Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

'bf babies more intelligent' thread II

162 replies

bubbleymummy · 17/03/2011 19:55

Ok, the original thread actually said that bf babies were more intelligent not because of bm but because their mum's were more intelligent...thread was killed by obsessive spamming from one idiot MNer and I would have been happy to let it die except that I clicked on a link on another thread and then came across this article which says that bf for even 4 weeks can have "?significant? effect on a child?s development in primary and secondary school".

Thought it might be an interesting way to reopen the debate given that many posters were saying there was lack of evidence for any intellectual benefits of bf.

OP posts:
bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 08:52

I don't need reassurance about my children's iq. That is not why i decided to bf - just an added bonus :)In any case, this study doesn't have anything to do with iq.

OP posts:
bonkers20 · 18/03/2011 08:55

TSC "and bonkers,you don't know either. it can't be proven so wtf is the point of mentioning it."

I mention it because there IS quite a lot of data supporting the fact that BF children have higher IQ
(statistically, in general...you know what I mean).

There is none (as far as I know) suggesting FF increases IQ.

I think it's rather ignorant of Milamae to completely dismiss all the research based on his/her anecdotal evidence.

tulipgrower · 18/03/2011 08:58

I think the most notable piece of information in the article is the fact that Britian has such a low BF rate. And as 'endless Government campaigns' haven't worked, there must be other circustances which prevent women breast feeding, like support, established attitudes in families/society, work pressures, physically crapper norks than the average Swedish lady Wink, ...

I think links between diet and behaviour have been proven, so I guess the tiny differences between formula and breast milk could make a tiny difference to brain chemistry too. (For examples: www.foodforthebrain.org, www.fabresearch.org )

hallamoo · 18/03/2011 09:06

Surely it's all about balancing risk. It's like people who smoke, they are not all going to die from lung cancer, some will live to a ripe old age and someone who's never smoked may die of lung cancer. It's means that if you smoke your risk is higher.

That's my intepretation of the study.

Also, for those people who think that those who are evangelical about bf are pious, boasting, or judgemental, I'd like to point you in the direction of this link to the 'analytical armadillo', which I think explains really well why people feel so passionately about what they believe in.

www.analyticalarmadillo.co.uk/2010/11/activism-isnt-about-being-better-than.html

TheSecondComing · 18/03/2011 09:15

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 09:26

Well I don't think anyone is going to choose to bf solely on the basis of this study because they want to increase their child's intelligence. I actually thought some people who had to give up bf for whatever reason would just like it affirmed that every feed they gave made a difference.

I agree that the UK's figures for bf are quite depressing - moreso because of the drop off rates. It's so promising that so many woman are initiating bf but clearly something is going wrong if the figures drop so quickly after just one week!

OP posts:
AlpinePony · 18/03/2011 09:30

Hallamoo - just because because someone writes a post on a blog saying "it's not about being superior" doesn't make it true.

Just like each and every "scientific report" thrown around wrt this issue. ALL data is anecdotal until children are raised in laboratories to prove otherwise.

If my son gets in to Oxbridge it'll have nothing to do with my tits. (Unless I attend the interview with him wearing Vivian Westwood.)

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 09:34

AP no one is saying that bm is the ONLY factor affecting intelligence.

OP posts:
StayingDavidTennantsGirl · 18/03/2011 09:42

Why is this no longer about IQ points? I thought the whole argument from the other thread was that there was a study proving that breastfeeding raised a baby's IQ by up to 6 points.

For me, what is needed here is balance. Yes, breastmilk is the best option, but is it by no means the major factor in a child's intelligence, how good their health is, or how well they do at school.

For example - my boys were exclusively formula fed after the initial few weeks (12 weeks mixed feeding with ds3 was my longest), but when I weaned them, I took care to give them the best diet I could - I did lots of cooking and pureeing of different veg and proteins, and went on to do as much cooking from scratch as possible. I've encouraged them to exercise and take up sports; sent them to bed at a reasonable hour; taught them about hygiene etc, and generally done all I can to make sure they stay healthy.

Dh and I have always surrounded the boys with books, read to them, encouraged them to read, provided them with paper and pencils so they can write and draw whenever they want, supported them at school, helped with homework etc - all things that will help improve their academic performance.

I don't have any figures or studies to back this up, but it is my belief that the things that I have managed to do for them probably far outweigh the 'damage' I did to them by not breastfeeding as long as I wanted to.

I must also say that I wish that the fervour that is being put into arguing the case for breastfeeding was being put into ensuring that the support is available for women like me who want to breastfeed but are struggling for some reason. Given my choice, I would far rather have been given the correct information and support I needed, and breastfed the dses than failing as I did.

And the healthcare professionals need the proper information and training so that they can support breastfeeding from the word 'go'. Ds1 developed neonatal jaundice and had to have phototherapy. Initially I was feeding him 4-hourly because I was told to stick to this routine to ensure he got as much time as possible under the lights. When his serum bilirubin rose instead of falling, a second set of lights was put behind his incubator, and I was told that he needed more calories and more fluids in order to recover, so I had to feed him every three hours and top him up with formula - and I am sure that it was the topping up with formula that spelled the end of breastfeeding for us.

At the time, I simply did what I was told - my pfb had jaundice, and it wasn't improving, and that was bloody scary for me, so there is no way I would have argued with the HCPs and refused to top him up with formula - but I do wonder, in hindsight, whether this was actually neccessary - and I may never know.

Once home, I did try to relactate, by breastfeeding ds as much as he would, and then using a breastpump hired from the NCT and topping him up with the ebm and then formula if he was still hungry - which he always was. On the first day of pumping, I produced a grand total of 4.5oz of breastmilk - and on day 7, after pumping at least 4 times a day for half an hour minimum each time, I produced a grand total of 4.5oz. At this point, I gave up - it seemed clear to me that the pumping wasn't doing any good, and ds was clearly hungry and unhappy unless given formula - so that's what I did.

scottishmummy · 18/03/2011 09:52

actually NO you are misrepresenting findings the researchers do not claim bf make may cleverer and she is at pains not to claim a definitive link

Maria Iacovou, one of the authors of the study, said: ?The issue was that while it looked as though breastfeeding did have an impact on cognitive development, no one knew if that was just because the type of mother more likely to breastfeed in the first place was more likely to nurture brighter children, or whether there was a true causal link

hallamoo · 18/03/2011 10:01

AlpinePony - I didn't say it was true, I said it helped to explain why people felt the way they do about it. I take it you didn't read the entire article.

Thesecondcoming - I take it that you didn't read the article either. Lots of people like to make a point of saying that people who are passionate about bf are 'weird' or other similar insults, but I've never heard someone say that someone is 'weird' or insult someone for their choice to ff. To me, it's about making a well-informed decision to support your choice. People who are passionate about bf generally just want to make sure people have all the facts and support when making their feeding decisions. I echo StayingDavidTennantsGirl's comments about support, information and training for health care professionals.

Not weird imo

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 10:03

Sdtg - I linked to the study earlier in the thread. It looked at test scores from entry level, ks1,2 and 3 - so not IQ. Even bf for a week made a difference although the main finding was that at least 4 weeks of bf made a significant difference (significant in the scientific meaning of the word) So even your initial few weeks, according to this study would have made a differenceIt was a recent study which was why I posted it because many people on the other thread were arguing about older iq studies.b- perhaps the one you are thinking of?

No one is saying that just because a child was bf they will be intelligent or that a child who wasn't bf has no chance of being intelligent. Of course all the things that you did will have an impact - probably moreso than bf. The point was just that breastfeeding does make a difference - even if it is a small one. I think that is interesting - even if no one else does :)

I think it is awful that you didn't get the support you needed and wanted and I think, especially in the case of jaundice, that frequent feeding is v important - 4 hourly wouldn't be enough. I think 4 hourly is probably the maximum time a new born will go without a feed!

OP posts:
bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 10:09

Yes, Scottish mummy, what she is saying was that no one knew if it was the mother's intelligence or education level that impacted the child's intelligence and that's why they did the study and controlled for that. Their conclusion was the bf did make a difference beyond the mother's intelligence (and the other factors they controlled for). I take it you didn't read the paper.

OP posts:
TheSecondComing · 18/03/2011 10:34

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 10:44

Ok tsc but I don't think anyone has done that on this thread at all so why are you bringing it up? Or is this thread considered 'beating over the head with a breast is best placard' simply because it is discussing something postive about bf?

OP posts:
hallamoo · 18/03/2011 10:57

TheSecondComing - I don't want to get into a debate about this with you, you clearly have very firm opinions which you are not going to deviate from, as do I.

The only point I would make is that I have never, never, experienced bf supporters riding roughshod over people's experiences or seen anyone bludgeoned over the head with 'breast is best' placards (literally or metaphorically), I have only ever seen the reverse, e.g. people who ff throwing insults at people who choose to bf and want to offer their support and knowledge. If people make well informed choices and are aware of all the facts, research opinons, then it makes no difference to me how they feed their babies. This comes back to StayingDavidTennantsGirl's point about the lack of support, training & information for HCP, because, as you say, there are 'people who have very little information about bf and little or no rl experience of it'

I am also 39 weeks with DC4 and have not been asked once by a health care professional how I intend to feed my baby - this is what I consider 'weird'. (or maybe it's the 'weirdo' or 'breast is best' tattoo I have on my forehead?)

TheSecondComing · 18/03/2011 11:05

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 11:09

Tsc - can you please stop bringing up posts from the other thread which, in any case, the person who posted them apologised for several times!

I'm not sure why anyone would criticise someone who couldn't bf because they had a double masectomy Hmm but I'm not really sure how that changes the 'breast is best' message tbh.

OP posts:
BeerTricksPotter · 18/03/2011 11:12

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 11:12

Can we really not discuss a positive study about bf at the risk of offending someone who is physically unable to bf for a very serious reason? Really? This thread has absolutely nothing to do with how or why someone chooses to bf/ff. Maybe you should start another thread about it if you feel you still have an axe to grind?

OP posts:
TheSecondComing · 18/03/2011 11:13

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 11:14

Btp - the other thread went off on tangents that I am trying to avoid. I am trying to discuss the study in relation to intelligence not drag up old comments that have offended people so you can all have another bun fight.

OP posts:
bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 11:15

Tsc - you clearly have issues. Go start a thread about it. This isn't the place. You are the only one being offensive on this thread.

OP posts:
BeerTricksPotter · 18/03/2011 11:18

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

bubbleymummy · 18/03/2011 11:19

Wht is a discussion about a study regarding intelligence riding roughshod over someone's feelings? Seriously, who feels guilty that they didn't bf purely because of the effect on intelligence?

OP posts: