To believe that formula companies have PR agents working the BF/FF threads on here?

[CocoDeMoll]

They are a multi million pound set of companies that are invested in keeping Britain’s low breastfeeding rates down and keeping their profit margins up.

Any positives about breastfeeding seem to be shot down in flames on here.

So much pro formula and anti breastfeeding rhetoric.

They can easily afford to and have the best at the jobs be it lawyers, pr teams or spin doctors on their sides and they’re not exactly renounced for their ethics are they (nestle?!?!).

Or am I just getting a bit tied up in conspiracy therorys?

Nobody is suggesting that the choice of how to feed should be taken away from women.

Not quite true - the formula on prescription posters above were suggesting just this.

However, if a woman asks about it, short of actually lying, giving her factual information is going to result in telling her that breastfeeding is generally better.

That assumes that the information you are giving is the full picture. There must be missing information, otherwise women wouldn’t be making the decision to FF.

I'm not talking about choice being taken away - you and a few other posters have insinuated, though, that women should be advised/encouraged to breastfeed, because it is best or beneficial or whatever other wording you like.

I am saying that this is (IMO) an unhelpful approach. It's not quite the same as an NHS healthy living campaign to discourage smoking, encourage healthy eating, encourage activity, or anything like that - partly because it requires sacrifice/work from the mother whereas the benefit is mainly to the child, and partly because what people choose isn't always necessarily what they are able to do.

In fact even if you do take the statement that BF is a public health issue at face value, look at the stats - we don't actually have a problem with "too many" people choosing formula - around 75% of women want to breastfeed and indeed 80%+ start out breastfeeding. The problem, if you're framing it as a problem, is that they stop, many before they had planned and this is a huge risk factor for PND (that's where the problem lies IMO - not that they switch from BF to FF, but that feeling forced to stop makes people unhappy).

There must be missing information, otherwise women wouldn’t be making the decision to FF.

Are they making that decision? Most women state that they want to breastfeed at first- something changes, lack of support perhaps?

Are they making that decision? Most women state that they want to breastfeed at first- something changes, lack of support perhaps?

That’s a factor.

It’s also possible once they try it they don’t like it. Or never wanted to bf long term.

I plan to bf for three months. Don’t want to bf for longer.

I think other posters are making the same point as I am trying to make, but better.

"Best if you consider only some marginal health benefits to the baby" is different to "best" overall. "Best" suggests best overall, and so many mothers are choosing to formula feed even when they are told that 'breast is best' that that is an obvious distortion of the facts.

I watched the recent programme on lack of support surrounding BF and I thought it was a perfectly measured programme.

I would absolutely defend any woman's right to FF but I don't feel the support is returned by FFers to BFers.

I did BF and, after the first couple of weeks, enjoyed it. I feel that it is inconsiderate of me to mention that in front of FFers who seem pretty militant btw. I love seeing Mums BFing in public, it's a pleasant memory for me.

It also seems that women who can least afford formula and bottles etc are the ones more likely to be spending money. Also very young mums who may struggle with the discipline of sterilising etc would benefit most from the convenience and lack of cost of BF but I would think are the least likely demographic to do it.

Most women state that they want to breastfeed at first- something changes, lack of support perhaps?

But most do manage to establish breastfeeding and then they stop. What 'support' do you believe would make those mothers want to continue?

Also very young mums who may struggle with the discipline of sterilising etc would benefit most from the convenience and lack of cost of BF but I would think are the least likely demographic to do it.

I was the only woman I knew my age who even attempted it. I was 20. Other young mums I met had all already decided to use formula.

Also very young mums who may struggle with the discipline of sterilising etc would benefit most from the convenience and lack of cost of BF but I would think are the least likely demographic to do it.

Surely if you are going to struggle with sterilising because you lack discipline (major stereotyping there), you are going to struggle with BF, because it is very hard for most women to be the sole provider of nutrition?

The sharpest drop offs in breastfeeding occur within the first six weeks. It's a steep curve which becomes steadily more shallow. This would suggest actually that establishing breastfeeding is the problem.

Some people stop because they don't like it or it was always their goal to only BF for a set time but most stop very early on because of difficulty.

Page 12 onwards:
files.digital.nhs.uk/publicationimport/pub08xxx/pub08694/ifs-uk-2010-chap2-inc-prev-dur.pdf

However, if a woman asks about it, short of actually lying, giving her factual information is going to result in telling her that breastfeeding is generally better. There are of course going to be exceptions.

Right. And if she doesn't ask about statistics? If she asks what is more popular and why? Or if she asks which is easier, BF or FF? Or if she asks what makes babies sleep better? If you are advocating giving a clear statistical answer on marginal health benefits to the women who ask for one, I have no issue with that.

Pengggwn - don't you think that very young mums (in general) are likely to have less funds/support/space for equipment? And they are more likely (in general) to have a less settled lifestyle that a mid-30s married mum with a healthy bank balance.

Probably yeah. I work in marketing and PR and I've heard of colleagues and other organisations doing it when launching new products and so on.

Most women state that they want to breastfeed at first- something changes, lack of support perhaps?

Or perhaps the reality of it hits them. I gave it a go. The thing that changed for me was shredded nipples. Switching to formula was a brilliant decision and I didn’t bother trying to BF DD2 as FF worked so well for us with DD1.

Pengggwn - don't you think that very young mums (in general) are likely to have less funds/support/space for equipment? And they are more likely (in general) to have a less settled lifestyle that a mid-30s married mum with a healthy bank balance.

I know that wasn’t to me, but as a woman who got pregnant at 20, I feel able to answer some of that.

I lived at the time in a large four bed house, admittedly with my parents, but still in a nice area with lots of outdoor space and a veg patch. I had no bills to pay, and so all my income could go on DS1.

I spent my time taking DS1 to garden centres, museums and child groups. Literally no different to a mum in her mid thirties would.

There was no pressure on me, DP and DS to move out, and we had a lovely time.

I didn’t trade him on eBay for coke and a lipsy dress like you seem to think some of us do. Please don’t think young mothers are idiots.

Bertie:

Across the UK, 69% of mothers were exclusively breastfeeding at birth in 2010. At one week, less than half of all mothers (46%) were exclusively breastfeeding, while this had fallen to around a quarter (23%) by six weeks. By six months, levels of exclusive breastfeeding had decreased to one per cent, indicating that very few mothers were following the UK health departments’ recommendation that babies should be exclusively breastfed until around the age of six months.

Although there is obviously a big issue with support, it doesn't account for the fall between 23% exclusively BF at 6 weeks and less than 1% at 6 months. Clearly many, many mothers DO establish BF but don't want to continue doing it. So, even if those mothers who don't continue EBF past 6 weeks were supported to do so, the overwhelmingly likelihood is that they would stop EBF of their own volition before their baby was 6 months old.

We're straying into anecdotes here but nope - I have major discipline/routine problems and would struggle to keep up with sterilising (I have ADHD) - I was also 20 with my first BTW - yet being the sole provider of nutrition for my child was no issue at all, because he was with me all the time, he would soon have let me know if he was hungry, and feeding him was easy. The convenience of BF was a huge plus for me.

But it won't be that way for everybody - I've seen lots of people over the years on MN comment that sterilising is easy once you're in a routine of it. For many people this is a total non issue. They wash the bottles, sterilise them, it takes 5 minutes, it's no more taxing than any of the other daily jobs that adults have to do as part of adult life and responsibility for themselves and their children.

Just like it can go the other way. One benefit many people find about FF is being able to see physically from a number on a bottle exactly how much their child has drunk. For me this was a total non issue and made absolutely no difference. I wasn't worrying about how much he had drunk. If he was hungry later he could have some more. It didn't make me anxious at all.

We are all different. This is why it is meaningless to talk about which feeding choice is best. Support people in the choices they make and ensure that they have access to good, fact-based information, not opinions about what is good/best/important or not.

violets17

Not having the resources to do something as easily as someone else isn't the same as lacking "discipline", is it?

We are all different. This is why it is meaningless to talk about which feeding choice is best. Support people in the choices they make and ensure that they have access to good, fact-based information, not opinions about what is good/best/important or not.

Agreed. I have ADHD too by the way, weirdly I find devising a strict routine and literally leaving it bullet pointed around my house helps a lot for me

Are they making that decision? Most women state that they want to breastfeed at first- something changes, lack of support perhaps?

I think you're confusing aspirational goals, and commitment here.

I 'want' to be a size 8 and earn & 200k a year. It doesn't mean I have the commitment to actually make this happen.

Exclusive breastfeeding figures aren't very useful to look at here - look at the drop off in any breastfeeding/duration of breastfeeding.

The vast vast majority of people will introduce solids before 6 months old, even if this is only slightly before (e.g. 24 weeks rather than 26). This breaks exclusive breastfeeding status yet has nothing to do with the formula industry, choices about milk feeding or breastfeeding problems.

In addition many parents choose to give formula either temporarily while they seek help for breastfeeding problems, or as a conscious choice as part of their feeding plans (e.g. one bottle last thing at night) while continuing to breastfeed. So again, I don't think this is a helpful figure to look at - better to look at the numbers for any breastfeeding (which end up at about 34% by 6 months).

There are stats in there somewhere about how exclusive breastfeeding status was lost, if you like, as this would isolate formula use from solids, but again this doesn't tell us whether a mother continued to breastfeed or stopped, so it doesn't seem relevant to the discussion at hand.

I would never denigrate young mums, I was also 20 and married and lived in MIL's house for the first year, I had it easy. I could concentrate on establishing BFing.

I was lucky though - and I think in a more fortunate position that a lot of young mums. Who are likely to have less support and finances surely (in general) than older, more established mums.

Even look at the last graph on page 33 - you can see most formula introduction is very high in the early days and if you get past that "hump" you're more likely to keep EBF until introducing solids.

It's the early days most women struggle. Then it seems a postcode lottery as to whether they get through that or not. IMO that's not acceptable, everyone should be able to access support.

In my opinion it could be lack of support that means people don't continue.

If I hadn't been able to pay for support I'd have stopped way earlier than I did I know it, so support has to be free. It has to encompass things like weighing your baby more regularly with no pressure if that's what you need for yourself (potentially loaning of baby scales?), loaning of hospital grade pumps, free/subsidised access to galactogogues and similar supplements, it needs to include free 24hr access to qualified lactation consultants.

How else can we make sure that people have the support they need/want to continue?

In the case of money for a poorer mother, We have to consider the costs of support and the initial barrier of a £75 (or however much it is in the UK) consultation with IBCLC versus an £8 tub of formula gives you a very easy choice if you don't have £75 just kicking about and you are struggling to establish breastfeeding...

BertieBotts

I think they are very useful. They show that the vast, vast majority of women, even when they are able to breastfeed, will make a decision that takes into account but ultimately goes against the raw healthcare advice, because of other factors that come into play for them.