Please note that threads in this topic are removed from the archive 90 days after the thread was started. If you would like your thread to be retrievable for longer than that, please choose another topic in which to post it.

another study that says that differences between breastfeeding and bottle feeding not statistically significant

(328 Posts)
deliverdaniel Tue 04-Feb-14 20:09:15

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614000549

This is a sibling study (the third major one) which again shows that between siblings where one is breastfed and one formula fed there is no statistically significant difference in outcomes on 10 major life outcomes of health and intelligence due to methods of infant feeding.

Sibling studies are the closest you can get to randomised controlled trials of infant feeding. The fact that yet anotehr of these has the same results just shows how massively overstated the benefits of breastfeeding are compared to formula feeding, and how bad the science aroudn this topic is generally.

Thoughts?

Paintyfingers Tue 04-Feb-14 21:58:01

Can't get your link to work.

Odd, as plenty of studies have shown better outcomes eg reduction in likelihood of allergies/diabetes.

Karoleann Tue 04-Feb-14 22:22:23

I don't think there's a massive difference. A lot of the infection stuff - there is a big difference in the rates of ear infection - could be put down to parents not steralising bottles correctly and there's not been a study with ready made formula v breastfeeding.

I have three very healthy normal, children with no allergies, including eczema and hay fever who were EBF for 1 month, mixed fed for until 4 months and then bottle fed (with ready made formula til 1).

A lot of women do find it more convenient to BF - I didn't after a couple of months I was ill and exhausted and felt so much better having stopped.

My 2 siblings and I were all EBF til 6 months, I have eczema and hay fever (and a very annoying red wine allergy and I was allergic to eggs until age of 5) and my brother has hay fever.

CarnivalCake Tue 04-Feb-14 22:24:52

I find it hard to believe there's much difference in the long run (possibly biased by my own experience of having children - breastfed child is constantly ill, bottlefed child is strong as an ox!!)

NinjaPenguin Tue 04-Feb-14 22:31:31

That's interesting, for sure. I FFed two of mine, one from birth (due to previous issues), the other from a few weeks (due to MH) and they are healthier by far than DS, who was BFed, but data isn't the plural of anecdote, or whatever the saying is.

Mmmbacon Tue 04-Feb-14 22:38:44

Bollocks is my thoughts on the subject,

I am very pro breastfeeding

Pro breastfeeding family on dads side, dmums side vehemently anti bfeeding, do much so that dmum didnt feed me her first as dgm said she wouldnt be allowed in the door doing that disgusting thing, dmum went on to feed siblings for increasingly longer lengths of time until baby bro was 12 months, all dads side very pro, very supportive,

What part if that study took into account higher rates of SIDS amongst formula fed babies, allergies, certain childhood cancers, mums breastfeeding reducing mums risk of breast cancer, heart disease,

Bollocks is what that survey is bollocks

Because breastfeeding isnt just the governmeny line we have been fed about healthier babies and we think less snotty noses, or nappies smelling of roses,

Breastfeeding has life long health benefits to mother and child, end of rant,

Ilovemydogandmydoglovesme Tue 04-Feb-14 22:54:00

My experience is the same as CarnivalCake and NinjaPenguin.

LouiseAderyn Tue 04-Feb-14 23:00:08

Is there direct proven correlation between ff and SIDS?

stargirl1701 Tue 04-Feb-14 23:04:30
cheesebaby Tue 04-Feb-14 23:09:12

Recent-ish meta-analysis showing association between breastfeeding and reduced SIDS.

DuckSongRocks Tue 04-Feb-14 23:10:33

I'm not usually one for posting on these threads as tends not to end well. Happy mum = happy baby is my view and there are so many factors to take into account.

Generally speaking I don't believe that 'artificial' anything (albeit still very nutritious and ticking all the boxes) is the same as anything 'organic'. Science can only tell you what it knows today; there is so much we don't know. I stand by that for formula milk or anything else manufactured. Doesn't absolutely mean you won't thrive, be healthy, satisfied and nurished.

Can you make the ref. into a clickable link please? I'd like to read it but can't from a tablet.

Stories about personal experience are interesting but not scientific evidence.

IHaveSeenMyHat Tue 04-Feb-14 23:20:14
Paintyfingers Tue 04-Feb-14 23:44:10

I can't get through to the full text from that.

DingbatsFur Tue 04-Feb-14 23:48:42

How can it be better to feed your child on a manufactured product vs something natural made specifically for the baby by its mother's body?
It cannot.

exexpat Tue 04-Feb-14 23:50:53

Some of the latest research looking at breastfeeding and the development of beneficial bacteria in the digestive system is very interesting - eg "How breast milk engineers a baby's gut and gut microbes". Abnormal balances of gut bacteria have been linked to things like allergies and coeliac disease, as well as other immune-related problems.

Personally, I never really bought the breastfeeding/intelligence link, but the breastfeeding/good bacteria thing looks like it could explain quite a bit (together with overuse of antibiotics and dietary changes which affect the gut biome).

LittleBabyPigsus Tue 04-Feb-14 23:54:40

Mmmbacon I don't see what you being pro-breastfeeding has to do with anything. You're not a scientist so how can you possibly say that a scientific study is bollocks?

wiltingfast Tue 04-Feb-14 23:55:58

I do wish people would stop obsessing with this. Clearly the benefits aren't obvious enough to stop all the arguing. Just ensure your baby is fed! One way or the other.

IHaveSeenMyHat Tue 04-Feb-14 23:57:15

You can't get the ful text without either paying or via institutional access for university students, etc.

Scaredycat3000 Tue 04-Feb-14 23:58:09

Why does it all have to be about the DC, what about the benefits for the mother like lowering my risk of getting breast and ovarian cancer? Saving money must be important for a lot of people?

SamHamwidge Wed 05-Feb-14 00:04:58

Sorry but yawn

No disrespect to anyone on here but as far as the age old debate goes, just feed your kid what you want ffs

deliverdaniel Wed 05-Feb-14 00:14:15

Hi, unfortunately you can't read the whole study from that link without paying for it.

There have been other sibling studies including this one:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1361236/

which found basically the same thing- that when you look at outcomes within the same family all the 'benefits' of breastfeeding found in the wider scale population studies tend to disappear. Sibling studies are a much better study design that population studies for various reasons.

I say this as someone breastfeeding for the second time- it does seem crazy how heavily bf is pushed by the NHS etc, how much is spent on bf promotion, how much guilt is generated on the subject when the evidence of benefits is so incredibly limited and overstated.

AroundTheGlobe Wed 05-Feb-14 00:15:14

I am very pro breastfeeding

Good for you. So am I.

But not to the point I would try and make a mother feel shit for not doing it.

Some women physically can't. They are made to feel like they are a failure. I find that absolutely disgusting.

We make thousands of choices of parents. You have to do what is right for you and your child.

I genuinely couldn't give a flying fuck if a baby is bf or ff.

ISBN1966 Wed 05-Feb-14 07:13:35

Given that in the US and the UK only a tiny fraction of babies are exclusively breastfed for more than a few weeks I imagine what the study was actually comparing was this: a group of mainly mixed fed babies who received SOME breastmilk for a few weeks, with a group of fully formula fed siblings. Some studies include as 'breastfed' babies who were actually fully ff by the end of the first week out of hospital.

If the study was comparing exclusively breastfed babies who were breastfed for 4 months or more with fully ff babies, I'd pay more attention to it.

All that said, I'm more interested in this issue from a quality of life perspective for babies. I think all humans deserve fresh food. Babies included. Especially when it's their sole source of sustenance.

ISBN1966 Wed 05-Feb-14 07:19:46

Should add - all the studies conclude that breastfed babies as a group do better on a whole host of scores, it's just that there are disagreements as to whether it's the milk, or the parenting style which goes hand in hand with wanting to/doing breastfeeding that results in this.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now