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?

Well it's correct and a FACT that my inlaws are fuckwits but I don't say it to them as it would upset them.

well, I had to mix feed my baby because of illness, and I managed to breastfeed til 14 months, although mixed with formula. and I fought hard to get him back on the breast after weeks of ff.

It was not made of plastic, ffs, it was a substitute for breastmilk which kept my baby alive. It was a different breastmilk to mine, but it was not artificial.

Such a fucking smug snobbery about ff. Put is down, and demonise it. great. better to have a dead baby? That was my choice. It was an alternative, not artificial. Using the word artificial is so judgemental. Because artificial says wrong and not fit for purpose. It is fit for purpose, and the purpose is feeding babies.

So no, YANBU. You are being rightly annoyed at people who want to use language to make mothers feel bad. Like we need more of that.

Aggh.

We used to call it powder milk.

'Artificial' would grate, I think, as 'formula' has been used for so long, I'd think the user of the term 'artificial' wanted to make a point. And it would be a judgey nasty one.

Well said cristina, I do think the term is being used to 'make a point'. Nasty.

In my town it is overwhelmingly called "baby" milk.

Not formula or artificial or powder.

If practically my whole town calls it "baby" milk thereby implying that it is the best or only way to feed a baby, how can you say that people are demonising FF? BF are a significant minority where I live - in a large town!

Artificial and formula are not words that the FF use. Baby milk, yes. What does that tell you?

A baby who is exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months of life and then moves onto the pretty bad diet as Milamae suggested is still at a lower risk for the whole host of illnesses in later life connected to not receiving breastmilk, whether or not the AF baby is fed organic everything.

just thought you'd like to know.

as you were.

you sound like you live in my town, ninks.

Haven't read the whole thread.

As a bfing mum of 3, find it offensive to call something as loving as 'feeding' your baby as artificial, even if it is formula in a bottle.

Bollocks.

And insulting to the people who choose, for whatever reason, to formula feed their babies.

Having seen friends who have formula fed their babies, I am horrified at the term 'artificial'to describe a basic need. Gives breastfeeding a bad name imo.

Formula milk IS artificial milk though. It's manmade and an imitation of natural breastmilk.

Synthetic milk for infants is designed, so of course it is artificial, in that it is man made. I really can't see the difference between that and formula, except that formula has stopped meaning anything in this regard, and just means the stuff you scoop out of tins to make up baby feeds.

I breastfed and then bottle fed, and for me that was the difference (I couldn't express, and in any case most breastfeeding mums I've express and therefore bottle feed on an exceptional rather than a regular basis).

I think the problem is that we have started to equate natural with good, which means that artificial must be bad. However there are many natural substances that are not good for you at all - if you eat daffodils or deadly nightshade you might well die, but they are perfectly natural.

The midwives who looked after me when I was pregnant used to refer to 'artificial milk' rather than formula.
It didnt seem like they were trying to make a point (and I breastfed anyway, so it wouldnt have applied to me).
It seemed like that was just what they called formula.

agree with butterball

not all factual statements have to be articulated at all times

I'm deliberately not reading the thread as the subject is far too emotive but yes, I find it offensive not irritating and actually incorrct. The baby is being fed, there is nothing artificial about that.

And unless I'm mistaken, formula is modified cows' milk isn't it? So not totally artificial either. Just another stick to beat ff with.

For me artificial feeding is the nasal gastric tube my ds was fed with for the first ten days of his life.

Once he could suck, he was formula fed (my choice) as the breast feeding mafia/evangelists in my area had their nipples so far down my throat about bf, that I was put off the whole thing; I am not stupid, I have a degree and was 29 at the time, but they would not let it drop.

My lad is now rapidly approaching 14; has a hole in his heart, but that was present from birth and has nothing to do with how he was fed; he is the brightest in his year group (or so the school tell me), so no problems with his IQ, and there is nothing wrong with his immune system. Being ff doesn't appear to have affected him adversely.

I think some on here need to get over how a baby is fed, as long as it is fed milk for the first few months of life, and then moves to a balanced diet thereafter what is the problem? One size ladies does not fit all and that needs to be recognised; people make different choices, they have the right to do so. I would not criticise anyone for either bf of ff their newborn - it's matter for the individual mother and their personal feelings on the matter. I dislike intensely the sanctimonious tone adopted on MN by some of those who are anti ff; that is precisely why some choose to ff.

foxytocin, so are you saying if an exclusively bf child who then moves on to a diet of processed food and artificial crap (and I do know one) will still be healtheir than my FF DD (from 5 weeks) who has an extremely healthy and balanced diet aged 3.5?

I am sorry but I find that hard to believe. I would like to see the evidince (as in proper peer-reviewed, academic research).

By the way, I do agree that BF is the best thing you can do for your baby. Its just that I recognise that it isn't always that easy and dislike the term artifical. don't see what is wrong with the usual term of FF.

I've never used the term formula fed, nor have I heard anyone use it, apart from on here. I've always said bottle fed. But I am ancient.

I think she's saying that on average a group of children fed in the former way will be healthier than a group of children fed in the latter way. Impossible to extrapolate out to individual children. There is research on this but not sure where to find it at the moment. (have toddler running about!)

And why do people find it so difficult to accept that what an infant is fed during its most rapid period of growth and development (apart from in utero) makes a difference to its health? We all stress over aspartame/transfats etc, which make up a tiny proportion of a child's diet, but don't seem to believe that their sole source of nutrition for 6 months is that important.

As for the term artificial feeding- I wouldn't use it routinely. But I don't have a problem with it. The only reason that 'formula' sounds better is because we are used to it. If it had been called 'artificial' all along and then a move was made to call it 'formula' there would probably be upset about that instead. Formula (to me) sounds a lot more processed and has laboratory connotations.

Im shocked that anyone would choose to FF, with all the known risks for the baby because they felt that breastfeeding was over promoted.

To address the point about IQ, the difference in IQ between breastfed and formula fed babies is not huge. Its a difficult area to study because of counfounding factors like maternal level of education, but most studies put the difference as a few IQ points, 8 is the highest difference in IQ points I have seen in a study.

That difference is important if it was applied across the whole population, but it isnt enough to allow you to look at one child, feel that they are bright, and therefore decide that their IQ has not been affected by FF.

Interestingly there is a study which says that 10% of babies will not have their IQ influenced by how they are fed:

www.news24.com/Content/SciTech/News/1132/2e6e2498d48a452885fcece3ac649f7f

In these debates there are often posts about the childs diet after they begin eating solid foods, as if people who FF go on to feed their child a perfect diet, and people who breastfeed go on to feed thier child noting but McDonalds.

Im not aware of any reason to assume that women who breastfeed care less about thier childrens diets than women who formula feed. Is there any evidence to suggest that this may be the case?

It seems disingenuous to say 'it is just a factual term, so meh, why is everyone getting so sensitive....etc'

I think everyone who gets involved in these discussions on breast/bottlefeeding know what an emotional subject it is, and that there are a lot of women who wanted to breastfeed, tried hard, failed and feel very sad about that.

I don't think this means that we should bury info about negative effects of formula, or stop trying to encourage b'feeding, but i do think a degree of sensitivity should be used.

Also when i switched to formula, I wanted the experience to be as close to b'feeding as i possibly could, going skin to skin, snuggling up in bed, I think it is important that if you do end up formula feeding that it is done with love, not with negative feelings in your heart (sorry if that sounds a bit odd!)

I think calling it artificial feeding just sounds cold and negative, like something that you would do with a doll.

I know I said it before, but there are lots of medical terms that one wouldn't use in day to day terms, because although they are factual and correct, they also lack sensitivity eg miscarriage/spontaneous abortion.

I agree with Hecate, it is artificial, it's made in a factory, but as feeding babies is a fraught issue it could come across as insensitive.

I saw a thread yesterday about someone calling bf "earth-motherish" that was taken as rude because those of us who breastfed aren't all tree-huggers and bake organic bread from scratch, it's a normal but difficult part of baby-care and we just got on with/getting on with it. But if it's going to be far too stressful and make anybody unhappy or you find it distasteful, formula feeding is fine, nothing wrong with it.

We all have to make our own choices.

Nothing wrong with baking organic bread from scratch, of course!

For me, artificial feeding was feeding my dd breastmilk with a syringe for week after weary week. Can't get closer to nature than that, eh?

no seriously, I am all for the benefits of breastmilk (or I wouldn't have gone down the syringe route)

but that doesn't mean that you have to rub everybody's nose in them

personally, I am always amused when I hear about the wonderful benefits of almost total take-up of breastfeeding in Sweden

because I don't know a single Swedish Mum (and I know many) who has never given a bottle. They just think of it as breastfeeding, even if you do give the occasional bottle.

I was wondering that too, Tiger. It rather seems to be biting off your nose to spite your face to be 'put off' doing the best thing for your child because you were surrounded by people promoting... doing the best thing for your child.

Penith I didn't mean that at all but if anything artificial is seen as a negative it would follow on through childhood to give your children the most natural diet once the original natural diet (BF) has stopped.My ds was FF as I was on medication that could have affected him but I would have died without.He was then fed on a virtually completely organic healthy diet til he was about 11 when he discovered if I wasn't there he could eat what he likes.