Benefits of bfing over ffing?

[you]

Okay I'm writing this on the back of reading the bfing thread in aibu but putting it here as I'd really like it to not turn into a gunfight if at all possible please :)

With regards to the risks of formula feeding an otherwise healthy term infant in this country, and presuming all other environmental and social factors are the same, what are the risks, really? I've rad the leaflets and been on a UNICEF course and am totally pro breastfeedibg, however I can't help but think a lot of the benefits are emotional rather than physical especially as the child gets older.

I've read a lot of research but a lot if it does show extra factors to be involved such as making up bottles indifferent.

So, IF a mother makes up the bottles correctly thus vastly reducing her chances of gastroenteritis, feeds baby in arms rather than with a bottle propped up against a cot side which seemed contribute to most babies ending up with ear infections, feeds on demand as would a bf mother etc what is a baby in this country really likely to end up with, risks wise? I believe the allergy link is pretty poor evidence wise so all were really left with is 3 points worth of iq and of course the not insignificant lack of antibodies, so more coughs/ colds pressumably but anything long term?

I really am interested so please let's not turn this into a debate as they all go the same way are boring :)

And sorry for any silly typos am on my iPod and the spell check is dire.

Buying new bras was expensive, but that's been my only expense really. Washable breastpads and got some lansinoh cheap off ebay (and have been using it as lip balm ). Just wore my normal clothes though - surely most clothes can be pulled up/down or unbuttoned?

Wish I'd gone to Hot Milk straight away with my first! M&S was a very depressing and false economy.

I must have the most impractical wardrobe ever. Not much of it pre-children seemed to be BF friendly. Lots of tea dresses and tops that were too tight to be pulled up without exposing entire body to the world or too low cut to be worn with nursing bras.

So I tried to do the vest/t-shirt combo but made the mistake of buying cheap and felt like a frump for months.

Sorry, have derailed from the OP a bit!

That's what I thought, Crazycatlady.

Michael Kramer, professor of paediatrics at McGill University, Montreal said that most of the information on leaflets is outdated. He calls most of the evidence weak, apart from the chest and gastro-inections. Oh, and the breast cancer, although there could be some confounding there in my opinion, as we do not know why breast cancer is there where it is. Apart from a gene that seems to be hereditary. And that's a small amount of women who have it. For all we know, it may be environmental factor that contribute, hormones in our meat, etc.

I don't suppose that a leading expert who has advised Unicef and the WHO can be really wrong.

About the stemm cells: we know that they could be used in treating cancer and Alzheimer's, but they haven't yet found an adequate manner in doing so. They are multifunctional cells which we do not have anymore once we grow up. Why they would be preent in BM is the question. The evidence is, though, that there is not an enormous difference between BF and FF babies, in terms of life expectancy, in terms of death rate, so the question is why those cells are there and what they do. They are also present in the placenta and the cord, but we do not feed that to our babies, to say it bluntly, and cutting the cord doesn't seem to have any effect on the baby despite its stem cell supply being cut off. They do not fight disease as that is the role of the white blodd cells, so can't be that either.
So, frankly, I would not call that a benefit.

At any rate, Dr Cregan, who did the research, says that '[they] have shown these cells have all the physical characteristics of stem cells. What [they] will do next is to see if they behave like stem cells.' So maybe those cells look like stemm cells, but they may not do what stem cells are known to do (be versatile in what they can become). So, essentially, nothing is known, really.

Michael Kramer was grossly mis - cited and out of context when all of that hit the media. He did issue a re statement which was more supportive than what you are describng there.

He was talking about one of the main points of here - that studies are confounded. However he also noted in the statement he put out that although the main effects are seen for gastro and respiratory infections...that these alone are enough reason to support breastfeeding.

He was also referring to the studies that show BF is linked to lower levels of rarer illnesses - as I mentioned above. We dont really understand this data as these illnesses are rare anyway - so any protection might go from a 0.2% risk to a 0.8% risk but still quadruple.

The breast cancer one makes sense though no? Breastfeeding usually suppresses ovulation, alters hormones - you can see a sensible link there.

rollit - believe me, both Tiktok and myself have read a lot, lot more studies than the few you are presenting (including this one). I fully understand the research area, the issues with the methodology, the need for more robust research. I agree with some of your points. I am not blind to what you are saying - I know the limitations but feel based on all the evidence I have read and seen that there is still a difference.

Probit - they are not actually randomising breastfeeding though are they.

I know the only answer to this is a proper RCT but it is not going to happen. Controlling for maternal background and other confounders is the only evidence we have. I just cannot see how so many studies are simply proving spurious links.

If the evidence was so weak why would the NHS invest resources into trying to promote it? It is usually quicker and easier for all staff invovled if the mum just formula feeds.

Well my outlay has been next to nothing,I bought two or three bras but only used them for the first three months as then i wore my normal wired bras,so the bras did for two babies.I did buy a pump-used three times (one nursing strike,two blocked ducts!) and a box of disposable breastpads(cheap) 2 washable ones.(pretty cheap).that's it.And I have been breastfeeding now since December 2004.(one child stopped as the next started).

How do you get a breast out of a normal bra? I can only ever do it at home as I have to unclip it at the back.

Thanks Leonie.She only feeds at bedtime and when she wakes up now.I am so used to breasfeeding that I never really think of how long its been.Although when I said to Dd that older children don't have booa (her word for bm) she said "I will have lovely Booa every day until I die" !!!!
As to bras,the trick is to have one with a low centre front,then the cup is easy to pull to one side,and the wires are less likely to dig in too,I've found.I'm a 30G/32FF, and I mainly wear this bra www.brasandhoney.com/freya-bra/freya-arabella-midnight/ I also have another style with a lower front from M+S but its not made any more.you have to hunt for ones that are quite plunging but not push-up.

mine maybe fed more than that at that age I think, because she was still waking several times in the night,which was hard.She'd dropped the daytime naps though.She only really started sleeping through a couple of months ago (she is 3y 9m).Now she sleeps through most nights but wakes maybe one night in seven,or will have a run of nights where she wakes at about 11.I have days where I really look forward to stopping,because I imagine that I might feel less tired,and I also imagine that I might then lose the baby podge.... but I suppose it will also be sad in a way when she does stop as I won't ever feed another baby (I'm 47).

Wow Peppa, I wish those figures had been available years ago. I mix fed my DS for nearly 5 months and felt appallingly bad about not EBF. But even by mix feeding it seems I more than halved his risk of getting all sorts of nasties. Good to know .

It's also not just about them getting infections or not. It's the fact that by bf them you actively help them fight the infection. Yes every time DD gets a cold I get it too, but I'm making antibodies for her. I love that.

Also we're on a private water supply that had some potential problems a while back with coliform bacteria. Our drinking water is treated but the rest of the water isn't. The immunity I have against any bugs is being passed onto DD so I needn't worry myself silly when she drinks the bath water. That was actually a major factor in me persevering through our many difficulties.

As for the stem cell thing, I should think Darwin would have had an opinion. Nature is pretty efficient and something that was not worth the effort would have been selected out.

Leonie you are so lovely.By the way I looked at your pics and your girls are gorgeous.

rollittherecollette - why do you find it so hard to accept that nature has evolved the best food for human babies?

Calves cannot survive on human milk. Human babies would not survive on cow's milk unless it was heavily modified. What is so hard about the concept that the best milk is the milk of one's own species?

rollit. For the one millionth time (it feels) they randomise breastfeeding support NOT breastfeeding. Two very different things.

The only real answer is to get say 3000 first time mums, randomly tell 1500 to FF and 1500 to BF and them compare outomes. And then repeat this study 10 or 20 times to see whether it reliably gives the same answers.

I am perfectly well aware of this study, I have said that many a time . I am pefectly well read in this area.

I am perfectly happy to respect your point of view just not fully agree with it!

I understand your points - the research could ideally be more robust. However the overall picture matched with biology and common sense disagrees with you.