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 what the responses would be 'fire up the formula detector' it seems ok to poke fun at bf but if ff was getting ridiculed I can guarantee it would be a different story! Likewise I wonder what responses would have been if the title had been bf babies are more content sorry I've not been on the thread, I've been busy being a fetish-y Earth mother

Also who on this thead is a 'bf fanatic' and what's wrong with being one?? I am probably one because I think it's great. I'm not able to speak openly because I am always apprehensive terms like 'Breastapo' are going to be thrown at me. I'm the only bf mum out of all my friends from play groups etc. funny how something so natural and normal can be so isolating.

When have any of us mocked breastfeeding? We were taking the piss out of the suggestion you could tell a bf or ff by looking

Freezing but would you insist bf is superior and ff is wrong? If not then there's nothing wrong with liking bf.

Most mums around me seem to bf, it depends where you are I think

I will remind you that you made a few sweeping statements a few posts back such as 'nct are all earth mothers' and the 'UK has a fetish for natural births' both of which i found pretty insulting

.. I pressed post without meaning to sorry. Of course I would never suggest that and I know there's nothing wrong with me liking bf thanks. But if I start to point out benefits statements such as those used above are thrown at me!

Why does that insult you? There's a societal obsession with natural birth and natural feeding in the UK.

Nothing wrong if you want that but there's a culture of pushing it

Well what do you mean by Earth mother and fetish? I choose to take on board the evidence and advice provided by a charitable and reputable source such as the nct and I'm told they're all earth mothers. And yes I wanted a natural birth and to bf but I don't have a fetish with it?

I would insist that overall Bf is superior to formula. Obviously though, at in individual level it depends on the circunstances.

Oh forget it, just googled the Earth mother definition and comes up 'an archetypcally nurturing and maternal woman' cheers for that compliment talizorah! I'll choose to ignore the 'fetish' comment

Freezing someone who strongly believes natural is superior.

I don't mean you personally have a fetish for natural birth, society as a whole.

Bam and that's your problem. Your insistence that it's better.

"If you BF for 2 years is your child more breastfed than a 6 month old?"

Can you spot that in a child?"

Umm, no. Not in an individual child.

That's the point I'm making.

All these posts on this thread along the line of: 'My breastfed child is a great sleeper, and very easy to look after, but catches everything going whereas my neighbour's ff child wakes every six seconds through the night but has never been ill' - the point I'm making is that none of this actually gets us any nearer the answer to the question about how feeding impacts on health, development, sleep patterns, behaviour or anything else BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BLOODY TELL BY LOOKING AT INDIVIDUAL CHILDREN!

"I want the extensive list and all data( including that which discredits previous data as often happens)."

Well, you're entitled to google away. You may find reading all the studies takes you several years, and brings you no nearer to getting an overview.

The WHO and UNICEF, and the NHS have panels of epidemiologists, doctors and researchers whose job it is to undertake reviews and do meta analysis of all the most up to date research, and then to publish recommendations based on this.

I personally have neither the time nor the research skills to conduct this sort of analysis of the research myself, which is why I rely on the conclusions that large organisations like the WHO and the NHS draw about the benefits of breastfeeding: because they do have the time and the expertise to undertake this sort of task.

"There's a societal obsession with natural birth and natural feeding in the UK. "

Possibly because natural birth and breastfeeding beyond a few weeks are actually fairly unusual now, despite everything we have learned over the past few decades about their value for women and babies: the tide is still flowing very fast in the opposite direction.

Most women have interventions in their birth. There is a big hospital near me where over half of all babies are born by c/s, ventouse or forceps. You can bet your arse that this state of affairs generates a shed load of discussion among everyone with an interest in birth, because lots of people are asking the question: 'why has the rate of interventions gone up so steeply in such a very short space of time' and 'what can we do to stop the rate of increase and to help more women have straightforward births'? Does this count as 'an obsession with natural birth'?

It's like that with quite a lot of things. Obesity for example. The fatter we get as a nation, and the more we discover about the health risks of obesity, the more we talk about it in the media, the more activism there is to try to reverse the situation, and the more angst is generated by people who struggle to control their weight.

Great post mini! This was the exact reason I opted to do hypno birthing and go to a MLU.

I had a birth without c/s, ventouse or forceps (although it was an induction for pre eclampsia). Do I think birth without intervention is ideal for most women? Yes, if that's what they want. Do I think women should feel bad if they have an elective c-section, or need to have intervention? Absolutely not. Do I feel I am a better mum for having given birth vaginally? God no.

The way to encourage more women to have natural, intervention-free births isn't to shame them if they have c-sections or ventouse/forceps, making them "socially undesirable" in some way. It's to research ways of reducing the need for interventions, while continuing to make ELCS available for those who want it, because to do otherwise is to take away any semblance of control over their body and their child's birth.

I feel the same about breastfeeding support. Do I think breastmilk is best for most babies? Yes. Do I think breastfeeding is best for most women? Yes, provided that it works for them. Do I think women should feel bad if they choose not to breastfeed, or are unable to? No. Do I feel mums who breastfeed are better mums? God no.

The way to encourage women to breastfeed isn't to shame them if they don't, or to make formula feeding "socially undesirable". It's to put more money into breastfeeding support; to make sure mums of all ages are supported (I experienced first hand why lots of young mums end up formula feeding), while making sure mums who do formula feed aren't made to feel guilty or like they are hurting their babies in any way, because that's a one-way ticket to PND - and ensuring that all mums also have access to formula, because breastfeeding should always be a choice.

I think while we're talking statistics, it's important to point out that a study (I think it was last year?) found that breastfeeding mums had the lowest PND rates, followed pretty closely by formula feeding mums, followed by mums who started breastfeeding but had to stop against their will. I don't think it's disingenuous to suggest that it is partly because there is so much guilt associated with not breastfeeding, and we have countless posters in GP surgeries telling us that not breastfeeding could harm our child, but not actually enough support and services in many areas.

Maybe the money poured into these posters and leaflets, which do very little to convince people to breastfeed - as many people have said on this thread and on others, it's very much a cultural thing influenced by who you've grown up with, where you've grown up, how old you are, how much breastfeeding you've seen around you, how other people react to breastfeeding around you etc - but cause a lot of guilt from mums unable to breastfeed - could be put into improving services and availability instead?

"The way to encourage more women to have natural, intervention-free births isn't to shame them if they have c-sections or ventouse/forceps, making them "socially undesirable" in some way."

Oh for the love of god, who are you trying to convince? Who here, or pretty much anywhere feels that women who have interventions in their birth are inadequate or 'socially undesirable'? It's a straw man argument!

"The way to encourage women to breastfeed isn't to shame them if they don't, or to make formula feeding "socially undesirable".

Again - who wants to 'shame' mothers for ff?

Where are ff mothers asked to leave restaurants or feed their babies in toilets?

Where is there an expectation that ff mothers feed their babies under a cloth so as not to cause offence to other people who don't want to see them doing it?

98% of all UK babies have formula by the time they turn one.

Three quarters of all babies have formula by the time they are six weeks old.

"Maybe the money poured into these posters and leaflets, which do very little to convince people to breastfeed "

Formula manufacturers spend £20 per head on marketing for every baby born in the UK, compared to a spend of 14p per head on breastfeeding promotion

Seriously - open your eyes.

Do you really think that marketing doesn't work? Why do companies spend £££££ on it then? Formula marketing is sophisticated and highly emotionally manipulative. Do you think that it's OK for women to be exposed to commercial pressure to ff through huge marketing campaigns, but somehow the promotion of breastfeeding is unethical?

"we have countless posters in GP surgeries telling us that not breastfeeding could harm our child, but not actually enough support and services in many areas."

Until very recently support services were improving year by year. In my area and across much of London there are breastfeeding clinics every single day somewhere in the borough and hospital practices have improved beyond recognition. But women continue to drop out of breastfeeding in almost the same numbers as they ever have done.

There is a need for both promotion AND support. Women need to have reasons to continue breastfeeding when breastfeeding is tough, because what the research shows us is that the women who are the most likely to continue are overwhelmingly those who are the most committed. Women who believe that it makes more or less no difference to a child have no incentive to continue if breastfeeding is challenging do they?

And culturally there is a mass of pressure for women to believe that it makes no difference how a child is fed - this thread and hundreds of others over the years on mumsnet are clear evidence of that.

Knowing what the research says does make some people who can't/have chose not to breastfeed feel awful, but that doesn't provide a rationale for obscuring this information. How can people make an informed choice without access to it?

As for the argument which is often made here that 'everyone knows the benefits of breastfeeding' - well the research doesn't bear this out actually. The last infant feeding survey (big government study looking at people's attitudes and feeding choices) reveals that a third of young mothers weren't able to name a single benefit of breastfeeding. Only 14% of all mothers questioned were aware that breastfeeding reduces the risk of breast cancer. The survey doesn't give a figure for the percentage who are aware that it reduces the risk of SIDS, but judging by the comments by educated women on mumsnet (who seem to find the whole idea preposterous), I'd suggest that this was even lower.

There is no argument for reducing women's access to health information about the benefits of breastfeeding, none at all.

No one could suggest formula milk is better than breastfeeding! However if you can't breastfeed or don't choose to don't beat yourself up about it but do try breastfeeding with the next baby if you can.

The research does bear out the benefits of breastfeeding.

Oh, and 99% of all breastfeeding promotion materials made available to UK mothers promote breastfeeding by explaining the benefits of doing it, not the risks and disadvantages of not doing it.

I maybe would imagine interventions has gone up but maybe still births should have come down.

Take gestational diabetes for example 1 in 5 women now have it. It can involve ALOT of intervention.
Maybe 20 years ago how many women had it undiagnosed and the risk of still birth is increased.

I might be wrong but maybe we have learnt to intervene because we had to! (maybe too much)

There are all sorts of reasons why interventions are increasing. There are many more high risk women giving birth.

But healthy, low risk women are also having more and more interventions in their births too.

And all of this with no reduction in the stillbirth rate

I don't think leaflets and posters work because they are not there at 3 in the morning when you're sore, exhausted, emotional.

Most women I know started breastfeeding but stopped because of pain or because it got too much for them or they were confused about how much milk the baby was getting and how long/often they should feed.

This tells me that the message is out there but the support isn't.

I've learnt things in the 6 months since having ds2, like that just because I'd given him formula, I still had time to start up again, like that just because I'd given him a dummy breastfeeding isn't written off. But I've done a lot more research on bf since.

I think to succeed at breastfeeding you can do with a lot of support, a lot of information and sheer determination.

I don't think a lot of people realise how hard it can be and they don't arm themselves with enough information because it's supposed to be the most natural thing in the world.

Ok.. So this is not MY opinion but the opinion of the person who ran my hypnobirthing course. She felt that giving birth has been medicalised. All we hear are horror stories and negative portrayals of birth. No one ever says 'I had a good labour and the pain was manageable!' (Well not very often) but people are quick to say with a knowing smile, 'oh just wait, you'll never cope' etc etc. that in turn causes women to fear or feel frightened/apprehensive/worried etc etc, when this happens adrenaline increases in the body, which slows down contractions, baby gets distressed perhaps, women feel pain moreso because they are so tense/adrenaline fuelled and ask for an epidural which increases the risk of further interventions.. I thought it was an interesting way of looking at things. She was a midwife and knew her stuff. I was apprehensive as I HATE pain - but what she taught me DID work, I got to hospital 6cm with no pain relief, used gas and air, stayed upright and got In the birthing pool and baby arrived chilled as anything! I wonder if in the past giving birth has been over medicalised.. As my teacher pointed out women give birth in other countries without any help at all. I thought it was an interesting perspective anyway (and before I get shouted at this is in no way a judgement of anyone who needed or asked for interventions during labour!!!)