howl long do protective effects of breastfeeding last?

[ruty]

I was talking to a doctor the other day, a toxicologist, and he was saying that the immuno-protective properties of breast milk decline after the child is one year old because the immunoglobulins can no longer pass thru the digestive tract. Does anyone have any scientific evidence on hand to prove or disprove this?
As my child is turning one this month and has had health probs in the past i have a special interest in this!

its ridiculous. I mean i know gps are overstretched but breastfeeding should not be regarded as a unnecessary extra rather an important component to the baby's health.

Absolutely, we've got a long way to go until breastfeeding gets back to being regarded as the normal thing to do, which it so obviously is.

Why do we talk about the "benefits" of breastfeeding when surely we should be talking about the "risks" of not breastfeeding?

I would say the effects can last a lifetime. There are studies showing that people who breastfeed are less likely to get some cancers such as breast and ovarian cancers. The rbeastfed child is apparently also less likely to develop heart disease, obesity or some cancers later in life. Nothing is guarenteed but there do seem to be good reasons for supporting breastfeeding and making it a more attractive idea than it is currently.

Mandy
(failed breastfeeder - lazy bottlefeeder - hated, hated, hated the extra work of making them up and daughter of a Mum who was raised on Carnation milk as my Nan had mastitis - all of us fit and healthy - nan lived to her mid-nineties))

I know these studies exist and breastfeeding obviously does have benefits but I work in pharmaceutical/medical research and I have to tell you, when I'm listening to specialists talking about patients at risk/not at risk of obesity, diabetes, metabolic syndrome, all kinds of cancers never do they mention whether or not a person has been breastfed or formula fed.

Mostly these conditions are linked much more strongly to lifestyle factors (diet, exercise, smoking, drinking etc), family history and genetics.

As usual, I'm not disputing that breastmilk is the ideal way in which to feed a baby but I'm rather sceptical about the degree to which it really impacts your risk, or lack of, of some of these diseases. Obesity is a prime example - it's very easy to control/avoid and to my mind has absolutely nothing to do with which type of milk you were fed with in the first year of your life.

I still think the longer you breastfeed the better New benefits are being found probably as we speak!!!!Not that there arent enough already!How can something man made (formula) be better than breast milk?After all breast milk is ever changing to suit your babies needs.Boobs are very clever if you ask me!
Oh btw Ive changed my nickname, was icklelulu.

interesting point here - if obesity is so easy to control/avoid - why are is there such a huge (excuse the pun) problem ?

Maybe specialists etc should be looking at patients & considering whether as babies they were breast feed/formula fed.

I also understand that studies have shown fat/chubby babies can grow into tubby toddlers/teens.....leading to.......tubby/obese adults. Although this maybe because society isn't as active as it should be. In this instance, bottle fed babies do tend to be bigger than breastfed ones. Yes, appreciate there are exceptions in both cases, but generally bottlefed ones weigh more, hence the centile charts which were introduced in the 70's to cope with the trend of formula.

Very good points mojo!!!!Totally agree!

there is a huge problem with obesity because -

as if this is news -

prevalence of fast food
poor diet
lack of exercise
the inability to say 'no thanks'

[rolls eyes]

There's a huge problem for the reasons you state! Generally a more sedentary lifestyle but still maintaining a high fat, high sugar diet. By making sure children (and adults) are kept active and eat a well balanced diet, you can easily avoid obesity regardless of how a baby was fed.

I'm not disputing that breastmilk may contribute but I think its contribution is probably very small compared to other factors like lifestyle and genetics.

It's also just occurred to me that I'm currently taking part in a huge prospective breast cancer study at the moment 'Breakthrough Generations - The UK Study of the causes of breast cancer' - the 43 page A4 questionnaire asks just about everything about your personal lifestyle and medical history. It doesn't ask a single question about how I was fed as a baby.

What I'm trying to get across is that there is absolutely no reason not to breast feed at all - obviously - but I also don't think there is any reason to get het up about 'the risks of not breastfeeding' because other factors throughtout your whole life weigh far more heavily on your chances of getting a disease than how you were fed as a baby.

skate i think the reason these questions are not asked in the research is because still not enough scientific researches are thinking of that as a factor. I think that might change in the future.

Possibly ruty.

Skate how about the benefits in childhood?I know mums that have breastfed and mums that have formula fed and I can safely say that the babies who were breastfed seem to have less ilnesses or they dont last as long. Obviously the benefits of breastfeeding out weigh any other forms of feeding a baby, it is 100% natural goodness

I agree it's the best thing.

My experiences are the opposite to yours though - 2 of my friends have breastfed and all of their children (5 in total) have eczema (3 of them quite severe) and for one of my friends her childrens' health is an ongoing nightmare - they are always ill with infections and colds.

In addition - all 5 children are large - all over the 95% centile. In fact one of the children is only a 4-5 months old at the moment and is actually off the chart for weight!

In contrast, mine have no allergies, no illnesses and are around the 25th centile and slim.

I don't think these issues have anything to do with how they are fed but everything to do with their genetic make up.

So why does all the research show differently?

I don't know - research is probably right but because people see so much opposing 'evidence' around them in real life they are not convinced. People dispute scientific evidence all the time based on their own experience (all the data points to MMR safety but thousands still dispute it and pay for single vaccs).

I did my own risk-benefit assessment at the time I stopped bf ds1 - I thought, Ok all the evidence suggests this is the best thing and it will impact this disease and that disease but actually based on my family history and medical background how likely do I think my children are to have allergies, obesity, diabetes, breast cancer? I decided, actually very little chance and weighed up against the absolute misery I was going through trying to bf I decided to stop.

I suppose the question is not does breastmilk reduce the risk of x, y and z (as all the research suggests it does) but how much and how much compared to other contributing factors.

Because research covers large populations and people only see very small snapshots of that. Nowhere does research state that breastfeeding will mean your child escapes allergies, obesity, etc. Also, nowhere does it say that formula feeding will make your child allergic.

What it does say is that the former is less likely and the latter more likely to make your child allergic, etc. And I even hesitate to say "make your child" - increase the chance is perhaps a better way to put it!

Also, the ones who formula-feed are more likely, IME, to say "Yes, but I know sickly breastfed babies and robust formula-fed babies" because to say the reverse attracts accusations of formula-bashing.

Hey hunker - wondered when you'd drop in! Good post!

How civilised is this thread?

LOL Skate! Yes, moth to a flame this kind of thread

Civilised or what? Might have to be inflammatory for old times sake

Don't you dare!

Anyway I need to go, work to do, dinner to cook, uniform to sort out -ds1 starts reception tomorrow - argh!

Keep it friendly won't you?

Course I will

I agree with the previous poster, the majority of doctors and researchers know nothing about breastfeeding or the potential for altering your later health and so it just hasn't been looked at.

Studies are only really being done by specific breastfeeding researchers and they're finding more and more all the time that it "can" have a huge effect on your future health. Not only for the baby but for the mother too.

Babies who are breastfed often gain more weight in the early days (hence the large 4 and 5 month breastfed babies you sometimes see) and then slow down so that usually they are smaller toddlers than their formula fed peers. This is obviously the way nature intended it and it does have quite a big effect into adulthood.
Your body basically treats as normal the patterns of eating and the amount of fat cells you have in toddlerhood and strives to keep this balance as an a adult, which can be one factor in why some people can eat as much as they like and never gain weight and some struggle all the time to diet and never lose it.

Its not just the type of milk given but the way its fed, formula fed infants tend to be fed huge bottles of milk maybe four times a day as older babies which has been shown to produce more obese adults than feeding half the amount of milk twice as often.
Basically they believe the baby begins to associate the feeling of being "overfull" with satisfaction leading to adults who crave food until they feel stuffed instead of being satisfied just to eat enough to stave off hunger.

Obviously there are many many factors affecting our future health, and most of them you can probably change by changing your lifestyle choices as you get older, but the way you are fed as a baby can also influence your lifestyle choices too..

Well said roxswood!