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?

The word 'frying' should be 'genuine' - bloody iPhone

MsKLo "I genuinely do not understand how some women can think it is not important to bf though"

I think most women are aware of the benefits but it's a choice.

How would you react to me? I bf all 3 of my kids exclusively for 5 mths and continued on for a year after this. Yet I put my dd3 to sleep on her front from 2 mths of age. Pretty contradictory huh?

It's all about risk assessment and lifestyle choices. Nothing is black and white.

I know mums who did the front sleep thing too because babie slept better etc

I just find the whole bf and choosing not to or not persevering if you can a bit confusing! I don't mean to be rude, i really do and I know a lot of women who do to but who are scared to say it!

Because it's bloody hard work that's why. And this is precisely the reason it brings out all these sanctamonious attitudes on MN.

It's very hard to be bf every 2 hrs day and night, to never go out on your own, to feel like your baby is your accessory and be so tired with the sheer energy depletion from your body. Then multiply it by the factor of how many kids you have.

It's not rocket science to realise that's not what most women want to do. But just because you are in the camp that chooses to do it - it doesn't make you a better mother. No one has the right to judge others for their choices. we are all different and have different stresses and priorities.

I didn't ever say I was a better mum and I know it's bloody hard work as it nearly did me in, especially with my first and the continuous mastitis, access and feeding every bloody twenty minutes so I know how bloody hard it is

This is the way I feel, I am just airing it and people can choose to do what they like but I will always be flummoxed why a women would choose not to bf if she could. At least I'm honest as I know a lot of women who think it.

And to say we don't judge choices people make Is so naive - just look through aibu! It's full of people looking at different choices!

whatever you say MsKLo.....[sigh]

Formula is not by prescription in Canada and never has been

Where are you getting your info from msklo?

Of course you don't have to defend your position lady

If you are happy that is up to you ! I was just saying what my thoughts were and of course we all have different opinions on the matter and on all kinds of things

Sorry breastfeeding is the cultural norm in Canada
My friend who lived there a while back told me the other info

to BF or not to BF; that is the question.....

[have a rusk]

OP, you are so rude. Can you drop that word please?

Specialist formula is already on prescription in the UK; regular formula is not (I have never heard of any country anywhere having regular formula on prescription - check your info MsKlo). I don't think peppa meant for formula not to be widely available for anyone to choose - in fact she explained she did not think that.

I suppose an argument could be made for a prescription to be given for babies who need formula on medical grounds, but all babies who are not breastfed need formula on medical grounds in order to survive!

I don't think the idea is a goer. What we should be arguing for and which I have argued for lots of times on these boards, is high quality, consistently low price, formula, readily available in shops, with no unethical marketing, and full information about contents and safe preparation.

Formula's price is highly inflated. It really does not need to be highly priced. But marketing is expensive and this elevates the price.

Canada bf stats:

"The proportion of mothers who attempt to breastfeed their babies rose from about 25% in the mid-1960s to 85% in 2003. However, just 17% of mothers breastfed exclusively for at least six months, as recommended by the Public Health Agency of Canada"
[http://www.statcan.gc.ca]

Those figures are rather higher than here.

i am canadian and i promise you that formula is on sale, for anyone who cares to buy it, without prescription

like here, you can probably be given a prescription for formula if your baby has some kind of intolerance to something in regular formulas.

:( :(

Why should mothers and babies pay a high price? They are paying for the unethical marketing.

nvdk - please link to references that show "for every study which shows some long term beneift there is another which shows little or none."

Would be interested to see these. Two or three would do. Or even one.

Thank you.

NVDK ?? I don't want an argument about whether women should breastfeed or not but the evidence is pretty conclusive really, not as you suggest.

[[http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK38337/ This}} is a fantastic review paper I know I keep posting but is very clear - lists where significant differences have been found and where not for developed countries alone.

An extract for example

We screened over 9,000 abstracts. Forty-three primary studies on infant health outcomes, 43 primary studies on maternal health outcomes, and 29 systematic reviews or meta-analyses that covered approximately 400 individual studies were included in this review. We found that a history of breastfeeding was associated with a reduction in the risk of acute otitis media, non-specific gastroenteritis, severe lower respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma (young children), obesity, type 1 and 2 diabetes, childhood leukemia, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and necrotizing enterocolitis

Obviously that is all about risk and definitives just challenging your claim that evidence is inconclusive

Oops sorry, here