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.

"they really don't need to be reading words that have been twisted to suit an agenda."

And you can't see how most information about infant feeding that is currently made available to parents twists words to suit an agenda?

What's the phrase - 'fish can't see the water'?

Any way, I'm out.

These are your twisted words to suit your agenda...

"Would add - that awareness of the link between ff and increased risk of SIDS is very poor among the general public."

There is NO link between ff and increased risk of SIDS.

Formula feeding alone will not increase the risk of your baby dying and you know it.

I have thought very carefully before posting this...

There is an evidence base for breastfeeding reducing the risk of SIDs stemming from this study:

pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/123/3/e406

The following agencies have then gone on to state that breastfeeding reduces the risk of SIDS:

www.lullabytrust.org.uk/breastfeeding

www.nhs.uk/Conditions/Sudden-infant-death-syndrome/Pages/Introduction.aspx

www.unicef.org.uk/BabyFriendly/News-and-Research/Research/Cot-death/Does-breastfeeding-reduce-the-risk-of-Sudden-Infant-Death-Syndrome/

www.laleche.org.uk/news/bed-sharing-breastfeeding-and-risk-sids

However, we all do the best for our children and some things we cannot control. For example, I could not control that my baby came early, which increases risk of SIDS (although if I chose to give myself a good beating about it I could say that if, I didn't drink coffee - 1-2 lattes per day, or if, I had put on more weight during pregnancy - I didn't under eat but I didn't over eat so my weight gain was a little under, my daughter would have been born at term).

Mothers who are unable to breastfeed cannot control for that. Equally some mothers may feel they are not able e.g. I have a friend who has had to go back to work when her baby is only 6 weeks due to financial reasons.

The women on this thread are obviously quite informed about risk however I honestly don't think all mothers are. I had a mother opposite me on my ward who was a smoker, formula fed (didn't try breastfeeding as she didn't want to) and obviously really hadn't read anything about baby care as she was always buzzing the nurses to ask - is the nappy supposed to be this colour? are his hands supposed to be cold? is he wrapped up correctly etc etc and would also ask me. She was only 17 and obviously cared for her baby but just quite ill prepared. She was a lovely and very sweet girl.

However, if we go back to the journal article. I don't see it also taking into consideration co-sleeping, which is a major risk factor. The NICE guidelines were changed last year to ensure there was a section on co-sleeping as the risk is so high.

Another thing the journal article doesn't account for is alcohol intake of parents which is also a risk factor.

It doesn't say if breastfeeding - boob-in-mouth is protective or if it also includes expressed breast milk given by bottle (which I did initially).

SIDS is a very sensitive issue and I think, as a mum, all background reading on risk of this, that and the other, should be done prior to the birth and not looked at again. All births and babies are different which means our plans for our children evolve with their needs. We can't beat ourselves up about what we should have done or, have to justify what we are doing.

All us mums are doing the best we can for our babies to ensure they are healthy and happy.

Good luck to all

xx

This review of 19 studies, published on the Unicef website says

"Crude ORs from 19 individual studies favored breastfeeding as protective against SIDS. The combined analysis indicated that bottle-fed infants were twice as likely to die from SIDS. The results of the analysis show that there is an association between bottle-feeding and SIDS, but this may be related to confounding variables."

It appears to be saying that while no direct link has been proved, as other factors haven't been ruled out, there is at least some kind of association between formula feeding and increased risk of SIDS.

Just going on this review alone - that might not mean that FF increases SIDS by itself - the decreased risk of SIDS for BF babies might in fact be to do with affluence, and as it's more likely that mums who are better off financially BF then it throws up a FF - SIDS link that's a coincidence only and nothing to do with cause and effect.

On the other hand it might be that there is something in it - figures like this are valid cause for concern surely?

Unless there are other studies not covered in this review, (perfectly possible! ) then both "sides" on this thread are making definite statements that are not valid.

You can't say there definitely is NO link unless it has been proved (and that hasn't been proved has it?) Just as you can't say there IS a definite link.

There is an association. And that is something as mothers we should be aware of so we can make informed choices.

Massive cross post!

Also, the reason high kcal formula is given in neonatal wards is a balance of risk. The babies can be losing weight so rapidly that kcal for kcal a high kcal formula is better. Using exclusive breastmilk although better for antibodies etc just isn't enough.

Another option which some hospitals don't use due to expense is a breastmilk fortifier. SMA do one.

I asked my hospital about this and was told they didn't stock it.

My midwife was advising formula and my consultant advised to persevere with breastfeeding expressed milk every 2 hours.