To think breast fed babies are more intellegent

[thecatamongthepidgeons]

Because their parents tend to be more intellegent not because they were breast fed?
More intellegent parents are more likely to choose to breast feed regardless of any dificulties they face if they think it will benefit their children.

"so i will say right back at you. all those spouting the my baby was ff and has a IQ of 3000 and 'breastfeeding is inconsequential' you fuck off. that is from every baby who has suffered in hospital with various illnesses because they were formula fed. that is from every baby who was ever denied the bonding experience from breastfeeding by the society that failed their mother. that 'fuck off' is from the baby on the right"

Accompanied by a picture of a dead baby.

So in your eyes, your approach has been moderate and sensible because you only posted one rant accompanied by a photo of a dead baby?

Peoples' attitude towards you has very little to do with your beliefs and everything to do with your gung-ho, slightly hysterical at times, attitude. You are not engaging with the discussion - you are steamrollering right over the top of it with no thought for the other people involved.

Hobnob, Liggers, loving you too!

Shall I rugby tackle you now Kung, or would you like me to wait a little????

[holds hands up to be tackled]

Now can we talk about the babies who are hospitalised BECAUSE of breastfeeding? My DD1 being one of them?

"Sorry Spud, but did you bother your arse to follow the link that i posted in response to your request for evidence that bf has no effect on cognitive development? No? Typical"

Thank you for that link.

Shall we have a research 'shoot out'.

You find one study which proves that infant feeding choices have no impact on cognitive development, and I'll find one which says it does.

And we just keep going, until one of us gets board or runs out of references.

You seem to think that if there is one peer reviewed meta-analysis which refutes the idea of bf promoting cognitive development it must mean categorically that all later studies or meta-analysis are irrelevant or flawed.

Cory - can I suggest you read how the research into infant feeding is done so you understand what is controlled for and how?

"Oh, and I know I keep bringing this up, but ime of breastfeeding Scandinavian countries, mums that call themselves breastfeeding often do top up or bung in the odd supplementary bottle"

Err, they do here as well.

The majority of breastfed babies in the UK are mixed fed. If they get even one breastfeed a day they are counted in the statistics as being breastfed.

But research into health outcomes generally finds that exclusively breastfed babies have the best outcomes, which is why the issue of supplementation is raised in parent information on infant feeding.

"If you want to hear things that promote breastfeeding in a 'sensitive way to those who are struggling'"

Well - would you suggest to someone who was struggling emotionally with bf to join a lively thread about ff vs bf on AIBU to discuss or reflect on their difficulties? Of course you bloody wouldn't!

It's real love, I ain't being ironic. And my BF baby was hospitalised too....... So you are both in my gang now and worthy of your places at the shrine...

"Now can we talk about the babies who are hospitalised BECAUSE of breastfeeding? My DD1 being one of them?"

Happy to discuss. It's a scandal. So much breastfeeding mismanagement and poor postnatal care.

Actually my 28wk prem baby was hospitalised well after BF had been established... but from my posts earlier on this roundabouts that is already stated.

"You find one study which proves that infant feeding choices have no impact on cognitive development, and I'll find one which says it does.

And we just keep going, until one of us gets board or runs out of references."

Well that's pretty much what usually happens - with neither side willing to concede that we can't be sure, but more than willing to be gung-ho about it.

Hobnobs - Boosmummie has a lot of love to give!

Not true though spud - my dd is down as ff from 4 weeks in the 'statistics' but actually if one bf a day counts then she was bf to 8 weeks.
So actually because that isn't explained I'm sure lots of people are like me and assume bf means exclusive.

Ruby, you have stated on this thread that ff babies will get cancer BECAUSE of formula milk.

Not rational debate really dear.

Breastfed babies being hospitalised (often not always) because of poor/non existent breastfeeding support - babies not being fed using the proper technique.

Bottlefed babies being hospitalised (often not always) because of poor bottlefeeding support/refusal post natally to assist parents to learn how to make up a bottle safely - babies not being using the proper technique.

It cuts both ways but the hysteria tends to be directed at formula feeding mothers when it's a ff baby in hospital, and the medical establishment when it's a breastfed baby!

no i didnt i said that jack newman said they were 33% more likely to because they weren't breastfed

kungfupanda thats right i posted that, then apologised etc etc move on maybe?

'i love the way the 'fuck offs' always come out on threads like these and they are rarely, if ever, those trying to argue on the same side as every major medical organisation there is.'

and anyway you missed a bit.

Woweeee that means mine were bf for 6 weeks then!!!!!!!!!!

Ruby do you not see why most sane people prefer not to live in fear of the dubious collection of bf stats you and your fellow obsessives like to produce.

As the majority of babies in this country are apparently fed both I fail to see how you can attribute either one or the other to anything.My 3 must have been having 2 tbs tops by the end of their 6 weeks yet they seem to be in the hallowed bf baby group even though the vast maj of what they were eating was SMA and after 6 weeks was all they were eating.

Sooooo how many extra IQ points do they get exactly?

It's bonkers,you honestly want me to get in a state over something soooooooo unreliable and I have to say rather trivial????

milamae that is exactly the kind of irresponsible drivel that had me posting that picture in the first place, because it is not 'trivial' to so many mothers and babies.

What's in it for anyone to make up the benefits of breastfeeding?

Nobody makes any money out of breastfeeding (unlike formula). HCPs and midwives lives would be a great deal easier if they didn't have to provide so much support to Mums struggling to berastfeed, and could just throw a bottle of forumla at them instead.

I guess I just can't see in whose vested interest it is to overstate the benefits of breastfeeding.

And re the gastro thing surely you have to look at the "risks" of every single bottle out of the 1000s a baby consumes in a lifetime. If prepared correctly I say again any "risks" are miniscule.

An apology is only worthwhile if the person making it actually regrets their behaviour and moderates their future behaviour as a result. Otherwise you can just keep being offensive and apologising for it. There is nothing after your apology that suggests that it was anything more than lip service. A real, heartfelt apology would have led to a more balanced approach, not the bollocks-to-you-all tone you continued to take.

fgs again, it is not just preparation, it is the protection from potential pathogens that breastmilk provides!