Any obvious differences in your bf / ff children?

[Frog253]

I was wondering if you have noticed any differences between your children.

My first two were mixed fed from quite early on (at 2 weeks one bottle a day, gradually increasing to 100% formula by 6 months). Number three is exclusive bf and is now 19 months. I tried a bottle at some point but must have missed my window of opportunity as he refused it and I haven't tried since.
Now they have all been miserable, miserable, clingy babies, late walkers only really cheering up when they are well into toddlerdom. None would take a dummy at all, DD took to her thumb which I hated and have now managed to bribe her off. They all seem to catch whatever sickness bug is going around the school however they are not terribly prone to colds. Can't help wondering if the genes and lifestyle are playing a bigger part in their health than their milk intake.In short DC3 has had the best of me and yet had three doses of sickness before he hit 15 months and has eczema, so doesn't appear a lot healthier imo than his siblings. Has anyone else noticed any difference in their children that they attribute to bf?

Ds1 BF until 6months.

Ds2 still BF at 22 weeks.

I already see a lot of differences. Ds1 will catch everything going and come down hard with whatever illness it is. He will inevitably pass it on to ds2 but I have definitely noticed that ds2 recovers much quicker from a more mild form of the same illness his brother has/had. Ds1 has had a couple of ear infections. Ds2 hasn't but then he's still very young.

I suppose it could be any number of things though really. Ds1 has had all his baby jabs on the NHS schedule where as ds2 has only just had his first jab last week and I'm spacing them out a lot more. Could the fact ds2 recovers quicker be due to the fact he hasn't had any chemicals and toxic metals injected into him or is it because he's BF or just because? Who know's.

Very interesting op though.

The way I understand it though milk intake doesn't make breastfed child X automatically healthier than formula fed child Y. A fully breastfed child is as healthy as they can possibly be, a formula fed child may have been healthier if breastfed.

So your DC3 may have had more sickness or worse eczema if they had been formula fed. DC1 and 2 may have been sick slightly less often if they'd never had a drop of formula.

Yes my DD, formula fed, is prone to ear infections.

But she might have been if she was breastfed too.

I think it's a mistake to look for individual differences between children who were breastfed and those who were formula fed. The evidence is clear across populations, it's not valid for individuals.

There really is little point in comparing sibling to sibling. At the very least, you can't control thousands of other factors.

A bf child is the 'norm' I suppose, with the introduction of formula introducing a 'risk'. Sorry for the bloody awful terms. But that's all across a population not individual to individual.

Ds ebf to 11m, dd 50:50 from 3m thengave up bf completely at 6m. Dd gets things much more mildly than ds. Assumed it was she was a girl !

Because she is a girl

Appreciate the population studies are more valuable, it's personal experience that I am interested in though. A lot of the MN threads are about bf experiences with regard to getting the latch right, outside help, feeding in public and so on I just wondered if, within a family, a difference could be seen at all and my experience is that no I can't see a difference (so far).

If DC3 turns out to be an exceptional academic or athlete then I will be taking the credit of course .