I had a slightly awkward conversation with two friends at a baby group today. They have 5 children between them and are bottlefeeding their newborns. I have one child and am BF her at 8 months. They were talking about BF and essentially implying that I was naive and trying too hard. I don't tend to comment on people's feeding choices but what they were saying sounded factually wrong to me and so I said so. Can I just check one of their arguments. They say BF babies are more likely to get colic. Surely this is wrong I've even seen graphs saying the opposite on the back of bottles! Their view was based on an extensive study of 'lots of their friends' so apparently I must be wrong! Who's right?
If anyone is interested, the other reasons not to BF are:
- Breastfeeding doesn't make the child less likely to be ill (in the experience of 'lots of their friends') as the baby has its own immune system anyway. Plus a friend's baby got chicken pox whilst being bf (?! - did anyone claim that couldn't happen?)
- BF doesn't promote health because one of the mums I was talking to was BF as a baby and she is often more ill than the rest of her family who were bottlefed (she's in her mid 30s...)
- If you read the back of a formula packet you'll see that formula is essentially the same as breastmilk.
Apparently my views are wrong as I am inexperienced and once I am more experienced I will see that most 'research' on this is 'wrong' so anything I say is irrelevant anyway!