Have I just ruined 4 months of EBF?

[ExistentialistCat]

EBF DD2 until 16 weeks, then introduced a bottle of formula at bedtime so that DH could sometimes do bedtime and I could do DD1's bath and bed (she's only 18 months and missing me). DD2 still wakes for 2 night feeds which are BF. I'm intending to continue BFing for the rest of the time until DD2 is at least a year old.

Now I've been reading some general info about how just one bottle of formula reduces the beneficial gut flora and seems to have posisble negative implications for supply later on.

What do you think? Is one ff in 24 hours after 4 months of BF really that bad? Bad enough to faff around with expressing instead?

No it really isn't that bad. Your baby has had all the benefits of EBF for 4 months - well done you! There should be no impact on your supply at this stage - the important time for building future supply is in the early weeks. Right now your supply should adjust just fine. Your baby has had more exclusive breastfeeding than the vast majority of babies, including mine who had formula overnight for the first 12 weeks. Stop worrying!

What GS said! :)
I ebf my DS til he was 16 weeks but I was back at work full time by then and the ebm ran out and so he had to have formula along with bm. I think the first few times you give formula you feel really guilty, which we shouldn't but it's natural to. I remember nearly crying that I couldn't give my baby bm milk for 6 months. Then I wised up, realised that formula is not evil and am happier for it.
My DS was eating solids by the time he was 18 weeks (ssshhh keep that a secret :)) so I figured formula was just another different food item in his diet.
You're doing great. And now you get to spend extra time with your DD2, which I'm sure she is loving. Remember, your baby is still getting bm and formula is not poison :)

It's certainly not bad - in fact I think you should be massively proud of everything you've done and are doing. At your baby's age, one bottle of formula at night is incredibly unlikely to have any adverse consequences at all for either of you (i.e. your supply or DD2's health). I think you shouldn't worry for another moment about it - enjoy your time with DD1. Mine are spaced similarly closely in age, and it can feel like you need to be in two places at once sometimes!

I meant extra time with DD1

Oh thank you, all. With the recent backlash against the bf news story, I was starting to feel like formula really is poison. I've been expressing on and off all afternoon for tonight's bedtime feed but have only managed 3 oz, which will hardly impress my 8-oz-guzzling DD2!

This is a genuine question, ExistentialistCat....why has the debate and discussion around this issue made you think formula is 'poison'? There is nothing in the original article that says anything about formula. There is nothing in the media coverage that says anything about formula.

The 'backlash' has been against the media coverage which in some places has said that breastfeeding is not a good thing.

Where, in any of this, either the debate, the media coverage, the article itself, or the backlash, would you start to wonder whether you have harmed your baby?

Yes, formula does change the gut flora, and it may impact on supply. Both of these effects are of a lesser concern in a baby of 4 mths...and don't imply poison anyway.

I'm asking, genuinely, as breastfeeding supporters (like me - I am breastfeeding counselor) are sometimes accused of 'making people think formula is poison' which of course I don't!

But somehow, you have felt this. So - how? :) Where has it come from?

I feel no guilt whatsoever that my baby has a bottle of formula a day - I'm not entirely convinced by this virgin gut theory anyway. By 5 months he was eating food too.

Hello, tiktok, and thanks for taking me to task on my woolly logic. It was a bit more thought out than my post implies but I'm existing on very little sleep.

You're right that the backlash is against the misleading media coverage, or course, and quite rightly so. Reading about all of that has led me to some of the more, shall we say, evangelical proponents of breastfeeding. Having tried very hard and failed (yes, failed, that's how it feels) to bf my first daughter, I am perhaps overly sensitive to the tone of websites like the analytic armadillo or la leche, or the recent thread on MN about the 'dangers' of ff as opposed to the 'benefits' of bf. They don't actually say that formula is poison in as many words, but to the slightly paranoid it's not a big leap . So I suppose I'm feeling rather guilty about a decision made on the basis of putting my needs and the needs of DD1 ahead of those of DD2.

I welcome you asking me these questions as I have sought support from many bf counsellors and all but two actually made me feel worse because they were so very negative about formula and had no room for my needs (with DD1, I was expressing every 2 hours 24/7 for 4 weeks, finger and cup feeding and doing all sorts of weird and wonderful things in a desperate attempt to make bf work - I think I developed PND but couldn't get it checked out because I couldn't find the time in between feeding issues!). One LL leader told me she had bf'd two of her 4 children and that those two were far more attractive and intelligent than the other two, and she still felt guilty about it all 40 years on.

I do believe that breast is best and I'm pleased that there seems to be more and more support for bfing women. But I'd change the slogan just slightly to 'breast is best - but not at all costs'.

I thought the virgin gut theory applied most strongly to the first 6 weeks???

4 months of EBF is great, if you need a bottle of formula to make it but are still BF-ing - good for you.

Thanks for the reply, ExistentialistCat.

But.....:)

The thread was not about 'dangers' of formula feeding, but 'risks' - interesting you have remembered it as 'dangers' :( 'Risks' is a technical, specific word which is linked to stats - 'risk' is a whole specialism within stats, but of course colloquially, it can (sort of) mean 'danger'.

The blog you mention takes pains to use evidence and research. Its tone is factual on the whole, though it is very supportive of bf, and recognises that there is misinformation in the world and mothers get let down. I don't think it is evangelical. La Leche League deliberately don't evangelise (nor do any of the vol orgs) but I do think what she said to you might have missed the mark....yet she told you she still felt guilty maybe as a way of connecting to your own feelings of loss? I think she would have done better not to say anything - I can't see how it could have helped. But it is true that mothers look back on all sorts of aspects of their children's early years and feel sad about some aspects of their parenting - I don't think feeding is unique in this in any way. We feel this way because we never stop being someone's mother!

I think the fact you (in your 'slightly paranoid' state as you say!) interpreted 'risks' as 'dangers' and then as 'formula is poison', and see that blog, and La leche League, as confirming that, shows how sensitive women are, and how difficult it is to protect breastfeeding from being undermined.

The slogan 'breast is best' is not used by any of the vol orgs supporting breastfeeding and has not been for many, many years. I don't think slogans are helpful. No one sensible thinks that individual mothers should be made to sacrifice their own health and mental well being for the sake of breastfeeding.

I'm not Tiktok and I can't give expert advie on this, but have you thought about trying to consciously turn around your perception of your situation? The sort of 'fake it til you make it' approach?

I can't find the stats now (although I am sure someone could) but a relatively low number of women EBF for as long as you have. Also, the benefits of breastfeeding are wide ranging and virgin gut is one teeny tiny aspect (and not one of the strongest researched ones as far as I can tell. My babies were EBF, but they had Calpol and Infacol. Did I mess up their virgin gut? Studies seem to intentionally discount these items, presumably because you couldn't disuade medicne or find a decent control group who hadn't had them, but as far as I can see we don't know they're different from formula). You're still breastfeeding, so you baby is still getting all of those other benefits. There's a good summary here.

I think that sometimes the whole 'breast is best' thing (which, alhough not used by voluntary organisations, has seeped into the public consciousness) makes people feel that anything less than exclusive breastfeeding for six months is 'worse' and that 'worse' means 'bad'. that is so sad, because there are so many benefits from any breastfeeding.

Oh, and you're not selfish. Firstly, although I successfully breastfed, I didn't have anything like your challenges with DD1 and think you are amazing for managing what you did. Secondly, you made your decision for the benefit of your whole family - that's the opposite of selfish. That's what a loving mother does.

So, big pat on the back from me. (wouldn't be so un-MN as to hug!) and chin up!!

Remember that those of us who had our babies in the 90s would have been introducing solids by 4 months. No doubt mashed spud changes your gut flora too- but it's not poison. If introducing something other than breastmilk at 4 months ruined the effects of 4 months of breastfeeding- how would the studies done at that time ever have shown that breastfeeding has health benefits compared to formula feeding. By that reasoning, we'd all have been in the same boat anyway.

Good points, all, Ribena, hope they help the OP :)

Thank you for your support, all those who have replied. I'm trying to focus on the achievement of EBF for 4 months now, rather than the half a bottle of formula a day that I have introduced. It does buy me a bit of sanity and I'm going to prioritise that.

Interesting point about calopol and infacol, Ribena, I've wondered about that myself...

I'm afraid, tiktok, that we might have to agree to disagree on some points, grateful as I am for your thoughts. You tell me certain voluntary organisations are not evangelical, but my personal, subjective experience of them was very much so. I do know the difference between risks and dangers, and dangers were specifically mentioned in the thread (even if not the original subject headline). I acknowledge that I'm very sensitive about the whole breastfeeding issue, but that's just it: It's a sensitive issue and I know I'm not alone in feeling steamrollered both ways (to balance the bf counsellors, MW and HV, I have parents who strongly disapprove of me breastfeeding and ask me at every phonecall when I'm going to stop!!).

Off to bed now to make the most of the 3-hour window before the next (breast!)feed!

ExistentialistCat - sanity is v. important :)

I think the reason why medications are excluded from assessments of whether baby is wholly breastfed is because of the tiny amounts we're talking about and because there is no 'foreign' protein in them - but that's a guess. I am not a fan of the virgin gut thing anyway.

Really sorry if anyone has behaved evangelistically - it's unkind, unsupportive and should be outlawed! As you say, people are sensitive, and how annoying to feel steamrollered one or both ways :(

Just as a point of info: Dangers were not mentioned on that thread - I have just checked the thread and searched on it. No 'danger', no 'dangerous' and no 'dangers'. Just risks.

Good luck and hope things work out for you.