To think that maybe its true about formula fed babies....

[curiousgeorgie]

Obviously no one can deny that breast milk is amazing, all the benefits etc...

But a friend of mine swears she had a very easy time with her DD because she was formula fed right from the off.. slept through from very early, hardly ever cries, settles very easily when she does. (Never even sick!)

As opposed to her DS, who was breastfed (For the first couple of months) and to be honest, he was a nightmare at feeding and sleeping.

Having a conversation about this with her and a group of other mums it did seem that all the FF babies were better sleepers and a lot less grumpy :p

Do you think this is true?

(I know that this says nothing of the longterm health benefits of breast feeding, and is purely about a small baby and sleep etc)

Load of tosh.

I would go so far as to suggest the opposite. FF is frowned upon and more mothers feel pressured into feeling that they MUST BF or they are letting their baby and the motherhood down, yet allergies and reflux are on the increase.

As breastmilk is affected by the diet of the mother, and formula is a constant same combination of ingredients, I have often wondered if there is correlation there.

Whackamole - thats sort of my point, your bf baby wakes once in the night, because formula is more dense? So because your baby is breastfed, the sleep is interrupted?

A bf baby shouldn't be any grumpier either so long as they are fed when they ask which is probably more often but if you're tuned in to your baby and can feed them ie not driving it isn't necessary for them to get to the screaming stage.

With my first I wasn't always comfortable whipping my boobs out so would probably be reluctant to feed her hence the crying I also didn't realise how often they do actually need feeding even if she has been fed 10 mins before dd can be hungry again. I'm way more relaxed and aware that the baby stage is very short in the grand scheme of things so she pretty much has my undivided attention

In my experience this is true.

My ff DD slept through at 8 weeks, and was a fab sleeper from then on.

My bf DS didn't sleep through until I stopped bf (when he was 2).

Also just about everyone I know who has ff has had a good sleeper, as opposed to only the odd one that was bf.

Obviously this is not at all scientific, just my experience. However I must admit, I thought it was pretty common knowledge that ff babies tend to be better sleepers.

Would just like to add that I absolutely advocate bf, despite my experiences with sleep! I loved bf!

Ok in my huge sample of 3 babies

dd1 - bf/mix fed for 8 weeks - then ff - brilliant sleeper at first, bloody awful sleeper from 1yr on.

dd2 - bf for 2 days - then ff -consistently bloody awful sleeper.

ds - bf/ff/tube fed on and off for 12 weeks - then ff - awful awful AWFUL sleeper.

(maybe I'm just not good at the whole babies and sleep thing!)

Not true OP. I know of nightmare FF and BF babies re sleeping and really easy ones both BF and FF.

Not true in my experience (admittedly a sample size of one!).
DD was mix fed for a month, then totally ff.
She used to sleep quite well, 6-7 hours straight sometimes at six weeks, went downhill following the four month sleep regression, and weaning seemed to make her sleeping worse.
She still doesn't sleep through at 17 months.

My FF first born did not sleep through until he was 4 yrs old. He also loved to cry for no discernible reason and start the day at 5am.

My BF second born slept through at 5 weeks old and was such a chilled out baby.

So by my extensive research your theory is crap. Still it helps a multiple billion pound industry make even more money with its free advertising via mums and grans with these myths And half truths.

All my boys breastfed:

Ds1-unhappy, unsettled baby - ok sleeper
Ds2-calm content baby - total nightmare sleeper
Ds3-happy baby who loved to do an afternoon screamathon - amazing sleeper
Ds4-only 3 months but easygoing baby - ok sleeper.

Their sleeping trends have continued in the same vein as they have grown older. Character and a little bit about birth weight in my view.

In my sample size of 3
Dc1 ff slept through the night from 8 weeks, brilliant sleeper, very happy had reflux though so masses of projectile vomit

Dc2 ff didn't sleep through till gone a year old, colic till 4 months!

Dc3 is now 5 months, ebf and has slept all night since 8 weeks, happiest baby of the lot!

My sample size of 1:

DS BF exclusively till 6 months. First slept through at 6 weeks (just one night, scared the life out of me, rushed in thinking he'd died), and then regularly slept through from 9 weeks. (And I swear I'm not making it up, most people think I'm lying!).

Fed loads during the day of course, but was generally a happy, 'easy' baby.

He went through periods every once in a while where he'd wake in the night to feed, usually coinciding with a growth spurt or teething, but at 2.5 he is still a great sleeper.

Just adding my bit! Dd is 14 weeks and ebf. She is very good, easy to settle and has been sleeping right through for 2 weeks now.

As everyone says, I think it's more to do with the baby than bf/ff

IME yes i think it is true - all the ff babies i know have slept alot better than the bf ones

If you stuffed your baby with a full roast dinner it would probably not wake through hunger. If a sleeper is all you are aiming for, go for that option.

Both of mine were fed the same way. DC1 was a complete nightmare but we dealt with it and DC2 woke every 3 hours, fed for 10 minutes and then went straight back to sleep.

We also have a sample size of 2, which is very, very small but I'd say that the way they are fed makes little difference at all.

My Mum is always quick to point out that I was ff and didn't sleep through until I was 4 whereas my Dsister was bf and slept through from 6 weeks. Small sample size again but this new shocking survey seems to prove your theory wrong .

SoupDragon - I'm not looking to stuff my baby full of food so she sleeps, I do FF her (and she sleeps fairly well, though I only have one atm so no personal experience to compare her to) I just wondered if this was true.

It is interesting what someone said about birth weight though, my friends FF DD was huge at birth, 10 and a half pounds, whereas her bad sleeper who was breastfed was 8 pounds... which is still a very good weight I know, but smaller than her first.

I would have loved to breast feed, but couldn't. I think actually I'm looking for some plusses! Expecting my second baby and wondering if rather than stressing out about FF him/her I could look forward to the fact that the baby might be a good sleeper! :)

My ff baby was my worst sleeper and still is. He is also by far the unhealthiest (asthma, eczema, food allergies, environmental allergies) so from my survey of 4 I say your friend is wrong.

"I would have loved to breast feed, but couldn't. I think actually I'm looking for some plusses! "

There is only one advantage of FF - the fact that your baby will be fed even if you can't/don't want to breastfeed.

Are women who breast more prone to being sanctimonious is a valid question

I can't see what other advantage you'd want TBH.

one of my sisters only ever bf'ed
one of my sisters ff'ed from day one
they each had a good sleeper and a crap sleeper.

I ebf'd mine for a bit, then switched to ff. there was no difference in their sleep when i changed to ff. nor were their sleep patterns were affected by weaning. i believe that the connection between what's in their tummies and how well they sleep is really not that strong.