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.

Bubbly 50% of 1% in any study is minimal risk-sorry.

That is just one illness (diarrhoea) there are many others and they all add up. They may mean very little to you but I bet if it was your child in hospital you would think it was important. They are unnecessary hospitalisations of children that could be prevented.

Still waiting on the study that shows that ff reduces the risk of those illnesses btw - are you having trouble dear?

TBH I just think you argue for the sake of arguing because your posts really don't say very much. :)

On that thought Milamae if you think that 0.5% is minimal risk why do you bother vaccinating against measles - I mean that only has a fatality risk of 1 in 5-10,000 (0.01-0.02%) - absolutely miniscule by your reasoning :)

bubbleymummy - of course formula doesn't reduce the risks of these diseases. Bf does reduce the risk by small percentages (and you are right even small percentages are not inconsequential).
Where I think you are overstating the case is when you say that not using formula could prevent these illnesses or that these are unnecessary hospitalisations.
With each individual child you will never know whether it was because s/he was ff not bf that the illness occurred. You will never know for sure that if s/he had been bf s/he wouldn't have been ill.
So, at a population level, yes, reduced risk, on an individual basis, impossible to say.

Well, in my hospital, I went to an open day before having my DS, and the midwives there talked to us about breastfeeding. They told us that they had had approx 500 cases of hospital admission for gastroenteritis in newborns the previous year, the majority of which were FF.

In any case, I truly feel for anyone who wanted to BF but wasn't able to due to lack of support in the crucial hours & days after birth. I know that had I not stayed in hospital after having my DS there is no way I would have been able to BF. He did not latch but I had fantastic support 24/7 for 3 days after his birth, I was told what to do to ensure he was fed (through expressing and syringe feeding), and given loads of help until he did finally latch on 3 days post birth. Had I gone straight home, as many new mums do, I would have struggled hugely, wouldn't have got the help that I did, my milk supply would have dropped, I would have worried he wasn't getting any milk, and I would have faced many of the issues that so many mums who have had to resort to formula.

Breastfeeding isn't easy, we are not educated properly before the birth - we all think it will happen naturally and for many new mums it doesn't, and it's a huge shock to the system when it doesn't and you are feeling fragile anyway.

Problems with supply & pain are more often than not due to not doing it properly in the first place, as the baby needs to empty the breast efficiently for you to produce enough milk. By the time your supply has dropped, or you are experiencing pain and bleeding nipples etc, it is often too late and too much effort and pain for new mums to go through to get through it and make it work. That is why women need educating on how to enable themselves to BF and make it work for them - by ensuring they know what to do in those first hours and days, as this it is so important to get it right in those early days to make BF successful.

Too many people think that the minute there are any problems, the answer is to give a bottle. I don't think that anyone who FF has done anything wrong, but I believe it is important to educate women, and make them feel they can do it, and that if they want to do it, they must know to get help immediately so that they don't feel they have to turn to formula if it isn't something deep down that they want to do.

There are a lot of defensive people on this thread, but trying to ignore the facts that BF is best, and trying to argue that FF is as good, is doing nothing to help the cause of BF and improving the health of our babies.

Improved intelligence may be an added benefit to BFing if it is true, but the main reason for BF should be the health and wellbeing of babies and giving them the best start possible, and we should all be supported in doing this if it is what we want.

rollittherecollette so what reason to HCPs have to promote it so much then? What's in it for them?

meant to write: what reason do HCPs have to promote it so much then?

A perfect example rollit - breast is not 'probably a bit better'

I think that the HCPs/midwives etc are promoting it so heavily because it is the party line. Lots of government policies work like this. You don't get funding if you 'don't agree' with climate change in that field. I guess if you're investigating infant feeding or applying to be a HCP supporting bf is a minimal requirement.

About 5 years ago it was estimated that promoting bf and taking formula bottles out of hospitals could save the NHS £1m a year.

I'm not pushing this view in any way - the reason the government have this as the party line is because whether it is 'a bit' or 'a lot' breastmilk does have advantages.

There are however other things at work which I believe go partly to explain the lack of support around bf. The saving wouldn't be there if more support was put in place...

But pomme - that money is being spent because of sick children. Even if the money itself isn't saved (because it is used to put support in place) at least there are fewer sick babies - surely that is the point. I think sometimes we can get caught up with the figures and forget that every one is somebody's baby. Most women WANT to bf - they are being let down.

that is interesting pommedeterre, although seeing as the NHS budget is approx £100 Billion, that does seem a rather tiny cost saving, compared to the amount of effort & cost that goes into promoting it.

and bubbleymummy is right - most people do actually want to BF. Th majority of people on this thread have said they wanted to. Most people do want what is best for their children don't they?

There is no new evidence that says formula is better though is there? I am sure that the formula companies are spending £££ on trying to find evidence that it is!

No, no-one is harming their baby by giving them formula - it is completely understandable why women use it.

But if you want to BF you should be given support to do so - as it is best for baby, and actually BF could work for so many more women if they were educated enough about it. Surely that is what we should be doing - not pushing formula the minute someone has problems, but educating them before it gets to that point.

I FF both of mine due to physical issues that are the business of no one else. However, my veiws are:

Breast feeding is best, it provides the essential added extras that Formula can't hope to. It is the way nature intended us to feed our babies.

Formula is not poison. It is an alternative. A safe alternative. FF our babies does not make us unnatural, unworthy or unfit mothers.

There have been many stats, facts, research and studies shown on this thread though I am yet to see anything conclusive anything absolute anything unshakeable fact. To any new mothers, mothers to be etc this is as dangerous as noninformation.

With regards to the troll OP, perserverence against all odds to breast feed does not signify a more intelligent parent. To persevere when your baby is miserable, hungry and dehydrated does not make a more intelligent parent. To persevere with BF against all difficulties purely because you may be providing your child with 6 extra IQ points is tantamount to insanity.

Intelligence is when you take all advice and suggestions thrown your way and should you still have a hungry, unhappy baby then stop. Fill it's stomach with the next best thing and begin to enjoy your child and enjoy motherhood safe in the knowledge that a least your child is well fed.

That was the OP and anything else on this thread is an excuse for a fight.

Bubbly a baby is more at risk every time you put it in a car yet we're not expected to get hysterical about it.

I'd also like to know the stats of bf babies hospitalised through de-hydration.My dd's consultant said their SCBU was inundated with it. By your logic said stats shouldn't be used to put the fear of god into bfing mothers against exclusive bf in the early days.

Parenting involves taking tiny risks every single day.Bf is but one of these.

I agree with how Roll sums it up -"it's a little bit better" but so are plenty of other things.

This article sums it up perfectly:-

www.women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article6718276.ece

Tsc - so are we supposed to lie and say formula is 'just as good' at the risk of offending someone who didn't manage to bf? No one is intending to upset someone who couldn't bf - most of us agree that support it woefully lacking and that many of those mums could have bf if they had proper advice and support. That's what we should be upset about - mums and babies who have been let down by lack of resources not because they tried to do what was best!

rollittherecollett I am happy to be proved wrong - I think that should be the purpose of debate, not maintaining unswerving opinion regardless of what facts are presented. I like to hear different people's opinions on the matter - especially when they speak sense such as FoofffyShmoofffer

I am happy with my choice to BF, and am very happy to have been given the support that enabled me to do so, as from what I believe, overall it is the best thing for babies. Hopefully, we all do what we think is best for our babies at any given time, and it is a balancing act.

Oh milamae - here you go with your comparisons again - we aren't talking about car safety

I don't see anyone getting hysterical about bf either tbh.

I'm not surprised that you think 'bf is just a bit better' because we've heard you say it often enough and no matter what anyone says or how many studies they show you you are never going to believe them because you don't like to think that your babies didn't have 'the best'.

"Strongly object to the benefits of bf/risks of ff being continually overstated by people on these threads".

Sorry - but it's just your opinion that the risks are being 'overstated'.

Nobody has said or implied that a ff child is 'likely' or 'will' become ill.

What has been said is that ff is linked with higher rates of illness. This is not an overstatement. This is true!

"There have been many stats, facts, research and studies shown on this thread though I am yet to see anything conclusive anything absolute anything unshakeable fact"

No - and you're not going to find it - in relation to infant feeding, drinking in pregnancy, diet in pregnancy, use of pain relief in labour, or diet in childhood. Health research doesn't work that way. Doesn't mean studies into health outcomes generally are 'non information' and not worthy of any attention.

Parents still need to know what is understood about these issues based on current evidence, so they can try to make an informed decision. All health professionals have a responsibility to do is to make sure parents have access to the best quality, peer reviewed evidence on these issues, and provide help understanding what it means and the possible implications for their clients. And by the way, many of the studies being rubbished and derided as 'scaremongering' on this thread ARE good quality, ARE peer reviewed, and actually form the basis for current advice to parents disseminated through the NHS and other large health bodies.

And would want to make a point that formula feeding should't be seen as the 'default mode'. The switch to widespread formula feeding of babies has been the single fastest and most radical change in the history of human nutrition. And it happened in a very ad hoc and uncontrolled way, and was driven (as it still is) largely by commercial interests.

Where are all the good quality, independent trials showing that formula isn't associated with poorer health in babies and children? Why are we still focusing on breastfeeding instead of asking questions about the efficacy of this radical (in terms of human history) new form of infant nutrition?

And Foofffy - most women stop breastfeeding without getting ANY sort of proper help.

Those women who do overcome difficulties (and there are many) generally do so with persistence and with good help.

If I'd followed your advice and given up with my first both my daughter and I would have missed out on 18 months of breastfeeding. The answer to serious problems with breastfeeding doesn't always (or usually) have to be 'stop breastfeeding' any more than problems with your legs should receive the immediate response of 'stop walking', particularly if this advice is handed out without any sort of expert medical assessment or treatment.

Bubbley- Formula isn't just as good. It's foolish to say otherwise. However, it's not poison. It's just the next best thing. How do you suggest Ledkr should have fed her last 2 children otherwise?

The thing that gets me is that the militant pro breastfeeders on this thread couldn't two shits who they offend in their pursuit educating the ignorant.

"so are we supposed to lie and say formula is 'just as good' at the risk of offending someone who didn't manage to bf? No one is intending to upset someone who couldn't bf "

Who is saying lie? The intent to offend may not be there but those who are, appear to be collateral damage in the pursuit of being right.

As I said earlier, a cursory nod and a flimsy apology is all that anyone is affording the offended and then... onwards you all plough regardless.

If, in fact, there were good, peer reviewed, 'independent trials showing that formula isn't associated with poorer health in babies and children' the formula companies would make these part of there advertising campaign. As I have said on a thread before, these companies would be shouting it from the roof tops! But they are not. Because there aren't.

'Why are we still focusing on breastfeeding instead of asking questions about the efficacy of this radical (in terms of human history) new form of infant nutrition?' Good question. I think we are starting to. There is more and more about breastfeeding being the normal way to feed a baby and ffing being risky rather than breast is best and formula is fine**.

**Obviously, formula is absolutely fine for lots of babies out there who suffer absolutely no adverse affects throughout their entire lives. Some/Quite a few? babies are not so lucky. And some people on this thread are in danger of either forgetting this fact or completely ignoring it. Which is a shame.