Talk

Advanced search

Am I that 2%?

(33 Posts)
HoppityBunny Mon 17-Aug-09 15:35:02

I have exclusively bf all my babies for 6 mths. Is it really as low as 2% for those that do?

It cant be that low
god I hope not thats is sad

I was thinking you were going to say you feed all your kids tll they were 2 and that was the 2%

alexpolismum Mon 17-Aug-09 15:39:03

Where did you get the 2% reference from?

HoppityBunny Mon 17-Aug-09 15:41:02

That's what I am thinking, it can't be that low??! makes me feel odd.

HoppityBunny Mon 17-Aug-09 15:43:26

"Go on, help them get to 10,000!"

From here bfg manifesto thread!

FioFioFio Mon 17-Aug-09 15:45:49

there are some statistics here It does seem as though it would be hard to ascertain actual definate statistics though

muffle Mon 17-Aug-09 16:13:48

That doesn't surprise me if you count any weaning at all strictly before 6 months. I was a devoted BFer and BF DS for well over 6 months - however he did start on the banana and avocado a little before 6 months because he was desperate to eat - grabbing food out of my hand etc. I think the 6 months is a guideline and some babies are ready earlier - not 3 months, not 4 months but a little earlier - so what I consider to be a good BF run and a healthy baby would not make the statistic.

Oh and DS was given a little formula in hospital when I was out cold, so he wouldn't make the 2% anyway. That statistic doesn't necessarily reflect the general level of people doing quite well at breastfeeding - though agree of course it's not what it should be.

Caro1302 Mon 17-Aug-09 19:57:05

In my NCT group of 5 none of us ebf for 6 months. 2% does seem very low though.

iwantitnow Mon 17-Aug-09 20:14:34

thought it was 1%

Ineedsomesleep Mon 17-Aug-09 20:19:00

I wanted to get to 6 months with DD, but at 23 weeks she stole and ate a ham sandwich.

Naughty baby messing up the statistics!

spiderlight Mon 17-Aug-09 21:52:55

I can well believe the stats. I ebf for 6 months and my health visitor told me in all serious that I was her first ever mum to have done so. She did start pushing weaning leaflets at me at three months, thoug :/

iwantitnow Mon 17-Aug-09 22:12:18

My DS ate a rice cake at 22 weeks this week. No gold star for us. Did manage him not eat his sister hula hoops and sausage though.

kaphc Mon 17-Aug-09 22:15:32

I ebf for 6 months too for DD2, but like others, weaning started when she sat on my knee while I was eating dinner and grabbed some pasta from my bowl and wolfed it!

TheProvincialLady Mon 17-Aug-09 22:18:51

Same here, DS2 grabbed and wolfed down his brother's chip at 5mblush

GruffaloMama Mon 17-Aug-09 23:20:41

According to the Infant Feeding Survey in 2005, a 'negligible' number, less than 1 percent, of babies are EBF by 6 months. Only 25 percent of babies are breastfed at all at 6 months. Most worrying to me (more so than the fact that by 6 months many babies start grabbing grub) is the 90 percent of women who give up bf (in the first 6 months) who wish they could have fed for longer.

llareggub Mon 17-Aug-09 23:26:26

I ended up mix feeding DS1 due to concerns about his weight and bad advice from HV.

DS2 is 15 weeks and EBF and hasn't been near a HV since he was 4 weeks. I don wonder if that made the difference!

Still, I'm not surprised. Many women can't afford to stay off work for long so stop breastfeeding in order to ensure that the baby can take a bottle of formula so they can go back to work. Or they get hassle from family members, and give in. Or they just never considered breastfeeding in the first place. Obviously I'm not quoting from any official research, just ancedotal evidence from friends and acquaintances.

AnathemaDevice Tue 18-Aug-09 07:48:19

I thought it was 4%. Still worryingly low though.
DS is 19 weeks and not really showing much of an interest in food yet, even when a friends DD tried feeding him a ham sandwich a couple of weeks ago. (I was very impressed by her learnning to share at such an early age smile) We should be joining you in the 2% club soon!
Maybe I'm very lucky, but I've found BF to be the easiest part of parenting so far, and I'm quite happy to continue for as long as DS wants to.

peppapighastakenovermylife Tue 18-Aug-09 08:29:47

I think it has reached the dizzying heights of around 3 % now. The IFS was negligible in 2005 so it shows things are changing very slowly.

I cant remember the exact statistics from the IFS but I think its something like only 48% of babies are exclusively breastfed by one week old! Bearing in mind that only 48% of babies are having any breastmilk at all by 6 weeks old.

There is a section to the IFS about introducing solids which is interesting reading.

mathshoneybunny27 Tue 18-Aug-09 08:48:48

I find the 'ebf' statistic idea a difficult one anyway - we should be measuring how many babies are having some breastmilk at 6 months as opposed to anything else, surely? Does it matter of they have a bottle of formula in hospital, or are mix-fed, or have a rice cake...or are weaned before 6 months? We should just be encouraging mums to bf alngside whatever else makes them and their LO happy....

scarletlilybug Tue 18-Aug-09 08:59:28

I think the point is that only 2% of babies are exclusively breastfed for 6 months as per the WHO guidelines. Evidence suggests that 6 months ebf is likely to have the beast health outcome for babies - yet this is astonishingly rare for babies in the UK.

Sure, some breastmilk is better than none... but just breastmilk for the first 6 months is even better.

Still, given the conflicting and often poor advice given by many HCPs regarding breastfeeding and weaning, can't say the figures surprise me.

lilymolly Tue 18-Aug-09 09:04:17

Do I not count as I a foolishly gave my ds 2 teaspoons of baby rice on saturday, as I was fed up with the constant night wakings (it made naff all difference) I have not given him anything since then.

He is 20 weeks and I plan now to EBF until he is 26 weeks, but does that 2 teaspoons really count hmm I am sure we could keep it quiet amongst ourselves smile

octopusinabox Tue 18-Aug-09 12:23:05

It doesn't really suprise me as there does seem to be pockets of higher instances of exclusive breastfeeding so I do wonder how the stats are done. I gave my baby about 3 bottle of formula in the first couple of months so I wouldn't count despite breastfeeding exclusively apart from that for at least 6 months for 2 babies. THe stats makes the situation look worse than it really is I suspect. That 90% figure though is quite depressing.

Ineedsomesleep Tue 18-Aug-09 20:19:03

It really makes me wonder how other coutries, like Norway and Brazil can get it so right and we can get it so wrong.

I've heard women say that they have never thought of bfing "if it (formula) wasn't as good, they wouldn't sell it would they".

I suppose that is what happens when you let multinational companies educate women on how to feed their babies.

AcademicMum Tue 18-Aug-09 20:35:22

I think there are probably several things that help bf rates in Norway, first is that it is much more normal over there, second is that they have as standard much longer maternity leave and better job security (making it easier to stay home and feed for that bit longer) and thirdly they are much less hung up about their bodies, which probably helps enormously.

Ineedsomesleep Wed 19-Aug-09 08:11:18

You make Norway sound fab, but Brazil doesn't have those things and bfing is the norm there too. Just wondering how we fail to make it the norm, when other countries have done so successfully.

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