5 ms·

> The long term benefits of breast feeding are so tenuous This is a joke, right? Simple reasoning and deduction will lead you to the right answer. We evolved

by maratd 13y ago

> The long term benefits of breast feeding are so tenuous This is a joke, right? Simple reasoning and deduction will lead you to the right answer. We evolved to drink the milk of our mothers, not a chemical concoction derived from the milk of cows fed by corn.

wikwocket 13y ago
We also evolved with immune systems. This does not mean that supplementary tools such as antibiotics and vaccines are not useful. I believe rayiner's point is that infants can thrive on formula milk as well as breast milk. Please don't mock parents who choose to formula feed; there are many cases where it is preferable and/or necessary, just as there are cases where it is necessary to use antibiotics to supplement the body's immune system.
- maratd 13y ago
  > Please don't mock parents who choose to formula feed; there are many cases where it is preferable and/or necessary And where have I done that? Formula is a fantastic invention that can specifically assist in very difficult situations. But just as it is clearly inferior to take antibiotics daily because it is too inconvenient to wash one's hands ... so to is it clearly inferior to use formula when the mother is capable of breastfeeding, but can't be bothered.
  - mistermann 13y ago
    While I can certainly see the downsides of abusing antibiotics, I don't "clearly" see comparable downsides, in likelihood or magnitude, to using formula.
    - emiliobumachar 13y ago
      Formula lacks the live immune system cells the mother passes to the baby. Maybe someday we will develop nanobots to substitute for that. Till then, that's a clear downside.
  - Uchikoma 13y ago
    Wash hands? We evolved to fight bacteria. How is washing hands superior to the acidic surface of my skin? And don't get me started on soap.
  - rayiner 13y ago
    The real question is whether formula is inferior in any way that matters in the developed world. My contention is that it's not, and in the general case, the inconvenience of breastfeeding greatly outweighs any theoretical advantage from breastfeeding in first world babies. Babies in the first world are: 1) not exposed to that many dangerous pathogens to begin with; and 2) in the rare cases they do become infected, are easily treated with antibiotics, etc. Sure, breast milk has live immune cells, etc, but does that matter in any practical way?
- rayiner 13y ago
  No, my contention is more pointed: the theoretical short-term advantages of breastfeeding are largely irrelevant in the developed world where babies aren't susceptible to infection anyway, and, when considered rationally in the general case, the inconvenience of breastfeeding outweighs any advantages of formula feeding. Remember, the couple of generations of Americans grew up on formula feeding. Breastfeeding rates were down to the 20% range in the 1970's. Yet, there is very little evidence showing any long-term negative impact in those generations.
Iftheshoefits 13y ago
Actual data are more valuable than "simple reasoning and deduction" when matters of the physical universe--of which the biology of breastmilk and its benefits are a subset--are concerned. I can easily see the possibility that long term benefits are masked or "washed out" by other factors. Short term benefits, on the other hand, are unequivocally and easily empirically established. The fact that immune systems and richer nutrients are passed through breastmilk undeniably give breastfed babies an advantage over formula-only babies.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

by maratd 13y ago

wikwocket 13y ago

We also evolved with immune systems. This does not mean that supplementary tools such as antibiotics and vaccines are not useful. I believe rayiner's point is that infants can thrive on formula milk as well as breast milk. Please don't mock parents who choose to formula feed; there are many cases where it is preferable and/or necessary, just as there are cases where it is necessary to use antibiotics to supplement the body's immune system.

maratd 13y ago
> Please don't mock parents who choose to formula feed; there are many cases where it is preferable and/or necessary And where have I done that? Formula is a fantastic invention that can specifically assist in very difficult situations. But just as it is clearly inferior to take antibiotics daily because it is too inconvenient to wash one's hands ... so to is it clearly inferior to use formula when the mother is capable of breastfeeding, but can't be bothered.
- mistermann 13y ago
  While I can certainly see the downsides of abusing antibiotics, I don't "clearly" see comparable downsides, in likelihood or magnitude, to using formula.
  - emiliobumachar 13y ago
    Formula lacks the live immune system cells the mother passes to the baby. Maybe someday we will develop nanobots to substitute for that. Till then, that's a clear downside.
- Uchikoma 13y ago
  Wash hands? We evolved to fight bacteria. How is washing hands superior to the acidic surface of my skin? And don't get me started on soap.
- rayiner 13y ago
  The real question is whether formula is inferior in any way that matters in the developed world. My contention is that it's not, and in the general case, the inconvenience of breastfeeding greatly outweighs any theoretical advantage from breastfeeding in first world babies. Babies in the first world are: 1) not exposed to that many dangerous pathogens to begin with; and 2) in the rare cases they do become infected, are easily treated with antibiotics, etc. Sure, breast milk has live immune cells, etc, but does that matter in any practical way?
rayiner 13y ago
No, my contention is more pointed: the theoretical short-term advantages of breastfeeding are largely irrelevant in the developed world where babies aren't susceptible to infection anyway, and, when considered rationally in the general case, the inconvenience of breastfeeding outweighs any advantages of formula feeding. Remember, the couple of generations of Americans grew up on formula feeding. Breastfeeding rates were down to the 20% range in the 1970's. Yet, there is very little evidence showing any long-term negative impact in those generations.

Iftheshoefits 13y ago

Actual data are more valuable than "simple reasoning and deduction" when matters of the physical universe--of which the biology of breastmilk and its benefits are a subset--are concerned. I can easily see the possibility that long term benefits are masked or "washed out" by other factors. Short term benefits, on the other hand, are unequivocally and easily empirically established. The fact that immune systems and richer nutrients are passed through breastmilk undeniably give breastfed babies an advantage over formula-only babies.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]