aibu to love this blog post about why formula feeding is brilliant?!

[girlwithasecretsmile]

I think it's great to have a post talking about good things about formula for once but part of me feels bad for laughing so much.

passmethebottleblog.wordpress.com/

Regarding the breast feeding and breast cancer stat - the studies into this are clear that there is a link but it’s not as black and white as breastfeeding = guaranteed decreases risk. The studies found that a) bf women MAY have fewer periods, so less estrogen which has been linked to aggressive forms of cancer, b) that bf mother’s tended to stop smoking and drinking and ate more healthily as the quality of milk is dependent on these things. These factors also decrease risk of cancer funnily enough.

The breast cancer society itself says;

‘It’s not yet possible to predict who will get breast cancer, and for women who have been diagnosed with the disease, it is not possible to say what caused it to develop. This is because there is no single cause of breast cancer – it results from a combination of our genes, the way we live our lives and the surrounding environment.

There are many important benefits associated with breastfeeding for both mother and child, but the decision to breastfeed needs to be a personal one. While many women breastfeed, not all women choose to and others find it difficult or are unable to for a number of reasons.

When deciding whether to breastfeed, you should consider the benefits for both you and your child, as well as the practical issues associated with breastfeeding. Breastfeeding can reduce the risk of breast cancer, but only slightly, and there other things that can do to reduce your risk.’

The other steps you can take such as not smoking, not drinking, maintaining weight etc have been proven to be as effective.

Some points of information related to previous questions:

• we can never have an in vivo RCT on infant feeding....ever. This would mean randomly telling women they can or can't breastfeed in order to compare them (and obviously the trial cannot be blinded, let alone double blinded as both mother and researcher will know what method is being used!).
• this does not mean we cannot assess differences in outcomes.
• someone stated that in the absence of RCTs, it was like proclaiming a drug (= BF) was the one true path to health without any evidence of benefit....talk about getting things the wrong way round! Formula feeding is the 'intervention' - that's what has been introduced without any evidence, because the default is BF. The safety or effectiveness of formula as a substitute for BF has to be inferred from observational studies, and RCTs are only used to compare different ingredients between two or more different brands. we do* know how many babies are fed on breastmilk and formula - sometimes called combined feeding. We know this from counting the babies who are breastfed, and subtracting from this number the babies who are exclusively breastfed. So for example, if 50 per cent of babies are breastfed at age four months, and 25 per cent of babies are exclusively breastfed at four months, then 25 per cent of them are combined feeding.....a total of 75 per cent of babies who are wholly or partially formula fed.
• the notion that people should not care how other people's babies are fed is bizarre....I don't have any judgmental or moralising feelings towards individual mothers at all, but I do care that as a society, we are somehow not capable of enabling more mothers to breastfeed happily and comfortably....just as I care about whether we have a good education service or health service or provision for special needs, whether or not I and my family are happy with the services we get. It's part of what makes society fairer, and who wouldn't want that?

The world cancer research fund says that if you can breastfeed as it reduces your risk.

Research has shown it reduces it by one fifth.
You make the mistake nodogs in thinking that doing the other things such as no alcohol actually makes up fir non breastfeeding. It doesn't. The breastfeeding is an added protective effect. On top of no alcohol, and exercise.

And yes there are lots if reasons and types of breast cancer. But even with genetic cancer you push back the age when it occurs by doing the environmental stuff.

Bluesky we do have info on why mothers stop breastfeeding. Consistently, in the UK, the main reason, at all stages of stopping, is 'not enough milk'. Being in pain is a common reason as you suggest. Being exhausted is not...however, there will be an overlap with 'not enough milk' as the mother battling with concerns about 'not enough milk' may also be exhausted and sleepless.

'Not enough support' is not listed when people are asked the question (see UK Infant Feeding surveys, passim). But I think this is because when women are asked 'why did you stop breastfeeding?' they will give a practical reason why.....yet more 'support' in the sense of knowledgable, effective resolution of problems would indeed help them continue.

Maybe a bit off topic, and I haven't read the whole thread, but WTF is follow on milk? I did bf with a bit of formula so that other people could have a go. The very day my baby was six months I checked the steriliser and bottles and started giving cow's milk in a cup. Why does anyone waste their money on these "staged" milks. What do they think it is made of?

The thing that pisses me off about bottle feeding is not that people aren't breast feeding, it's that they are being ripped off by companies who are feeding off their insecurity, post 6 month. The guidelines for feeding seem to change to suit baby milk manufacturers.

@Headofthehive55 giving birth itself reduces risk by 7%. A YEAR of breastfeeding MAY reduce risk by 4%. Not ‘a fifth’

If you really want to reduce breast cancer, much existing research suggests having children earlier. In countries with low rates of breast cancer the over riding difference is age that women start having children

Have a look at the reasons given on the survey on here.

www.mumsnet.com/Talk/breast_and_bottle_feeding/2994416-MNHQ-here-what-you-told-us-about-breastfeeding-and-why-some-of-you-stopped

Many of the reasons overlap, as the totals add up to more than 100%, but there are factors which can be helped with support, and those that can't. Pain isn't always avoidable (and saying that pain should only last a few weeks is little comfort for those that find pain difficult to deal with), and it's more difficult to get decent rest when feeding all falls on you.

denise current guidance is that babies over six months with milk as their main drink/food are best off on breastmilk or if this is not available or fully available, regular infant formula is the alternative, not ordinary cows milk.

Ordinary cows milk is not suitable as a drink until about 12 months, when the baby has a range of solid foods. Ordinary cows milk is low in bioavailable iron and vitamins - there's nothing especially harmful in it after six months, and it's fine as a mixer with other foods (like cereal), but it's really not good as a drink because it could displace other foods.

Follow on milk is formula with added iron, so it's better than ordinary cows milk. It's not necessary though, and regular formula is better.

It was created as a marketing ploy so manufacturers could advertise branded formula; illegal to do this with formula intended for under six months.

Messy I'm a working mother and have never been told I'm shit for doing it. Unlike breast feeding.

My kids probably eat too much sugar and red meat, have far too little exercise and too much screen time. Again I'm not berated for that.

Instead I seem to be defined as a mother by the fact I used formula for a few months.

Messy I'm a working mother and have never been told I'm shit for doing it.

Assuming 'Messy' is me.

Lucky you! I'd advise you to keep away from the SAHM/WOHM threads on MN - everything I quoted I've read or heard multiple times on MN, as well as elsewhere (newspapers, blogs, school gate, my mother's friends...)

The obesity/child diet threads can get ridiculously histrionic about sugar and diet and exercise, the meat threads always have a couple of posters telling the others they're reprehensible baby-killers, and on and on.

It's really not just BF/FF (where frankly, I think most of us get attacked for one or other of or choices by total and utter numpties.)

Is it not possible to do both nodogs?
Is a reduction of 4% not worth bothering with?

In fact if you read dr colditz's research the results are between 10-20% risk reduction depending on receptor status.
Bear in mind things like chemo and radiotherapy do not always have such a positive risk reduction and we promote those?

@Headofthehive55 yes - for triple negative or basal type cancers. Very rare.

Colditz goes on to say ‘the effect of breastfeeding on the risk of breast cancer was not statistically significant.’ As do other studies. The vast majority of longitudinal studies state that whilst there is a link, it can not be attributed solely to breastfeeding

It's always difficult to quantify risks of contracting any condition, and breast cancer is especially slippery, as there are lifestyle and genetic factors all mixed up.

It's pretty clear that if we want to really lower risk, we'd ensure girls did not start their periods until about 14 (so we'd try to stop them maturing by keeping them less well-nourished), we'd then ensure they started having children at age about 15 or 16, and breastfed frequently to stop ovulation for as long as possible until the next baby came along 2-3 years later, and do this for about 20 years. Because not ovulating does make a real difference to risk.

But that's neither possible nor desirable in today's world, where women want different things in life.

So we look at the practicable, modifiable aspects of lifestyle, which include breastfeeding and breastfeeding for longer. Women - especially those who have reason to be concerned about breast cancer because they have had friends or family affected and just feel more personally affected by it - do deserve to know about it, IMO.

Studies come up with different estimates for risk reduction - inevitably.

To add - seems that 'any breastfeeding' really is insignificant. So starting to breastfeed and doing it for a few weeks, or breastfeeding not very often (to a schedule, or supplementing with formula), is not going to show up as making a difference.

From a breast cancer POV, you need to do it for longer and you need to do it more often round the clock.....to have an effect on ovulation, probably.

Thankfully, my pill stopped ovulationfor the entire time I was on it.

BTW, I did do some mixed feeding (which I wasn't going to do until my baby had other views) and next time, I want to do more of an equal mix for much longer, but as far as ovulation is concerned, there are easier ways to stop ovulation than breastfeeding for hours a day round the clock. It's a very marginal reason to do it IMO.

She's banging on about c sections now. She should go and get some therapy instead of blogging. Seems to have some very large chips on her shoulder.

It's worth me remembering I am a first time mum of a PFB 8 month old with high needs, on a years maternity leave without the need or inclination at this point to do anything much but dance attendance on her every whim

Exactly so you are mainly seeing it from your own personal point of view where you would (rightly) do anything for your child.

But when you're working full time you've got a 18 month old and a teenager, a dp who works long hours etc it is so much less significant what your baby is/was fed.

I look at my 18 month old little boy who is absolutely thriving, doing excellently at nursery, eating healthily, walking and speaking to me - I don't feel an ounce of guilt that I didn't carry on breastfeeding. I don't look at him and think God you'd be so much better off if I'd not given you formula. I look at him and I love him and that's it. How I fed him in the beginning seems insignificant now.

She's banging on about c-sections now

Actually she is just pointing out the bloody stupid comments you hear if you've had a c-section. As the recipient of some of these comments I think it's great.

I also liked her formula post too for similar reasons. Having struggled massively with breastfeeding a child who had no coordination (turns out he is autistic with ADHD and dyspraxia) I beat myself up so much for formula feeding. I wish that blog post had been about when DS was a baby.

I bf until 8 months but WISH I'd stopped sooner as it helped me and DD enormously. I had more energy and finally enjoyed bonding with her at feeding time, and her reflux improved steadily from the first time she tried formula feeding so she wasn't being sick nearly so often. I really like the post as I was desperate for something to make me feel less guilty about stopping bf, and I think a lot of people end up carrying on purely due to guilt when in fact switching to ff would be a better solution.

"the meta analysis showed the protective effect of breastfeeding..." Particularly in terms of receptor negative types.
Receptor negative are not that rare. I know several women with them. They account for twenty percent of the cases. Do they not count?

@Headofthehive55

15 in 100 cases are triple negative

Breastfeeding MAY reduce risk by 20% so by 3 patients

Regular physical activity was found to have a better chance at preventing risk

Why not do both *nodogs"?