to think that the formula companies are succeeding with their campaign to promote formula to be as good as breast milk...

[MissyKLo]

...when it isn't?

this article rang true in so many ways

www.analyticalarmadillo.co.uk/2010/10/how-breast-is-best-came-to-be.html

Breast milk is of course, full of amazing antibodies and nourishment etc that formula can never replicate - but the formula companies are winning in their campaign to make people believe that formula is as good as breast milk aren't they? A lot of people don't see bf as a big deal and that babies are 'perfectly fine' on formula. But what about all the benefits of breast milk and the fact that so many babies don't ever get these?

Breast milk cannot be beaten on so many levels so why are the formula companies allowed to get away with this?!!!!!!

Libra- but if you didnt want to/couldnt etc exactly how would somebody judging your reasons (or excuses as some arrogantly call them) going to help anybody? Is it only okay to be helpful and supportive to those who share the same parenting ideals as yourself and to hell with others- they just get dismissal/judgement/told they aren't putting their babies first?

Lol diablo! Where have I attacked ff mums? I think you'll find nowhere! All I've done is answer posts questioning the benefits of bf/risks of formula. If you choose to interpret that as an attack on ffers then that's your problem :)

Also, wannabe ( I think!) you are proving missy's op quite well if you think that bf actually makes very little difference in developed countries :)

Gemsy that is not my experience.

I was never dismissed/judged/told I wasn't putting my baby first.

TBH I have never in RL come across anyone who FF who was made to feel that way either.

As Mothers it is our choice to BF or FF and that is always respected, as there are a variety of reasons for our choices.

There are plenty of support groups that help Mothers who choose to FF, the concerns of those Mothers are held as high as those who BF.

I have not heard the statement anywhere Yawn. The formula feeding fascists strike again .

However, you did post Yawn. The breast feeding fascists strike again so who exactly, in that statement of yours, is being judged for their choice?

Rollit- I disagree that there is a constant theme that genuine bf problems are rare - I suppose it really depends on your definition of 'genuine'. If you mean physiological, as in completely unable to produce milk then yes, the incidence is very rare. However, many women feel that they aren't able to produce enough milk maybe due to problems with latch etc that can impact on supply or maybe because they interpret not feeling 'full' as not having enough milk or because the baby is on a growth spurt/cluster feeding etc. It is those type of problems that could be overcome with better support and knowledge and bf supporters are only too aware of them - they are a very real problem but that doesn't mean that they can't be overcome whereas the physiological problems clearly can not.

Also, no one says that bm guarantees anything - this is just a misinterpretation that crops up frequently on these types of threads. The studies show that ff babies are at increased risk of certain illnesses etc. This does not mean that ALL ff babies will get those illnesses or no bf babies will ever get them. It just means that based on studies at population level, when other factors such as diet, lifestyle etc are taken into consideration, babies who are ff are more likely to have those illnesses... I don't know how many times this has been said on this thread and others!

I don't think "making women feel guilty" is an excuse not to educate people. SO YANBU. I think hiding medical truths from people so as not to upset them is patronising and unethical.

My baby is 5 weeks old and it broke my heart not being able to exclusivly breast feed. I give her in total probably about 20% of her milk intake.

This was due to many factors that lead to a massive dip in my milk supply. I feel bad but am going to continue as I know even the small amount I give her helps and is full of antibodies.

Hiding medical truths is patronising...but so is assuming all women are silly bints who just follow the FF manufacturers like sheep.

Most women are bright enough to understand the risks/benefits of types feeding.
Most women have their children's best interests at heart.
Most women put their DC as top priority in their lives.
Most women have access to free health care and are thus made well aware that breast is best.

The reality is that the vast majority of women make a choice to either FF from the start or very soon after birth.

Energy would in my view be far better spent supporting women who choose to BF.

Rather than patronising everyone else.

Crikey, who needs the patriarchy when it is assumed woman are so stupid.

"the vast majority of women make a choice to either FF from the start or very soon after birth."

Actually, according to the Infant Feeding Survey 2005 73% women who stopped breastfeeding would like to have breastfed for longer.

Then we need to ask why.

I suspect the answer will never be...I saw a Cow and Gate poster and felt obliged to stop.

Felt obliged - no. Felt like there was no point in continuing because sure there isn't much difference anyway - perhaps. Although I would say that a lot of it initially has to do with lack of support but I think people feeling 'oh well, sure formula is just as good anyway' obviously would influence people's decision about whether or not to persevere.

I suspect it had everything to do with support and circumstance.

Women finding it hard.
Women in pain.
Women going back to work.
Women exhausted.
Women having to juggle the rest of their family/school runs/ small children/elderly parents.
Women finding it utterly inconvenient.

And at that point those women probably weighed up the benefits of BF (which we all know from our health professionals) versus those other factors.

Women are not stupid.
They just have to make practical choices for their lives.

no one but no one tries to make bf mums feel bad about their choices.

Really?
Dr's, mw's and hv's are constantly undermining bfing and encouraging mothers to move onto ff.
No-one would bat an eyelid to see a baby drinking from a bottle in a public place, but feed from a breast and you get raised eyebrows, sniggers and downright looks of disgust.
Right now in the breastfeeding topic is a mother trying to bf against the odds, as her family keep taking the baby away to feed it formula.

OP - YANBU. You didn't set this out to be a bf vs ff debate, you commented on the marketing.
When my mil had her babies, they were not allowed to bf. The babies were taken away shortly after birth and brought back to their mothers every 3 hours with a bottle.
Formula marketeers designed hospitals to keep mothers and babies separate, to encourage ff.
I had my Ds 6 weeks ago. In hospital at the same time was a lady who wanted to bf. She did really well, but every time she had visitors, they spent the whole time ridiculing her for "getting her baps out" Her mother brought her in bottles, so she could "give up this feeding nonsense". With attitudes like this, it's no bloody wonder more mothers ff.

(I haven't read all of this yet btw, in case all this has been said!)

idon't think formula companies should be allowed to advertise at all.

goverment please ban it

rollit - I agree that there are also studies showing BF has no effect on obesity and even a few which suggest things are the other way around.

I think the problem is getting amplified because these messages are not being disseminated in full. It only seems to be fairly recently that study findings are seen so commonly in the news and read by those with little or no scientific background. Therefore the studies get cherry picked, or elements of them skewed giving an incorrect picture. Certainly it seems much more common for mums to go out and look for scientific evidence now than it would have been even 10 years ago.

The allergies and BF one is difficult ground. Unless the study controls for genetic risk then it is pretty meaningless because lots of mums with high levels of allergies themselves breastfeed for longer to try and reduce the genetic disposition for their baby - therefore comparing them to FF is difficult because that group is often at lower genetic risk.

I agree though - we seem to have got to a point where we have to publicise scientific benefits of breastfeeding when it should just be seen as normal. The fact that it was made for the baby and has obviously been around forever is strong enough reason in itself.

However, you did post Yawn. The breast feeding fascists strike again so who exactly, in that statement of yours, is being judged for their choice?

Actually Libra I never posted that- please dont misquote me to try and prove a point.

Good post and points Roll.I find it particularly interesting as my father comes from a huge long line of long term bfs in a family with a lot of food intolerences,excema etc.My mothers side were all ff and interestingly it's completely the reverse.

Peppa sorry you're talking cobblers re obesity.It's soooooo much easier to regulate portion control when ff,you know exactly what they're getting and it's very easy to stick to the latest advice re portion size.It's not rocket science and it's not difficult.

Re taste sorry but weaning at 6 months onto a wide and varied diet sorts that out which again is incredibly easy to do and not rocket science. Childrens eating patterns are a looooong process which you have to work hard at for many years and embrace as a family. I know you'd like to believe that bf gives you instant broccoli eating,slim kids but sadly that isn't the case.Bf is so insignificant I fail to see how it's even worth a mention on this matter.

My maternal uncle is a medical scientist researching into obesity and diabetes in North America,we've had conversations on this issue. Never once has he mentioned bf/formula neither even being worth a mention,he has however mentioned the extremely sedentary lifestyle in the US which is now over here,the huuuuuge portion sizes,the over use of fat and his pet hate- the over use of fructose.

I come from a long line of maternal ff,my mother was strict re healthy food,portion size and crap.I feed my kids exactly the same way I was raised,it's how I was taught to feed a family. We're all extremely good sizes,always have been in fab health. We're also very adventurous re food,I was weaned on far East street markets living abroad as we were,my mother is an amazing cook.We love interesting healthy food(and the occasional not so healthy).Bf would have made no difference but my mothers upbringing re food made all the difference.

Now re me being defensive and angry re ff,I would still like to know why I'm being accused of this,anybody care to enlighten me?????I find it very patronising and rude.

I have 3 very bright,very healthy children with no food allergies,intollerences or health issues.All 3 were mixed fed for 6 weeks then ff completely,formula saved 2 of their lives. I thrived on formula as did my mother,sister etc. We're all degree highly educated,fab sizes, fantastic health,extremely low bp with extremely slim children. Please do tell, why do I need to be defensive re my use of formula?

'Bf is so insignificant'

for many many babies, it is not insignificant. to flippantly say that is not only irresponsible but so obviously vindicates your decision. you insist on bringing up your 'bright, very healthy children with no food allergies' yadda yadda yadda as if it some kind of proof that ff is the way to go and it matters not which choice you make. but to many babies out there, it matters. it matters alot. and to suggest otherwise in such a stubborn and polarised fashion shows you up as a bit of a fool IMVHO. and you ask about why you need to be defensive - er, no one said you need to be, but you are!

You are not wrong that healthy eating and exercise can to so much good. But you are wrong that breastfeeding can't do so much good. FGS it is a LIVING bodily fluid. children who are breastfed are more likely to find a kidney match in their mother if god forbid they ever need one.

i'd also like to apologise for bringing the term 'bf nazi' into this debate. very poor form. sorry.

And be grateful you don't live in a place where there are natural disasters for example hurricanes, flooding and monsoons etc because in those instances, it can be life or death for your baby whether you are breastfeeding or not.

tbh all of this to me is common sense. breastfeeding is the normal, protective way for a mother to feed her baby.

Milimae - I am not talking coblers . One of the reaosns why FF can have more appetite problems is precisely because you are controlling what they have rather than letting them learn to regulate their own appetite - using internal signals of fullness.

There are many studies that show BF babies as a group are more likely to take a wider range of tastes when weaned compared to FF. AS A GROUP not individual babies.

I wouldn't 'like to believe' that BF will solve all eating and weight patterns for life. However it gives a statistically better start based on the scientific literature.

Your argument that you and your family are fine because you are FF is meaningless really. Of course you are likely to be fine - we are talking about risk ratios not an automatic assumption.

"It's soooooo much easier to regulate portion control when ff,you know exactly what they're getting and it's very easy to stick to the latest advice re portion size."

You don't need to do this with bf because they regulate their own intake and they don't overeat.

How can you calculate portion size for each baby anyway? Some children eat more than others - you are just guessing that it is how much they want.

Your posts re ff do come across as very defensive - you keep arguing points that aren't being made (that bf guarantees protection) or producing anecdotes as proof that all the research about bf isn't true or stating that the differences are insignificant. (which just proves the OPs original point) Of course people are going to come along and correct you and then you dismiss any evidence put in front of you and continue to argue the same points. I remember you from the thread last week and the fact that you are here again spouting the same things - it's pretty obvious that no matter what anyone says you are going to argue with them.

Oh come on Bubbly I'm very pro BF, but we've all seen fat BF babies and toddlers.

I wonder actually if propensity to being fat isnt a. genetic and b. based as Leonie pointed out on type of diet as opposed to portion.

I also wonder whether exercise doesn't have much more to do with it then we recognise.
My DC are into sport at a fairly high level...all their peers are like bean poles.
However they were fed as babies, whatever they eat now (some are healthy, some can be found chugging away on glucose drinks)they are all skinny.

I guess it's just calories in versus calories burned.

You can get off your soap box re the 3rd world we're discussing babies in this country we all know that 3rd world babies don't have decent sterilising facilities.

I disagree re "many babies".In this country we're talking about miniscule numbers which is exactly why many of us take issue with the scare mongering.

If you prepare formula safely and provide a healthy lifestyle and stimulation very few babies will have negative effects from formula, sorry but bf is not something that needs obsessing over.No more than any other parenting ideal eg no sweets,screentime etc.

Many of us take issue with the huuuuuge inflated statements linking to flimsy studies,the incorrect doom laden assumptions,the lack of perspection that many pro bf like to hurl into a conversation.

Why exactly do you have the need to do it?

One wonders if there are other areas of your parenting you don't feel so confident about so like to trumpet about the bf benefits you've provided.If you like we could pull apart areas of your parenting you don't fulfill the ideal.You know like maybe not providing adequate hours of sleep,not ensuring 5 a day are eaten,too much fat,not enough exercise,too much screen time,not enough reading etc.We could hurl doom laden statements,massage stats,might liven the subject a tad?????

'perspective'

bubbly I suppose what I'm saying is I'm more convinced that the increase in obesity is linked with the introduction of food stuffs like corn syrup as Leonie points out.

And the reduction in day to day exercise.

I'm not saying the increase in FF has had no impact on obesity levels, just that it seems more likely that the other factors have more importance.