to think that cunting Cow and Gate with their 'clever' marketing about babies 'needing iron' and funding 'research' have fucked up the last 10 years of improving and supporting breastfeeding?

[AtYourCervix]

1. 3 of the authors of that 'research' are funded by formula milk or baby food companies.

1. physiological third stage anyone?

wannabe, i couldn't agree more.

Did cow and gate announce "breastfeeding is bad"?

BoF i've held it in until i actually read and disected the article in question take a note there Nancy75)

The actual report only commented on weaning age. I saw no mention of ff vs bf. My dd is nearly 7. I started on baby rice at about 4.5 months. I had never seen MN or heard of BLW at that point. I was going on what was in the books/HV info i had at the time. I DID have an Annabel Karmel book......I never cooked any of those recipes ever.

pretty much but in different words hoover.

AtYourCervix- Thanks for the Unicef link. Explains it all really clearly.

In a press release from c &g?

AtYourCervix - thanks for linking to unicef's response. It was very reassuring to read a rational, reasoned and well researched response to all the hype. :)

via the BMJ.

and maybe i would have served better by leaving out my personal rant and just sharing that one

i shall do that. apologis for rant.

How is this linked to third stage? Genuine question.

but who cares?

Unless you have a baby that is under the age of six months really what does it matter what other people think or how they choose (yes, it is a choice) to feed their babies or what advice they take on board and what advice they choose to ignore.

Because really, once you're past the age of giving milk how you were fed as a baby really isn't important. No, it isn't. And your baby won't care, your baby isn't going to be a different human being because he/she was breastfed or because he/she supped the delights of SMA or Aptimal or whatever other formula you chose.

Seriously the whole thing is just overrated.

Nooooooooooo more

Third stage is normally managed with early cord clamping and injection of oxytocin to minimise the risk of PPH.

However this means that the baby gets up to 33% less blood via the placenta and cord than would naturally.

This extra blood carries with it enough iron stores to see the baby through the milk feeding stage untill weaning at around 6 months.

The headline in today's Times was "Babies need solid food, not just BREASTmilk". Surely it should have said not just MILK. The research was about whether they need solids before six months, not over which type of milk. It takes until page 8 of the newspaper before making clear that exclusively FF babies would be no better off for iron etc.

The leapis to assume that all women who might wean earlier due to this will do so with commercial products.That isnt the case.

sorry usual. i'll shut up now. it's painful and been done to death, i know.

Daily Express headline "Mother's milk 'may do more harm than good'". This stuff sticks in people's heads. It's abysmal.

YANBU.

I'm not here to bash FF at all.

I got because the media has reported this like I'm going to make my baby iron deficient. And I do blame the formula companies for that.

Exactly choccyp1g - I'd of though bf fans would have been pleased at fact ff was not mentioned once.

YABU.

Here, have one of these - maybe share it with your baybee?

its Friday night ,chill

good piece here about the whole thing

I just don't get why everyone is so het up about the reporting. Anyone with a GENUINE interest in health would look past these headlines and get the real facts and figures behind the headlines.

peppapig this is from Cervix's link

Iron deficiency anaemia
IDA is strongly influenced by iron stores at birth (which is related to the mother?s iron
status and length of gestation) and early cord cutting (which is still common and can
reduce iron stores by up to 33%)