To suggest that ff babies are generally more content than breastfed babies?

[mrsb26]

...because they are fuller for longer?

Following on from an article I read recently regarding a study that suggested that of its recipients, the ff babies were generally deemed to be more calm, easy to settle to sleep etc than breastfed babies.

I know this is bound to be a taboo subject, but I must say, as a breastfeeding mother myself to a 4 month old dd, I have considered whether she'd be more satisfied on formula. She's not the easiest of babies and, to me, seems fussier and more demanding than her formula fed peers.

For example, she is really hard to settle to sleep for naps. She will sometimes feed to sleep, but not always (I know this is a debate on itself). I have never been to the shops or out for a walk for half an hour without her fussing (even if it's just for a little bit). She will sit on my knee or go to someone else for five minutes tops before fussing and starting to cry.

I'm not doubting the benefits of the quality of breastmilk, obviously. I guess I just feel like I'm filling up a tank that's emptying as quick as it's filling^^ and that she's never fully satisfied. I know breastmilk is digested quicker, but still.

She has no issues re: reflux, tongue tie or anything either.

Of course there are behavioural differences amongst all babies, but as a general rule, what is your opinion? Interested to hear from anyone who has perhaps breastfed one baby and formula fed another.

I wonder how much of this is down to the fact that the sample size (no of kids one has raised) is generally small?

If you've had two kids do X, then that's your experience and naturally you think that X is normal. If you'd raised two hundred kids, you'd probably see the variation more.

My anecdata (sample size one) is that the (maddeningly few) times ds has slept well at night are when he's cluster bfd all evening. He sleeps so badly that honestly, if he'd go down and stay down on formula I'd switch in an instant

DD1 was bf for 13 months and utterly unsettled and fussy most of the time, never seem satisfied etc.

DD2 was bf for 18 months and the easiest of babies.

I've only got one so far, so nothing to compare it to, and even if I did, all babies are different so it would be impossible to say. Fwiw (which is very little!) my breastfed DS was calm but active and lively. Never really fussed or grumbled, and was very happy out and about.

And, truthfully, even if someone told me that my baby would be more "settled" on formula, that wouldn't for me be a reason to use swap to using formula.

Yabu

Some babies are easier than others.

Some of those babies are ff.

Some are bf.

It'll only turn into a debate if people get there knickers in a twist , if people just state facts no need to escalate.

My DS was BF then FF and has been content, placid and slept like a log since birth.

Only thing with formula is you maybe could overdose them a bit more. Not sure if that works with BF I don't know about it in depth.

Breast fed babies tend to be fed (rightly so) on demand and things seem to be more child led as a result. Bottle fed babies tend to be fed on schedules with exact fluid measurements known. They can be fed by others.

I've had 4 breast fed babies. Three were and still are the most laid back creatures. We coslept which linked in well to breast feeding. I could have tried to put them in a cot but DS's would want to be with me. Which seems very normal for a tiny well bonded vulnerable baby.

Yabu

My 3bf babies are lovely and happy and this now 6 week old snoozing on me has slept 5 hours twice already

What utter bollocks. I had two v babies both bf. One fairly laid back although fed a lot. One very laid back never cried and quickly slotted into feeding pattern also slept very well from about 2 weeks in.

All of mine were demanding :o the oldest two were mix fed from early on, the youngest was bf for longer. They are all demanding children (I'm not joking) I don't think I'm doing anything wrong as they're all lovely teens/children, it's just their personalities and you see their personalities quite early, with hindsight.

But do what you want, it's your body and baby. Not any one else's

DS had to go onto formula to top him up when my own supply dropped through stress. He was colicky, had horrendously explosive reflux and was utterly miserable until my milk came back into full supply. I BF for another 14 months after that without any problems and didn't want solids until he was about 8 months

Have you a link to the article you are referring to?
Fwiw Yabu it's to do with the personality and temperament of the child not how or what type of milk you feed them.

I wonder how much of the perception that ff babies = happier has to do with our expectations about babies being shaped by several generations of ff being the norm? So, typical bf baby behaviour like feeding often is seen as a problem; going 3/4 hours between feeds is seen as a sign the baby is satisfied and content.

Mine (bf) fed hourly during daytime for the first few months. Wasn't really a problem for me, and definitely wasn't a problem for her, but from midwives and HV and family and books (I'm looking at you, Baby Whisperer!) I had "oh she's snacking", "she isn't taking a full feed", "you need to stretch her feeds out", "she should be going longer than that between feeds", "maybe it's something in your milk?" "maybe she'd do better if you gave her a bottle?", on and on and bloody on. She's fine! I'm fine! Stop bloody jiggling her and give her back!

YABU, depends entirely on the child & has nothing whatsoever to do with how or what they are fed IMO.

This is bullshit. Link to the study?

Mine were both BF and both were content babies. People still comment now that DS2 particularly was just the most laid-back baby they've ever met (he's 5 next month and has continued being that way; he just doesn't sweat the small stuff).

I think it's down to more than food; if the parents are stressed that will have an effect. If the parents are struggling financially, relationship-breakdowns, PND, employment issues, health-wise and all sorts of other stuff will have an impact. DH and I are very relaxed, happy people with no financial or health worries. It makes sense that we have easy, relaxed children.

What to people have to be rude?! The OP has just asked for opinions as a mother with a young baby. Why can't people just state the facts and not resort to swearing?

Formula takes longer to digest. So could satisfy babies for longer. Unless the stuff upsets their tummies and they become unsettled.

Completely depends on the child.
All 3 of mine were ff from birth.
DS1 was always hungry. He was having 9oz of hungry baby milk every 45 minutes at 8 weeks old, day and night. He wasn't happy until he was weaning.
DD was just never happy

DS2 is a happy content boy but still has 8oz of hungry formula every couple of hours and has started weaning.

YABU - completely agree with Bolshier

same as AnnaMarlowe, I had twins: one was brilliant at BF, the other not so much. When I moved both to FF, the brilliant BFeeder developed reflux and didn't sleep properly until he was 2yo, the other twin did brilliantly and really thrived (but possibly would have done while BF as I think he was latching badly)

3rd dc EBF and was very content, a crap sleeper but very happy

I think it sounds a lot like a pile of wank too - everything here is anecdotal. What was the article & what study was it referring to?

I think it's true that formula fed babies fit in better with our culture. Culturally we favour babies who need less physical contact and are easier to put down and leave for longer periods.

Physiologically, babies are designed to be carried by the mother or family member and fed frequently. The vast majority of babies who are carried and fed on demand will be very content. However this is at odds with our society where mothers are supposed to do all the baby care alone, plus look after siblings, keep the house, leave the baby for long hours to work etc.

So, knocking a baby out with large quantities of hard to digest artificial milk can be culturally preferable.

Hark at you all with your easy, laid back back kids :o

Formula takes longer to digest as the cow milk protein is denser than human milk.

We've evolved as a species to be nomadic - have put babies with us feeding on demand in smaller and less protein-rich quantities, more often that calves.

So some babies might appear more 'content' with formula (in the same way you fancy a nap after a big meal), whilst their body works harder to break down the cow's milk protein.

Think it depends on the baby, my dd was on a roughly 3 hour feeding routine and was bf for a year, she also slept well night and day. That said she was easily over stimulated and cried a fair bit. She is 9yo now and is still very sensitive, don't think ff would have made one bit of difference!

Op your dd sounds similar to mine, the difference being I didn't think the bfing had anything to do with why she cried a lot! Ime bf babies can be a routine and can sleep well, I think your post could put some new mums off bfing.

OP can you link to the article you read please. I like to read it.

Thaks