Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

I think the BF / FF statistics could be wrong

90 replies

shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 00:18

I completed a survey for the NHS recently on how DS is fed. He is exclusively BF, however the day he was born he had a 7ml syringe of formula, to help him settle, as he was sucking and sucking at my (actually rather copius) colostrum, but was still starving.

The survey asked if DS had EVER had formula, even if it was only once, and then went on to ask loads of questions, assuming he was still having it? There was a comments box where I explained, but I have a feeling that they will just look at the numbers and see that in the eyes of the survey he wasnt "exclusively" BF.

Obviously it doesnt actually matter to me, but I cant help but think that this may have something to do with why Britains BF numbers are so low???

I know FF is the trend anyway, just saying the figures might be a bit off.

Two friends had DSs at the same time as me, one BF for a few months (inc the odd bottle of F) and one FF from birth. The girl in the bed next to me in hospital BF but also gave her DS formula once (obv i dont know what happened when she went home

So even though 75% of us BF, 100% of us had given formula at some point.....
(and the OFFICIAL NHS survey doesnt distinguish between once and full blown mixed feeding)

OP posts:
tiktok · 19/12/2010 10:37

ISNT - read the links, follow them through to the original papers and decide for yourself.

If you want a personal opinion, in your case a 'sip' of formula which you don't even know if she swallowed on not is simply not worth worrying about.

duchesse · 19/12/2010 10:40

I hardly know anyone who really truly has exclusively breastfed since birth. Exclusive breast feeding seems to mean different things to different people.

And I too wonder why your DS was given formula on day 1? There was surely no need. Hospitals aiming for baby-friendly status are not allowed to do that. Hoping more of them start converting. At the hospital where DD3 was born, having specifically stated that DD3 was to be given no formula, I was sent a lovely HCA to come and help me help me express colostrum for her. I was still groggy from a GA and she was in the NICU, where she would remain for a week, but she was still exclusively breastfed. I had bottles and bottles of expressed milk lined up in the fridge. And still there were bloody neonatal nurses twittering about formula top-ups 3 days later because she was taking time learning how to feed from me. It was nonsensical. The midwives would have gone beserk if they'd known. Just to say that it is possible and doesn't take that much in terms of resources (although obviously you need to find the right people to be in roles like that lovely HCA and I couldn't have hoped to find a better one).

Original poster
shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 11:56

I think it was mainly because I was transferred to the obs-led unit due to v quick labour making him distressed... When I went back up to the mw-led unit they were brilliant at encouraging BF

Am :( that 7mls would really make people think my DS isnt EBF. Obv not doing it for what people think, but it still makes me :(

I think that they really need to distinguish as figures suggesting that BF is so unusual are contributing to more people FF? Maybe if it was more clear that some people have given formula once or twice and still successfully "E"BF, less people would give up on BF if they did it?

Sorry if my point isnt quite so clear, lol Grin

OP posts:
eviscerateyourmemory · 19/12/2010 12:00

The way that the survey distinguishes between exclusive BF and mixed feeding is the way that the researchers have chosen to define it.
Im sure it isnt intended as any kind of moral judgement, IYSWIM.

FrostyAndSlippery · 19/12/2010 12:01

Same here, DS had ff top-ups for the first 2 weeks (enormous baby with jaundice, low blood sugar and difficulty latching) but then was EBF til 6m, still BFing at 16m. I think it was recorded though.

TBH I wish there was less money/effort put into recording figures, and more put into actually increasing BFing rates. I don't think it's a good idea to keep publicising how low the rates are anyway necessarily, surely if you weren't keen on BFing and then you found out the majority of mums were FFing it might dissuade you from trying?

MoonUnitAlpha · 19/12/2010 12:06

I agree - maybe more emphasis should be put on the fact that most babies are breastfed, half are breastfed at 6 weeks and a quarter are breastfed at 6 months. That's actually more than I expected given all the doom and gloom "lowest rates in Europe" stuff we hear.

Original poster
shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 12:09

Exactly! Less emphasis on EXCLUSIVE BF and more on how many have any BM at all :)

After all, who really wants to be the weird hippy woman that the statistics point out!!

OP posts:
eviscerateyourmemory · 19/12/2010 12:39

What to the stats point out as being a 'weird hippy woman'?

eviscerateyourmemory · 19/12/2010 12:40

Sorry, that should say:

What do the stats point out as being a 'weird hippy woman'?

Original poster
shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 12:43

I meant the rarity of BF in the statistics suggests that it is weird. And in my experience, a lot of people who FF think BF is a very "hippyish" thing to do.

Not an opinion I share btw, just explaining that I think that is the problem, and I think that the low statistics are just making it worse.

OP posts:
peppapighastakenovermylife · 19/12/2010 12:44

Erm...I exclusively breastfeed and am certainly not weird or hippy Hmm

peppapighastakenovermylife · 19/12/2010 12:44

The statistics do not suggest it is weird. They may suggest it is rare but that is a very different word Hmm

tiktok · 19/12/2010 12:47

We absolutely need the surveys and the stats.

They are an essential part of bf support - what is the point of bf support unless you can find out if it is working or not?

And accurate stats are also essential. No one collecting stats is making a judgement on anyone - a baby is either exclusively bf or he is not, and letting a baby who's had 7 mls into the excl category, or one bottle, or three bottles, or whatever, just to make his mum feel better is no good at all.

'Any' breastfeeding is also recorded in all the stats, so a baby who is getting 95 per cent formula and 5 per cent bf still goes down in the stats as breastfed, just not excl breastfed.

UK targets for bf include 'any' breastfeeding.

Calling women who do bf excl 'weird hippies', even in jest, is rude, sorry about my sense of humour bypass here.

tiktok · 19/12/2010 12:51

Our bf stats are not all that low - more than three quarters of women start off breastfeeding.

The fact that many of them don't continue to bf exclusively is not (usually) because they worry someone will think they are a weird hippy. The figures are very clear - they stop, or introduce formula, because breastfeeding is not working well for them and they hit challenges they are unable to overcome.

Some of these challenges might well include not feeling comfortable with the idea of breastfeeding, or other people around them suggesting it's not good, but the task would then be to increase their confidence not to massage the stats.

ISNT · 19/12/2010 12:58

peppa, shirley makes a perfectly valid point, no need to take umbrage.

I am also interested to see that as her baby had one small amount of formula once, given by the hospital, you relate to her as someone who feeds her baby in a completely different way to you. You obviously do not consider her to really be a mother who breastfeeds.

Which is kind of the point she was making with her op and subsequent comments.

No this point about "making mums feel better" if their baby has had any formula ever - indicates strongly that there is something very wrong with babies having had any formula ever.

Please can someone confirm the full set of risks for these babies. Tiktok I cannot go away and read all of the relevant papers on the subject - I have two small children to look after and do not have a medical background. It would take months and months. It has been indicated on here that any formula at all might cause damage - please can people confirm if my list earlier was exhaustive or not.

Original poster
shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 12:58

people ask me if my son wants "bitty" and you dont think anyone thinks breastfeeding is weird?

can only write about my experiences, and this is it. the women i work with have point blank SAID that BF is weird and hippyish. :(

i am not calling anyone weird or a hippy.

OP posts:
Original poster
shirleyhyypia · 19/12/2010 13:00

Thank you ISNT
Am getting quite upset here :(

OP posts:
ISNT · 19/12/2010 13:01

I'm not surprised shirley so am I.

ISNT · 19/12/2010 13:04

The women at my work were shocked when I said that I BF DD1 to 14months and was still feeding DD2 at 18months. Said all sorts of things. Not in a horrible way, but made it clear they thought me odd.

Well I say I BF them for those periods, of course now I realise that I'm just deluding myself.

DreamTeamGirl · 19/12/2010 13:09

Arghhh at people questioning- months down the line- WHY your baby had 7ml of formula, like YOU have failed in some way OP

In my postnatally odd state, I gave DS some formula one day when he was 7 weeks old as he was refusing my milk - apparently the antibiotic cocktail I was on for wound & womb infections had soured it? from either bottle or breast

I went onto a board and asked for help and was bombarded with info on how I had DESTROYED his gut and what a terrible person I was.

So, in my postnattaly fucked up state, I quit BF there and then- after all what was the point in carrying on and bump & dumping for 4 days when I had already destroyed and caused PERMANENT damage to his gut
Yeah- thanks a fuckin bunch for that Hmm

theexample · 19/12/2010 13:10

Since the pedantic wording of things is so important to some posters on here, I'd suggest that as the 7mls of formula was given by the hospital and not by her, OP HAS exclusively breast fed.

chibi · 19/12/2010 13:10

i bf my son till he self weaned around 14 months.

he had formula for his first couple of days of life (medically indicated, long story, not relevant) then was fully bf until about 24 weeks, when i began weaning him, after which point bf was a complement to solid food

i would not be considered to have exclusively bf him

i can live with that, and do not consider the day and a half of ff to have cancelled out all the subsequent bf he had

peppapighastakenovermylife · 19/12/2010 13:16

Shirley - your first message suggested women who ebf were weird and hippy. You clarified it in the second statement. We cross posted.

ISNT - I am not sure if your comment is aimed at me? I havent commented in any other way other than to say EBF women are not weird and hippy. Nowhere have I said the OP should be banished in some way because her baby had some formula.

Technically she did not EBF in terms of scientific definitions. Emotionally, practically, in reality etc etc of course she EBF her baby and it is highly highly unlikely that there would have been any effect on the baby.

The statisticians need to know - and she added a note to them. Brilliant. Perhaps they are interested in collecting stats on how many babies are in this situation - or this information could help inform the next survey.

FrostyAndSlippery · 19/12/2010 13:29

Yes I wish there was more emphasis on the fact that ANY BM AT ALL is better than none. So whether you only give the colostrum, or you mix feed or whatever, it's still a Good Thing. There are many mums who will never decide to EBF but at least if they are encouraged to BF a little bit they will make a difference.

tiktok · 19/12/2010 13:40

ISNT - you say "Tiktok I cannot go away and read all of the relevant papers on the subject - I have two small children to look after and do not have a medical background. It would take months and months. It has been indicated on here that any formula at all might cause damage - please can people confirm if my list earlier was exhaustive or not."

I can't read them either! I'm suggesting you use your common sense, to be honest - I really think that will help. It's not worth sweating about, really it isn't.

You have already seen posts saying that 'damage' is too dramatic a word for a small amount of formula - which you don't even know was swallowed or not. No one can prove either way - the evidence is that formula has an effect on the gut (of course it does). A small amount before a return to breastfeeding will have a small effect unless your baby is one of the few susceptible babies likely to have an allergic reaction.

No one here can say any more than that! Your baby is already having far more breastmilk than most babies in the UK, anyway :) That's something to be pleased about, not 'tarnished' by worrying that a theoretical effect is somehow spoiling it.

Hope you can put it to the back of your mind :)