So does anyone else find the term 'artificial feeding' in relation to the use of formula milk a bit irritating?

[bangandthedirtisgone]

Or is it just me?

your

What's being twisted? Oxytocin is the 'cuddle hormone', so ff mothers will also get this feeling when feeding their babies.

I understood it was a product of nipple stimulation but I will stand corrected if someone can provide a link suggesting otherwise.

If you believe it is from simply cuddling then I can see why you asked the question.

Although I breastfed, I chose to bottlefeed my dcs when they were at ft nursery. Despite knowing that formula is inferior, despite my owning a breastpump. It was just for my convenience. I could not be bothered to express at work.

That was my choice.

So how is it I can read a statement that formula in inferior or is artificial, without feeling judged or thinking there is any moral connotation attached to it.

It is a fact. I'd just shrug.

The thread topic is about the term 'artificial feeding'. It is not about whether or not breastmilk is better for babies than formula. I woud be interested to hear if any of you who are describing the benefits of bf and need for support in bf think that it is an ok term to be using.

Artificial feeding to me means bottle feeding, whether its EBM or FF.

I ff and don't feel guilty at all. Why would I? I work full time to keep a roof over our heads, ds is loved and kept clean, warm, safe, and fed.

My colleague who was bf is in and out of the hospital with asthma and diabetes. I was ff and the worse thats happened to me is I have had to have my tonsils out. Just trying to point out that ffing doesn't always equal health issues. I agree its best but CHOOSING, for whatever reason, not to bf aint the worse choice someone can make.

An oxytocin rush can be caused by more than just nipple simulation. Other examples would include sex or a baby moving down the birth cnal. I would imagine itimacy through cuddles with a baby would also cause similar.

Oxytocin, I understand, is the hormone responsible for let down. It is a direct physiological reaction to bf-ing.

It could be that formula feeding and other cuddly activities also stimulate oxytocin, but I know certainly not in the quantities to stimulate let down.

scaryteacher, why are you so determined that there can be no benefit to the mother of breastfeeding? It suggests a closed mind.

I guess because you are comfortable with your choice blueshoes which is your prerogative. Good on you.
The defensiveness of some posters who crop up time and time again on these threads makes me believe they are not happy with their choices however much they protest. That is sad and I think that was what minniethemiinx was getting at. If you genuinely don't feel negatively about that choice, then the insensitivity and/or rudeness of others wont matter a jot to you.

puzzle, the point is that many of us do feel negative about not having bf.

and insensitivity and rudeness makes that worse

I actually find it pretty sad that other women will be insensitive and rude to mothers who haven't made the same choice as they did.

very sad.

Ra - I was talking about posters saying they chose not to bf, and are happy with their choice, and yet seem so angry. I assume you wanted to breastfeed.

Why should it follow from feeling bad about not bf-ing, that you (I mean that generically) should then look for reasons to downplay the benefits of bf-ing and not even allow a discussion about the significant benefits of bf-ing?

The second is not a rational response to the first.

I have no desire to downplay the benefits of breastfeeding (particularly as I breastfed both mine). However, I see no reason to use an emotive and potentially judgmental phrase to designate formula feeding. Which is what this thread was about.

Cory, I am responding to the recent posts on this thread. I would not use the term 'artificial' on a mother who was sensitive about not bf-ing because I am not in the business of deliberately hurting someone's feelings.

But IMO, reacting badly to the word 'artificial' is irrational because formula feeding IS artificial. Same implication lies in the word 'formula', though somehow that is acceptable.

I am not determined there is no benefit, I was curious. In 1995 when I was pregnant, there was none of this information readily available; and as I have no other children, I haven't researched it. Not a closed mind, then, but my interests are in other areas now; teenagers for example!

I can see that there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods of feeding, and that the issue polarises people the same way the state/private education debate does; and I can see the advantages/disadvantages in both systems as well, having taught in both.

I asked ds as he came in from school just now if he resented the fact I didn't bf him. he rolled his eyes, said 'Mumsnet again? I can't remember being a baby, so I'm not bothered, can I have some toast?' I guess that that puts it into context for me. He's happy, healthy and finally putting on weight and having a growth spurt, so we're there.

stonethecrows, what I was trying to say but maybe I didn't say it properly is that some people who are given the job description of Breastfeeding counsellor or call themselves that, are not what they really are.

Anyone can call herself a bf counsellor just like anyone can call him/herself an engineer. It does not mean that they went to uni and received a B.Eng. degree.

A certain amount of training, years actually of practical and academic, go into becoming a breastfeeding counsellor. And no counsellor trained and working with any of the four voluntary breastfeeding charities would have the bedside manner that you described. If she did then the organisation for which she is attached to would have welcomed a letter too.

I hated breastfeeding DS and was incredibly glad to give it up. He had digestive issues and needed to be put onto medicated formula but the 8 weeks i breastfed him were the most exhausting, harrowing and horrendous weeks. Once he was on his prescribed formula he was like a different baby and suddenly feeding him wasn't a nightmare, i wasn't exhausted and walking into walls and we bonded much better.

scaryteacher, sorry to belabour the point. But the advantages (particularly health) are loaded in favour of bf-ing. Although I can understand why some people choose to formula feed.

"But this thread is FILLED with comments that point out how inferior FF is and about "poor" choices. The OP is about using the emotive term "artificial". "

Pointing out that ff is inferior to breastfeeding doesn't imply any sort of moral judgement whatsoever on mums who ff. It's a statement of fact. It doesn't imply that mums who ff are inferior as mothers. I have also missed comments on this thread about 'poor' choices. Are you quoting directly from a post on this thread?

"The implication is that people who do not bf are somehow lacking in the intelligence or knowledge to do the right thing by their babies. As I said - we all KNOW that breast is best, yet for some it just doesn't work. Babies aren't dying all over the place because they had formula."

No - there's no 'implicaition at all that people who don't bf are 'lacking in intelligence', but it's absolutely undeniable that some people are lacking in good quality information. I certainly was when I was making feeding choices with my first baby. Most of the information that women have on this issue is partial and incomplete. Women are exposed to huge amounts of manipulative marketing from the baby milk companies or fascile 'breast is best' NHS campaigns. I've only discovered what now know about the differences between bf and ff from doing a lot of reading of professional and specialist texts. This is particularly true of information about formula, which is quite hard to come by.

As for babies not 'dying all over the place', that doesn't take away from the fact that there are many, many children in the UK who need GP and hospital treatment for common illnesses like gastric upsets, ear infections and respitory illness, who wouldn't have become ill if they'd had breastmilk instead of formula. It also doesn't take away from the fact that some children will probably develop diabetes - which is a life limiting disease - as a result of being exposed to cows milk formula as infants. For me this is serious enough to justify the continued push to promote breastfeeding.

"I think that other factors are more prevalent in preventing cancers, osteoporosis et al than bfing"

Nobody is denying that other factors also play a part. I'd be interested to know how you have come to the conclusion that bf plays an insignificant part in reducing the risk of developing these conditions. On what do you base this view?

but sabire what about the term 'artificial feeding'?

As for babies not 'dying all over the place', that doesn't take away from the fact that there are many, many children in the UK who need GP and hospital treatment for common illnesses like gastric upsets, ear infections and respitory illness, who wouldn't have become ill if they'd had breastmilk instead of formula

My son had gastric upsets and ended up in hospital after being breastfed and was made better by having formula.

Scaryteacher - without wishing to be rude, I I suspect your son, like most young people, knows absolutely bog all about infant feeding, and probably at his age even feels a bit squeamish at the idea of being breastfed - particularly as he's probably had very little day to day exposure to breastfeeding as part of the normal mother baby relationship. I also would have said exactly the same as a child or teenager.

He may feel differently in years to come as an adult, when he learns about the differences between breastfeeding and ff, and assist his partner in making this choice for his own child.

"I can see that there are advantages and disadvantages to both methods of feeding, and that the issue polarises people the same way the state/private education debate does; and I can see the advantages/disadvantages in both systems as well, having taught in both"

You cannot use school as any sort of comparison at all.

If a mother is able and willing to breastfeed, what possible advantages can there be for a normal baby in being ff? I really can't see any - except in the very rare situation where a baby might be strongly allergic to something in the mother's diet, or unable to process the proteins in breastmilk.

What benefit do you see in ff for a baby - if breastmilk is available as an alternative?

The term 'artificial feeding' is simply factual. An 'artificially fed' baby is fed synthetic human milk from a breast substitute made of plastic and silicone. There's no moral judgement in the term, unless you want to read into it that natural = good, which I can see is easy to do in our current culture which tends to use 'natural' as a marketing term to signify something of value.

I can understand how this term has become common currency in health circles - it's partly as a challenge to ff having become the cultural norm, (to the extent that most young girls assume that bottles + babies go together like horse + carriage, and bread + butter.... and where many people have got to adulthood without ever really seeing breastfeeding as part of normal life with a baby).