To think the formula and breastfeeding guidelines don't match up?

[Shiggle]

I inadvertently managed to start a conversation about when to transition from formula to cows milk and it got me thinking that actually the guidelines don't match up.

WHO says breast milk is nutritionally important for a child until 2 years. But for formula fed babies they can transition to cows milk at 12 months. Cows milk is quite clearly worlds apart from human breast milk or we wouldn't bother with formula. Formula is much closer to mimicking the nutritional content of breast milk. So if breastfed babies need breast milk to 2 years why don't formula fed babies also need it to 2 years?

Added sugar not naturally occurring lactose that is in all milk products. There is a higher amount of lactose in all formula as opposed to plain cows milk.

And it's 7.4 not 7.6

Its still 7.6g of sugar, whether its lactose or sucrose - it isn't magically harmless for teeth etc because its in milk. 7.8g in 12+ month formula compared to 4.7g in whole milk is a big difference. You realise the lactose is added, not naturally occurring?

There's 6.9 - 7.2g of lactose in mature human breast milk. There is lactose is all milk products even human ones. This isn't the point of the thread at all.

You were the one that made a sweeping statement with such assuredness about there being no sugar in follow on milks

I think most people are flexible . My 4th child was very hungry and breastfed until 2. But at the same time he ate cereal with cows milk, drank cups of cows milk when I was at work. He was happy to have what his big siblings had but loved his mummy milk too. He could even say it... They do seem strange recommendations, true.

I thought that the way breastfeeding works means that the breast milk doesn’t pool in the mouth? So therefore the sugars in the milk don’t have such a negative effect on teeth? Idk, I could be chatting nonsense..

Marcine I didn't say that at all actually. I made a specific statement about one brand of follow on milk. It is not considered an "added" sugar if it occurs naturally in the product itself. There is sugar in fruit but it isn't added. There is sugar in milk, all dairy milks, but it's not added. You can't have formula, breastmilk or whole dairy milk without lactose.

At any rate I suppose I'm trying to tease out why they have made that recommendation to switch to cows milk at 12 months. I can't seem to find the rationale anywhere. Perhaps it is dental concerns?

Its added as formula is created by using skimmed milk powder as a base, and then carbohydrates (sugar), fats and protein are added in roughly the same proportions as in breast milk. Its not the same as naturally occurring sugars in unprocessed fruit or milk. In any case you said sugar, not 'added sugar'.

Cows milk is suitable as a main drink from 12 months as by that age babies' kidneys can handle the amount of sodium in unprocessed milk and should be getting sufficient vitamins and nutrients from solid food.

The guidelines are the same for all babies, not different whether breast or bottle fed (many babies are both) - breastfeed til 2 and beyond. If the baby isn't breastfed under 12 months they need formula as a substitute, over 12 months they can have whole cow's milk.

They don't need to match up. They are two entirely different things, so why would they?

Formula milk us just modified cows milk.

The vast majority of Babies can digest unmodified cows milk aged around 12 months, and they are eating food as well. There's no reason to continue to pay for formula at that point.

There!'s no conflict with breast-feeding advice. It's perfectly fine, probably advantageous, to continue to bf after a year. But if you choose to change milk at that point, you can go straight to ordinary cow, not formula-modified cow.

Just because that's the guideline doesn't mean you have to stop formula at 1. Plenty people don't but it's a lot cheaper and convenient to use cows milk and get the added vitamins eslewhere.

My breastfed 2.5 year old found cows milk without food pretty hard on the stomach up until fairly recently, not sure why but seems OK now, although it's not something we give as a drink that regularly.

My toddler is 2 and still drinks formula. I don’t drink cow’s milk, so there’s never any fresh stuff in the house.

For the poster up thread querying the 'heaps' of other benefits on top of antibodies for extended feeding, here are a few:

• pain relief
• antiseptic qualities (seen to literally kill germs under a microscope)
• emotional connection
• soothing (like a dummy or comforter)
• enables time out from being over stimulated by environment
• stimulates 'happy hormones' in mother
• a drink at appropriate temp and mixture to suit weather conditions (mothers body literally makes milk warmer/cooler/more watery and so on)
• nipple has sensors which use baby's saliva to interpret what needs to be added to the milk for the babys/toddlers needs

These are just the ones off the top of my head and I'm no expert so I'm sure someone else better placed could supplement

The figures I’ve seen for percentages of people breastfeeding were all for exclusive breastfeeding. And most people start solids at six months, so aren’t exclusively BFing any more. That’s where the appalling “less than 1%” figures come from

Actually if you look at “any BFing” as opposed to “exclusive BFing” it’s 34% in the UK at last count.

www.unicef.org.uk/babyfriendly/what-is-baby-friendly/breastfeeding-in-the-uk/breastfeeding-rates-in-the-uk/

If you have a child like mine who's not a great eater then giving formula is the only solution for getting some goodness into her, plenty of vitamins added to follow on milk. I would love it if she'd eat more food so I could drop her bottles but she will when she's good and ready.

Breastfed babies can move to cows milk at 12 months as well, they don't need to stay on BM for two years. But the WHO has to take into account the whole world when giving its advice, it is not only aimed at those of us in the western world

This is a persistent myth. The WHO guidelines include all of us in the Western world also and the recommendation is for everyone to aim to BF until at least 2 years.

It's not about the risks of polluted water. It's about evidence from countless studies on the benefits to both mother and baby from BFing longer.

Of course in the UK, formula feeding is the mainstream culture and BFing until 2 is unusual. This doesn't mean the WHO guidance doesn't apply to us though.

Formula is about as close to breast milk as I am to Mars. You're comparing apples and oranges

I have bf up to two and given children cows milk from 1. They're not mutually exclusive .

Exclusive bf stops when you introduce solid food. But carries on. Milk or honey are products that have age suggestions attached for different reasons. They're not like formula as that is a food supplement.

I have bf up to two and given children cows milk from 1. They're not mutually exclusive wink.

Same here. I remember dd saying “milk from mummy then milk from the cup” as we slowly transitioned from one to the other for her bedtime drink.

As @raisinsarenottheonlyfruit said, the WHO guidelines are worldwide.

We, in the West, have been heavily influenced by million pound advertising campaigns ygat have managed to convince thousands of women that our own milk is as good as a milk from another mammal.

Formula milk is a life saving product in many ways. The number of infant deaths a 100 years ago was ridiculously high compared to now. But, it was ultimatley not created to replace human milk.

Human milk is uniquely made for human babies and feeding until self weaning should be the norm but reaching 6 months seems to be rare these days.

For the poster up thread querying the 'heaps' of other benefits on top of antibodies for extended feeding, here are a few

Note3 the post I queried said that except for adequate nutrition and antibodies there were heaps of other benefits to breast milk . Most of what you've posted refers to breast feeding.

This is a good overview of the make up of breast milk past 12 months. Cows milk doesn’t compare with it IMO. However, a healthy diet of solids could also provide that, so I do see the other side of this when a 1 year old is eating well and potentially doesn’t need cows / human / formula milk at all.

Ooh thanks for putting up that poster Appraiser, I struggle to get my 20m old to eat any meat so its nice to know he's getting some extra protein.