To feed my baby using plastic bottles. Just had a row with DP

[CassandrasCastle]

[https://www.google.com/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/19/bottle-fed-babies-swallow-millions-microplastics-day-study]
I have just been accused of not caring for our baby (formula fed since week 2. My decision, I couldn't take it anymore. I still don't think he completelyunderstands this.) because I'll continue to use plastic Tommee Tippee bottles after reading this Guardian article DP found today. He's usually incredibly wonderful and supportive, and I think I'm probably being a cow.
But we're currently not really speaking despite apologising to each other about outburst on both sides.
If I continue with the plastic bottles for 6 month old DD AIBU?

[AlmostAlwyn]

and maybe there's a kernel of truth in not caring for DD NO no, that's stupid and awful

It's not stupid and awful. Of course you care about your baby, but you also have to care about yourself. And it's also not awful that you would just continue with the plastic, lots of people do. As I said before, you make your own decisions based on your circumstances, but you're not parenting alone, so some discussion and compromise is sometimes required.

It sounds like you've had a tough feeding journey, but I think you should make peace with it and give yourself a break.

Don't take what your OH said as a personal criticism. Do as suggested above and just say sorry when he gets back. You both overreacted, there's no shame in "giving in" first and it doesn't make sense to give each other the silent treatment.

[DTIsOnlyForNow]

Honestly OP there's nothing wtong with using plastic bottles.

It would appear as if there IS something wrong with it though. I don't think anyone should feel guilty, but pretending things aren't true is unhelpful.

[ChristmasDeliverySlots]

@cologne4711 I don't see it as a stick to beat me with though, it's just useful knowledge to help me minimise risks as we learn more about environmental exposures

Yes, the papers can be sensationalist but generally research is done with the aim of us learning more about things. Sometimes that info can be worrying but at least it gives us the opportunity to explore other options if we want to, based on our own assessment of overall risk and our means.

If I had a higher income for example I'd only buy organic foods and refurbish the house with items without flame retardants as well as buying nothing in plastic packaging but it's not realistic for us so I just keep the info in mind and only buy certain things that are particularly associated with pesticide residue organic if I can afford that week, replace household items with safer alternatives when they need replacing etc. I'm really glad I know about these things but I also know that there's loads we don't know - like for example whether the alternative plastics in BPA products are better or worse than BPA. It does seem likely though that glass or stainless steel poses less of a risk when it comes to baby bottles

[VinylDetective]

[quote CassandrasCastle]@VeniceQueen2004 Thanks for being so kind!
Sort of dreading him coming back from work at 7ish tonight - I don't want to be silently walking around each other, both feeling a bit shit[/quote]
Then don’t. When he comes in say you both over reacted (you did) and tell him you’re going to buy some glass bottles. Just clear the air.

[CassandrasCastle]

@VeniceQueen2004 Thanks for being so kind!
Sort of dreading him coming back from work at 7ish tonight - I don't want to be silently walking around each other, both feeling a bit shit

[cologne4711]

This concern about heating plastics isn't especially new though

This - it's just another tool to beat mothers with. As if there weren't enough already.

OP do whatever you feel comfortable with. And as for him not accepting your decision to ff from 2 weeks old, I take the view that dads don't get a say about baby feeding. It's solely the mums' prerogative. Her body, her choice. Men get a say when they start doing the childbearing...oh wait...

[VeniceQueen2004]

@CassandrasCastle

Millions of babies are fed from nothing but plastic bottles, they are available to buy and therefore currently considered perfectly safe, this latest research does not conclude that there are any concrete negative outcomes. Most people won't even consider it. You are NOT awful. You are perfectly normal. And you are listening to your husband and considering compromising to include his views, that's being a good partner - you don't have to think he's right, or that it's necessary.

Only you can know if you care about your DD, but there is no reason whatsoever from what you've said that gives the slightest indication that you don't.

[Parker231]

Can’t believe how many perfect parents there are on here criticising the OP. I’m assuming that no one has ever made a choice which wasn’t perfect but perfectly ok?
I’m glad my healthy DC’s are past this stage and managed to survive on plastic bottle fed formula.

[CassandrasCastle]

Haven't sent him a message yet. I met a friend today who mentioned using Avant glass bottles, and that it was a positive experience.

I do get too touchy sometimes. I feel bad about making him feel as though he can't speak to me about stuff, feeding related. It's no like I scream abuse or anything 🙈 Perhaps shut him down? I don't know.

Is it awful that I really would just continue feeding DD from plastic bottles if left to my own devices? I'll get glass bottles to placate him.

We do love each other, very much, and don't often argue. Perhaps that's why I still feel bad - and maybe there's a kernel of truth in not caring for DD :( NO no, that's stupid and awful

[GingerBeverage]

I used glass. TT make some, John Lewis sell them. I don't like plastic and try to avoid it where I can.
Scientists have been warning about heat and plastic for some time now, it's not new, but it has previously related to chemicals leaching into food (particularly via oils) when heated.

At least we're spared the lead in water issue parents in the US are experiencing.

amp.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/20/led-exposure-bottle-fed-babies-black-infants-study

[Brefugee]

To be fair brefugee, OP had already made up a bottle, and was getting dinner ready.

well quite, and OPs partner was BU when he said she didn't care about the baby.

But microplastics in food and the ingestion thereof isn't something that has suddenly appeared in the papers. It has been a matter of concern for some time, and it getting in the food chain has been a matter of concern for some time. Most of us know about microfibres and washing machines and fish being found with microplastic in them.

And i think that if i was feeding my baby from plastic bottles (which i did on occasion because i expressed) and my DP brought this article to my attention, i would read it. Because i know that the environment we live in is harmful these days in a way that it wasn't when i was a child.

If there are a few small changes you could make to your routine to mitigate this, why wouldn't you make it? There has never ever been a better time for finding information easily, either, and it is very easy to find the source material for this study.

When my DC were babies, toys were often made of that super soft plastic. Until suddenly they weren't because it was shown to be dangerous. Do you think we continued to let our babies play with them? How about sleeping positions? Forward facing car seats? We are constantly getting new and better techniques for things and it would be daft to dismiss them out of hand because no newspaper doesn't have some kind of political agenda.

What is the agenda behind this being reported when more than one newspaper reports it?

I mean if we distrust science so much why aren't we all living in asbestos riddled houses?

[ChristmasDeliverySlots]

This concern about heating plastics isn't especially new though, I remember trying to conceive my first child we were told to try to avoid things like plastic food containers (for heating things up mainly, although even normal plastic packaging like on a milk bottle increases number of phthalates as compared with glass) and canned food (especially tomatoes) because of the BPA lining, use unfragranced products where possible and avoid mattresses with flame retardants

Obviously it's impossible to avoid plastics etc in daily life so we just try to minimise the risk where possible so I try to buy tomatoes in cartons for example and use glass containers but must stress this is where possible, I don't freak out about using cans sometimes or the odd Chinese in plastic containers although I'd never microwave anything or reheat in plastic. Non stick pans are another thing but can't avoid it all so we just accept that.

A poster mentioned breast milk and toxins and they are absolutely right actually, there's plenty of research on this, which is why I take all the above precautions to the extent that we reasonably can within our means and without being overboard. We can't afford new mattresses so have settled for natural ones for the cot etc only and just hoover and dust frequently. I avoid perfume and hair sprays while pregnant/breastfeeding but don't obsess about a bit of fragrance in my face cream. When the kids are older I'll not really worry much and certainly not for just my own sake.

I've no idea how much difference all this makes, if any, in the long run but it doesn't impact us too much so we just do little bits here and there. It's not an especially new concept. It also doesn't mean our children will be any healthier in the long run than others as there are so many factors in long term health including genetics, but it might help them as individuals - who knows?

[SarahAndQuack]

Glad to see we agree.

[VeniceQueen2004]

@SarahAndQuack

Anyone who makes their mind up based on a newspaper report is a first class fool. Any article worth its salt will link to the underlying research; there are then some pretty basic checks you can run to assess the quality of the research (is it a systematic review, if not is it a double-blind controlled trial, is it in a peer-reviewed journal) these are simple checks you can make on the paper without even being able to get behind a paywall and READ it.

The fact the newspapers have picked it up isn't enough to give it credence, as surely anybody knows. But without them doing so the vast majority would never have any idea there was anything to know.

[VinylDetective]

OK 🤷‍♀️

[SarahAndQuack]

No shit. So, as you have observed, they did it because they thought it would be of interest. So it's not neutral, is it? It's not a disinterested decision to publish any and all research.

[AlexTheHalloweenCat]

It's hard having a baby and it sounds like you have a lot of your plate with moving countries.

Could you get some cheaper glass bottles and make the formula from the prep machine into them (as I'm guessing the heat from the hot shot would be the problem with the microplastics?), and then feed from the plastic bottles? I know it's a bit of a faff. Or use glass bottles in the day but not if the baby wakes for a feed in the night as everything is more difficult in the night?

Not sure if you are steam sterilising or water sterilising? Steam sterilising is quicker in some ways, but water sterilising means you can make up the sterilising solution every 24 hours in a tub with a lid and drop the bottles in for 15 mins whenever you need to sterilise.

I still use plastic bottles but baby is older and on cow's milk now, so I heat the milk in a mug and transfer to the bottle for feeding. I appreciate this is much easier with cow's milk than with formula!

[VinylDetective]

Can you explain to me why the newspapers picked up this particular study, and how that decision was 'neutral'?

Easily, research institutes publish the finding of their research and issue a press release. It was deemed newsworthy because the findings would be of interest to parents of babies who could assess the information and make decisions about baby bottles and sterilisation.

[SarahAndQuack]

@VinylDetective

They offer an opinion merely by printing it, don't you see?

No, I don’t see. That’s basically saying there’s no such thing as neutral news reporting, which is obviously bollocks.

Of course there's no such thing as neutral news reporting!

And if there were, this certainly wouldn't be it. You know there are lots of researchers who publish their studies, right? Can you explain to me why the newspapers picked up this particular study, and how that decision was 'neutral'?

You think they just stick a pin in a journal?

[VinylDetective]

They offer an opinion merely by printing it, don't you see?

No, I don’t see. That’s basically saying there’s no such thing as neutral news reporting, which is obviously bollocks.

[SarahAndQuack]

[quote VeniceQueen2004]@SarahAndQuack

Why it's picked up by the papers is neither here nor there; there has been some research, and these are the results. What that 'means' is of course open to interpretation, as is much in life; and whatever it 'means', how people respond to it is a choice. But it is not a negative thing that this information, top-level though it is, is available. People overreacting to it is their own issue.[/quote]
I think this is seriously naive.

Of course it matters why it's picked up, and that it is picked up.

I agree it's not negative that the information exists. But it is sensible to think about why that information has been given the particular prominence it has.

You can't interpret this information in isolation; therefore it matters that it has been presented in isolation.

[unmarkedbythat]

I'm struggling to understand your argument, Sarah. Do you feel it shouldn't have been reported on at all?

[SarahAndQuack]

@VinylDetective

But it's not sensible to pretend that those opinions have proper scientific rigour. They can't.

Why not? I’ve read two reports in two different papers. They both reported facts. Neither of them offered an opinion.

They offer an opinion merely by printing it, don't you see?

It's cherry picked.

That's fine - that's what newspapers do - but you'd look a right idiot if you treated it as scientific 'fact' or 'proof' of anything except the limited point that particular study set out to investigate.

[VeniceQueen2004]

If someone reported, for example, that formula feeding had better outcomes for maternal mental health (I have plucked this example totally out of the air, no idea if research supports this but it is often a reason given by those who choose to ff, happy mum happy baby etc) - I wouldn't try to suppress this information just because I chose to breastfeed. It might be useful to someone! I wouldn't take it personally and say 'another article making bf mums feel guilty!' as if it was designed to upset me personally.

[VeniceQueen2004]

It's the same as when there were reports that breastmilk contains stem cells that reduce the risk of childhood cancers, or when research indicated that breastmilk was optimal for NICU babies to reduce the risk of necrotizing enterocolitis. A bunch of people who could not or chose not to breastfeed throw a shit fit because they don't like to hear in any way shape or form that any method of feeding but the one they use is optimal. This is factual information people have a right to be aware of, regardless of whether they are able to or ultimately choose to breastfeed or not. People are entitled to their feelings, they are not entitled to censor facts to protect them.