developed countries. Because almost all the data in this review were gathered from observational studies, one should not infer causality based on these findings. Also, there is a wide range of quality of the body of evidence across different health outcomes." http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/brfouttp.htm http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/brfouttp.htm
  - run4yourlives 16y ago
    From your link: > We found that a history of breastfeeding was associated with a reduction in the risk of acute otitis media, non-specific gastroenteritis, severe lower respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma (young children), obesity, type 1 and 2 diabetes, childhood leukemia, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and necrotizing enterocolitis...For maternal outcomes, a history of lactation was associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, breast, and ovarian cancer. Early cessation of breastfeeding or not breastfeeding was associated with an increased risk of maternal postpartum depression.
    - cromulent 16y ago
      That's right. Associated, not causal. The problem is that mothers who are health-conscious, affluent, educated, etc are more likely to choose to breast-feed, as that is the recommended option by health providers. So, you can't say that the breast milk is the cause, simply that it correlates. Not a scientific proof, I'm afraid.
      - billybob 16y ago
        Surely statistics can be used to correct for this - compare affluent, educated, health-conscious women in both categories, for example?
      - run4yourlives 16y ago
        You're now suggesting that the authors of all of these studies failed to control the most obvious of outside factors? I'm not sure why you are so resistant to these studies, but it's clear that no amount of scientific research is going to convince you that there are clear benefits to breastmilk.
        cromulent 16y ago
        No, I'm not suggesting that. They do. Have a look at the WHO study: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595230_eng.pdf http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595230_eng... For example: "Even within the same social group, mothers who breastfeed are likely to be more health-conscious than those who do not breastfeed. This may also lead them to promote other healthy habits among their children, including prevention of overweight, promotion of physical exercise and intellectual stimulation. This may be particularly true in high-income populations. Because these maternal attributes are difficult to measure, it is not possible to include them in the analyses as confounding factors. Nevertheless, this possibility should be taken into account when interpreting the study’s results." I'm not resisting studies - I'm reading them, rather than relying upon misinformation from other sources.
- jdminhbg 16y ago
  Full disclosure: I was breast-fed and am perfect in every conceivable way. "The self-righteousness that exists is part of an ongoing effort to turn back 50 years or so of misinformation that existed in North America..." Isn't this exactly the point? Nearly everything we've ever known about nutrition has at some point been 'proven' to be completely, 100% wrong. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental of people who make different choices?
  - cromulent 16y ago
    I'm also not convinced the choices are always for "convenience". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8443904.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8443904.stm
    - run4yourlives 16y ago
      Sven Carlsen, the author behind this and basically every other study that forwards that breastmilk isn't as wonderful as it is (he's a lone voice) has questionable ties to GlaxoSmithKline.
      - cromulent 16y ago
        I would agree that there is much misinformation out there. I would also suggest that very few mothers choose not to breast-feed solely for convenience. I am not as sure as you that it is a scientifically proven fact that breast milk provides numerous health benefits. Whilst the recommendation nearly always is to use it (and no modern study suggests that formula is better) the studies are not as conclusive as I would accept as fact. The confounding and self-selection effects in the studies, and the differences in formula and ethical considerations since the long-term studies were started cast uncertainty on any conclusion. However, I understand that the majority of the information out there leads people to believe that it is a fact, and agree that the safe option is breast milk. Edit: "basically every other study...has questionable ties to GlaxoSmithKline". Really? The WHO also says that the benefits are moderate, rather than "wonderful".
        16y ago
- mediacrisis 16y ago
  I was adopted at 3 months old, and I have many friends who were also adopted in their infancy. I remember my friends mother recounting a story in which she was feeding my infant compadre in a shopping center, and a woman came up out of nowhere and pretty much berated her for not breast feeding. It is such a war between these women, and its ridiculous, since most mothers who don't really and honestly can't. And quite frankly, as part of an army of formula fed humanoids, I'd like to think we all turned out just fine.
  - billybob 16y ago
    "And quite frankly, as part of an army of formula fed humanoids, I'd like to think we all turned out just fine." The woman you describe was rude, and I'm sure you did turn out fine. But the impetus for the debate is scientific evidence on what, statistically, is best for babies. "This isn't best" is not a personal slam to you or your mom, and "I turned out fine" isn't a counter-argument.
russell 16y ago
Those women who have difficulty producing enough milk should know that (in the US at least) that there are mother's milk donation programs that can help out. Those women who can should donate.
dgrant 16y ago
Of course "bottle-fed with breast-milk" is equivalent to breast-fed. I think people are judgmental when a mother chooses to not breastfeed for no "good" reason, or no reason at all. Reasonable people would be fine with someone not breastfeeding if they absolutely couldn't or it was extremely difficult. My wife breastfed and it was quite difficult at the beginning and then got easier and easier. She wanted to quit a few times, but pressed on. It's hard for her (and most people in the same situation) not to get judgmental when she hears of some mom having a rough day in the first week of the baby's life and throwing in the towel and switching to formula.
- cromulent 16y ago
  > Of course "bottle-fed with breast-milk" is equivalent to breast-fed. I thought that too, but I was told off by a passing lactation consultant.
  - run4yourlives 16y ago
    There are some studies that point to many benefits of the act of breastfeeding itself, but I think from a health/scientific perspective I think it's stretching things to suggest that putting your milk in a bottle and then into your baby's mouth somehow reduces the benefits. Obtuse bitches that happen to be employed as lactation consultants notwithstanding.
    - dgrant 16y ago
      The studies I have heard of talk of the benefits of skin-to-skin contact while feeding, which can easily be done with a bottle too. I'm not aware of any studies that point to any benefit of nipple vs. artificial nipple.
      - run4yourlives 16y ago
        There is the issue of failing to go back to the breast once established on bottle, but like I said, not overly important in the larger picture.

run4yourlives 16y ago

Very few mothers cannot breastfeed, in the grand scheme of things. The self-righteousness that exists is part of an ongoing effort to turn back 50 years or so of misinformation that existed in North America regarding formula vs. breast milk that caused women to turn away from breastfeeding in droves, mainly under the guise that formula was "better". Why I agree that the judgments are unwarranted,(in every case) the fact remains that it is scientifically proven that breast milk provides numerous health benefits over formula. If you were fed formula, you have, on average, a higher risk of everything from a childhood cold/flu to asthma to leukemia. While every mother needs to make the best choice in her particular circumstance, choosing not to breastfeed for the sole sake of some convenience to the mother and/or others is not a responsible choice, in many people's opinions.

cromulent 16y ago
I agree that breastfeeding should be encouraged, particularly in 3rd world countries. However, the mantra of "breastfeeding has been scientifically proven to have benefits" may be less solid than you think. There is a strong correlation between mothers who choose to breastfeed and lower incidence of many adverse conditions. However, does this imply causality? "Conclusions: A history of breastfeeding is associated with a reduced risk of many diseases in infants and mothers from developed countries. Because almost all the data in this review were gathered from observational studies, one should not infer causality based on these findings. Also, there is a wide range of quality of the body of evidence across different health outcomes." http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/brfouttp.htm http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/brfouttp.htm
- run4yourlives 16y ago
  From your link: > We found that a history of breastfeeding was associated with a reduction in the risk of acute otitis media, non-specific gastroenteritis, severe lower respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma (young children), obesity, type 1 and 2 diabetes, childhood leukemia, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and necrotizing enterocolitis...For maternal outcomes, a history of lactation was associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, breast, and ovarian cancer. Early cessation of breastfeeding or not breastfeeding was associated with an increased risk of maternal postpartum depression.
  - cromulent 16y ago
    That's right. Associated, not causal. The problem is that mothers who are health-conscious, affluent, educated, etc are more likely to choose to breast-feed, as that is the recommended option by health providers. So, you can't say that the breast milk is the cause, simply that it correlates. Not a scientific proof, I'm afraid.
    - billybob 16y ago
      Surely statistics can be used to correct for this - compare affluent, educated, health-conscious women in both categories, for example?
    - run4yourlives 16y ago
      You're now suggesting that the authors of all of these studies failed to control the most obvious of outside factors? I'm not sure why you are so resistant to these studies, but it's clear that no amount of scientific research is going to convince you that there are clear benefits to breastmilk.
      - cromulent 16y ago
        No, I'm not suggesting that. They do. Have a look at the WHO study: http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595230_eng.pdf http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2007/9789241595230_eng... For example: "Even within the same social group, mothers who breastfeed are likely to be more health-conscious than those who do not breastfeed. This may also lead them to promote other healthy habits among their children, including prevention of overweight, promotion of physical exercise and intellectual stimulation. This may be particularly true in high-income populations. Because these maternal attributes are difficult to measure, it is not possible to include them in the analyses as confounding factors. Nevertheless, this possibility should be taken into account when interpreting the study’s results." I'm not resisting studies - I'm reading them, rather than relying upon misinformation from other sources.
jdminhbg 16y ago
Full disclosure: I was breast-fed and am perfect in every conceivable way. "The self-righteousness that exists is part of an ongoing effort to turn back 50 years or so of misinformation that existed in North America..." Isn't this exactly the point? Nearly everything we've ever known about nutrition has at some point been 'proven' to be completely, 100% wrong. Maybe we shouldn't be so judgmental of people who make different choices?
- cromulent 16y ago
  I'm also not convinced the choices are always for "convenience". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8443904.stm http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8443904.stm
  - run4yourlives 16y ago
    Sven Carlsen, the author behind this and basically every other study that forwards that breastmilk isn't as wonderful as it is (he's a lone voice) has questionable ties to GlaxoSmithKline.
    - cromulent 16y ago
      I would agree that there is much misinformation out there. I would also suggest that very few mothers choose not to breast-feed solely for convenience. I am not as sure as you that it is a scientifically proven fact that breast milk provides numerous health benefits. Whilst the recommendation nearly always is to use it (and no modern study suggests that formula is better) the studies are not as conclusive as I would accept as fact. The confounding and self-selection effects in the studies, and the differences in formula and ethical considerations since the long-term studies were started cast uncertainty on any conclusion. However, I understand that the majority of the information out there leads people to believe that it is a fact, and agree that the safe option is breast milk. Edit: "basically every other study...has questionable ties to GlaxoSmithKline". Really? The WHO also says that the benefits are moderate, rather than "wonderful".
      - 16y ago
mediacrisis 16y ago
I was adopted at 3 months old, and I have many friends who were also adopted in their infancy. I remember my friends mother recounting a story in which she was feeding my infant compadre in a shopping center, and a woman came up out of nowhere and pretty much berated her for not breast feeding. It is such a war between these women, and its ridiculous, since most mothers who don't really and honestly can't. And quite frankly, as part of an army of formula fed humanoids, I'd like to think we all turned out just fine.
- billybob 16y ago
  "And quite frankly, as part of an army of formula fed humanoids, I'd like to think we all turned out just fine." The woman you describe was rude, and I'm sure you did turn out fine. But the impetus for the debate is scientific evidence on what, statistically, is best for babies. "This isn't best" is not a personal slam to you or your mom, and "I turned out fine" isn't a counter-argument.

russell 16y ago

Those women who have difficulty producing enough milk should know that (in the US at least) that there are mother's milk donation programs that can help out. Those women who can should donate.

dgrant 16y ago

Of course "bottle-fed with breast-milk" is equivalent to breast-fed. I think people are judgmental when a mother chooses to not breastfeed for no "good" reason, or no reason at all. Reasonable people would be fine with someone not breastfeeding if they absolutely couldn't or it was extremely difficult. My wife breastfed and it was quite difficult at the beginning and then got easier and easier. She wanted to quit a few times, but pressed on. It's hard for her (and most people in the same situation) not to get judgmental when she hears of some mom having a rough day in the first week of the baby's life and throwing in the towel and switching to formula.

cromulent 16y ago
> Of course "bottle-fed with breast-milk" is equivalent to breast-fed. I thought that too, but I was told off by a passing lactation consultant.
- run4yourlives 16y ago
  There are some studies that point to many benefits of the act of breastfeeding itself, but I think from a health/scientific perspective I think it's stretching things to suggest that putting your milk in a bottle and then into your baby's mouth somehow reduces the benefits. Obtuse bitches that happen to be employed as lactation consultants notwithstanding.
  - dgrant 16y ago
    The studies I have heard of talk of the benefits of skin-to-skin contact while feeding, which can easily be done with a bottle too. I'm not aware of any studies that point to any benefit of nipple vs. artificial nipple.
    - run4yourlives 16y ago
      There is the issue of failing to go back to the breast once established on bottle, but like I said, not overly important in the larger picture.