To hate the assertion that breastfeeding 'costs money in increased food'

[Lycidas]

This line is often trotted out whenever someone emphasises the economy of breastfeeding over form: 'except that the mother has to consume more food in order to produce adequate breastmilk'. Nonsense.

Firstly, evidence suggests that breastmilk supply is only threatened when the mother's calorie count dips below 1500 a day, which is below the average intake for a breastfeeding woman. More importantly, one of the virtues of breastfeeding is that it can burn 300-500 calories a day. Assuming that the mother doesn't increase her food consumption, and sticks to around a standard 2000 calories a day, this deficit is precisely what's needed in order to maintain a consistent level of weight-loss in the postpartum months. This deficit will allow the body to utilise the fat deposits that were placed down during pregnancy in order to produce breastmilk.

It just really pisses me off when someone makes this argument about how much extra money they spent on food, then says;:"OH, and btw breastfeeding didn't help me lose any weight!' Well, no shit sherlock.

This isn't to say that I think breastfeeding is significantly cheaper (have spent more than I would like to think on a good quality nursing pillow, bras/vests, pump etc), but simply that the argument based on food doesn't compute.

Never heard of this. I just eat normally when breastfeeding and have never had an issue with milk supply.

More food costs more money, whatever type of food it is.

Because of severe morning sickness I hardly gained any weight during pregnancy, and lost it almost instantaneously after giving birth. I am slim anyway and I really had to eat a lot more than I was used to to not become dangerously underweight.

YABU.

Obviously it is different for different women, but it can very well be an additional expense.

With DS1 I have never known hunger like it. I used to lay out a loads of snacks for eating during the night. I lost all the pregnancy weight in less than 3 weeks.

Turns out DS1 was totally overfeeding cos of severe reflux - didn't know it wasn't normal to feed every 45 minutes until I had DS2. No extra hunger, and fed every 3 hours....

So, yes it did cost us extra with DS1 as I was permanently starving. But i wouldn't use that as an argument for or against BF. I liked BF and it was easy.

I think YABU because you do need to eat more and good food, it annoyed me when really hungry (and yes did lose weight, quite a bit) PIL didn't understand why I couldn't just wait all day and skip lunch..
also when DC in hospital they provided extra food for me as a breastfeeding mother and a room to stay - even though baby a bit older- they obviously felt that was important. Although I have never heard this 'argument' before in hindsight, I think so.

I don’t know anyone who isn’t hungrier during breastfeeding, so yes it would cost more in terms of food if you’re doing it properly.

Probably I ate more but it definitely wasn’t £10-£15 a week more. It’s also surely hard to distinguish extra food spend due to calorie requirement of breastfeeding from extra food spend due to being knackered with a tiny baby, relying more on convenience food an takeaways.

Breastfeeding did cost me more with DC1 than with DC2 though l. I think that was due to all the stuff I thought you needed while bf - special nursing clothes, electric pump. With DC2 it cost me a few packs of breast pads and a £12.99 manual pump.

I'm not eating more but it's like my body is holding on to every single calorie as I'm really struggling to stop the last few pounds to get back to pre baby weight! Burning calories my (massive) arse.

Nope. Never heard of this. Ever.

I’ve never heard of this either. However I don’t agree that economy is an advantage of BF. It only is if you don’t place any value on a woman’s time.

Nonsense

The fact that you have heard this trotted out many times that is

I've never heard this used as an argument before.

I didn't feel the need to eat more overall but did feel I needed to move the balance of my meals to make them more carb-heavy in the early days. Or at least that's what I wanted to eat so I told myself it was what I needed!

The other things that get trotted out as expensive requirements are clothing and breast pumps. I never spend any significant money on clothing. A few £1.50 vest tops from Primark to go under other tops and job done. Ok, and one dress I got for my nephew's Christening.

I did buy a pump which I used for a while to get a supply for DC1 so I could go out for a few hours to a hen do when he was 4 months. Never really used it much after that and not once with DC2 who never took a bottle at all. It is annoying when these things are presented as absolute essentials.

I've had to switch to dairy free due to a rather extreme CMPA reaction. So that's a bit pricier at first, until you find all the milk free cheap things.

Not lost any weight - not gained any either. Going to have to embrace slimming world soon to shift excess. But then pregnancy did a number of me so I was weak as a kitten for that kick start your metabolism phase!

Nursing bras for larger busts are pricey. But then so are all bras at that point.

Oh yeah, I did forget about the bras. But I bought 4 and wore them for 3.5 years so I think I got pretty good value out of them.

I like to think of breastmilk as designer milk - it's always exactly what your baby needs when they need it! So I'd say breastmilk is priceless! Regardless of the arguments not everyone can or wants to bf so fed is best.

I spent silly money on food when bf because I didn't have time to prepare anything. M&S sandwiches for lunch and dominoes pizza for tea.
Formula would have been far cheaper.

I probably ate more, but not enough to make a significant difference to finances. I didn't buy any of the recommended shite, never evening considered pumping, just had a few cheapo nursing bras that did for subsequent children. I also bought breast pads to soak up leakage, but as I didn't have periods so wasn't buying san pro that was pretty cost neutral. So breastfeeding cost me very little money wise but was an experience beyond price.

Yabu.

Breastfeeding makes me ravenous. I am consuming over 3000 calories a day. My BMI is under 20, so I clearly need the calories.

To be fair though, the increased food cost is probably less than alternative cost of buying formula.

I've said this jokingly at baby classes when someone was going on a bit about the advantages of BFing and I thought it was getting a bit much, especially with FFers in the group. "Oh I don't know, I'm keeping Cadbury in profit!", that sort of thing.

I ate a frankly obscene amount while BFing (sleepless nights made me crave chocolate and gave me no energy to resist) and didn't really gain weight. I also have a couple of friends who ate normally and were at their slimmest ever by quite a margin, one of whom was told she needed to gain weight asap by her doctor. So I would say, yes, IME you do need to eat more while BFing to maintain your normal weight.

YANBU OP.

The key difference between the baby consuming 100 kCal and the mother consuming 100 kCal is that the mother can eat what they like.

Formula costs about £1 per 100 kCal, while the mother can spend what they like depending on what they eat to replace them.

One option is lemon curd which comes in at 4p per 100 kCal.

So at one end of the scale feeding the baby is around 25 times more expensive than feeding the mother.

If the mother chooses to replace the calories using truffles coated in gold, then that will be rather more expensive....

The time issue is also varies massively from person to person. My DD never BFed longer than 5-10 mins at a time and rapidly got to 4-5 hours between feeds. Other people I know seemed to have the baby on the boob more time than not.

Also, your statement on calorie deficit and losing weight assumes that all women have a lot of weight to lose postpartum. I didn't.

I do think that tiredness makes you eat more too

This^. And I never lost an ounce while breastfeeding large hungry babies.

I’m inclined to think that breastfeeding is still cheaper than bottle, but not much. But like others, I’ve never heard this argument before, and doubt that it has much impact on people’s choices.

Probably a more significant difference in cost is not buying bottles, sterilisation kit...unless you BF via pumping in which case your pump might cost more than the formula kit....and you still have to buy bottles...

Now I have a craving for lemon curd!

I don't eat more than I used to, but I was eating too much before I got pregnant and was about a stone overweight. I have lost 2 stones since birth. I agree that a bit more toast in the morning and some chocolate hardly costs the earth. However... maternity and nursing bras x 4, about 6 tops in a 14, 4 or 5 in a 12 and 3 bought today in a 10 have cost me. I can't do one up one down, it's too hot. I spent £60 on a pump that I used for about 3 months and £60 on a perfect prep as he has a bottle in the evening. I also, when meeting friends, found coffee not enough and I wanted cake too making a café cost £6 instead of £3. It's certainly been convenient but not really cheap!

When I was breastfeeding I was hungry all the time. I ate 5-6 meals a day with snacks in between, pudding at lunchtime, cakes etc. Baby weight was off within a month and by the time each baby was 10-12 months I'd lost so much weight I looked ill. I was slim to start with and didn't put on much baby weight though, maybe that makes a difference.