channel 4 breastfeeding programme

[lazycow]

Just thought people might be interested if you don't already know.

Channel 4 on Weds 1 Feb. A programme called Extraordinary Breastfeeding is on. The write up in the magazine I'm looking at says:

"You'll be texting your friends about this as soon as it starts. It's about the phenomenon of mothers who breastfeed their kiddies well beyond the age considered 'normal' in this country. Seeing a feisty mum breastfeed her two-year-old twin isn't that disturbing, but the sequence of another lady suckling her 7 year old dughter isn't one we will forget in a hurry. "

I'm looking forward to seeing the tone it takes.

Tiktok - I agree with your last post. Apart from banging on this forum like a "Boob Lady on a Jihad" I am also on a Jihad to reform the health service - hence my membership of various BF orgs.

I think what I trying to say is - over emphasis on the health benefits without equal emphasis on providing professional and peer support, and striving for cultural change, just breeds resentment and sets women up for failure and guilt.
the two can co-exist happily, I'm sure.
the most powerful incentive for me to continue bf when the going got tough was not a statistical analysos of the health benefits but the memory of my sister telling me how jealous she was that I would get to bf, and what lovely times she had enjoyed bf her children. I know not everyone has that kind of family support - but we need to work on creating it or an equivalent.

I wouldn't have picked you up on the small numbers Nanneh as I agree - it is very sad. However, formula itself does not kill in that whatever it was that killed was not an ingredient listed on the can. But then we're into the realms of food poisoning (no, I'm not suggesting for a minute we should digress!)

Ho hum. Thank goodness the blooming programs on tonight anyway - then we can start the proper debate

I think the issue (or at least part of the issue) is that when you "bang on and on" about the health benefits, the people who you reach are absolutely the WRONG people. The person most sensative to the poster in the doctor's waiting room is the woman who heard the message, tried to bf, got bad support and failed and is still traumatised by the thought she is harming her child. Whereas the mum who is bottlefeeding because her mum and her auntie bottlefed and all her friends bottlefeed won't even notice the poster is there.

I'd slightly disagree with Tik one one point though - I do think there is some benefit in correcting the overenthusiastic spin of some pro-bf messages for mums who have not been able to bf. For instance, we know that bottlefeeding increases the risk of obesity. This is (I think) based on studies in the US where the childhood obesity rates were 12% for bf and 15% for bottle (adjusted for socioeconomic factors). OK, that's a meaningful number, but to take away the message "bottlefeeding your baby makes your child obese" isn't accurate. 85% of bottlefed children were still not obese.

The only purpose I can see in letting a mum who ended up bottlefeeding believe that her child will be obese is if you want to "punish" her for failing. Which is neither fair nor productive.

harpsi - different people have different reasons for BF- granted.

But I usually find that when I get soppy and say I BF my son beacuse I love him and I like the warmth of him being close to me, and I love it when he smiles at me when he feeds, etc. it usually gets a very silly reaction from people.

My DH and my mother understand that it has alot to do with my emotional attachment to my son, but not complete strangers who have a negative attitude to BF in the first place.

I stick to the health benefits when talking to other people.

There is at least one major study I know of that shows the impact on mortality and morbidity of infant feeding, in the West, with socio-ecnomic factors controlled for, but I don't have the time at the moment to find it and link to it.....LucyJo, you might know you cannot post something saying this without a link, because people are perfectly capable of saying 'I don't believe it' unless they have evidence!

The study was done on thousands of babies (would have to be thousands, in order to show the difference) in the US, and was published in the last 3-4 years. If I have time later today I will search for it.

I would appreciate that Tiktok - I'm not saying "I don't believe it" - I'm saying I have yet to be convinced because the studies I have seen do not make reference to socio-economics (and that kinda thing interests me in all aspects of life btw)

However, I will never believe that formula itself kills babies.

Squarer - all the major studies by that I have ever seen have a "control" for socio-economic factors. If they didn't no one would take them seriously as they would not be scientific.

I know a lot of people here are planning to watch the program and then complain about it afterwards, should it prove to be as much of a freakshow as we fear. I just wanted to share this from the book "Remotely Controlled":

"I should point out that I have actually seen producers at the BBC and other networks laugh at the viewers who bother to respond with their so-called 'viewer feedback'. I was told by one executive producer at the BBC that when he sifted through the viewer feedback and passed it onto the staff, they all sniggered. So he stopped after the first day. While on an ITV show, the producer was very straight-forward; 'We completely and utterly despise anyone who bothers to give us their 'feedback'. They are sad fckers, that's how they will always be regarded by people in the media who think they are so much better than any sad fcker of a viewer. They are absolutely never takn seriously, and any colleague who does wouldn't be taken seriously and would be despised themselves.'"

Channel 4 don't give a toss what you think of this program, they just want to get as many people as possible watching it. Looks like their sensational freakshow angle is very successful indeed, judging from the attention the program is getting on here.

Squarer - formula per se does not kill babies.

The fact that there is a far greater potential for formula to be contaminated is the thing that is frightnening.

Add to that the potential for a person or company to make "bogus" formula and flog it to the poor (see the case of China on BMA website) and you have a very serious public health situation.

That is shocking, abhorrent and disgusting!!! I suppose it shouldn't be surprising though...

Presumably, if you want to hit C4 where it hurts, you should write in telling them that you intend to boycott any products advertised in the slots either side of this program, and that you intend to write to the advertisers letting them know that you are doing this in protest against them being associated with the programme.

But viewer feedback did get the BBC to pull the awful "multiple heads" ad promoting digital television.

But in essence, I am agreeing with you: Channel 4 will delighted that their "freak show" trailers has generated the level of response that this thread would suggest. The fact that it might have also had a deliterious effect on the health of our nation by damaging our laready poor breast feeding rates is totally irrelevent.

As they say, there is no such thing as bad publicity - at least, for those selling the porgramme,

Don't know why my links don't work, but here is the address of the study I was referring to:
www.mercola.com/2003/dec/24/formula_influence.htm
(Sorry, but I'm supposed to be doing the housework this morning, hence the delay in posting)
Also, here is the address of the Channel 4 program that kicked off this whole debate:
www.channel4.com/health/microsites/F/family/parenting/qa_breast.html
Actually, it doesn't sound as freaky or sensationalist as I was expecting, so maybe it won't be quite as bad as I fear...

tiktok - your post addressed to me?

Excellent - absolutely spot on!

when the next breastfeeding debate arises, as it surely will - I will be cutting and pasting and then parping

This is probably going to sound really weird but I B/f my son because it was an instinctive feeling that by not B/f him he wasn't getting fed. I remember being in tears on a couple of occasions while trying to decide to carry on B/f or switching to bottles because it felt that I was stopping feeding him and he was going to starve.

Totally irrational I know.

r3dh3d - good idea. Reading that certainly does make one want to do something to unseat the arrogant b@stards!

nanneh - yes i know what you mean but if we don't tell people how great bf is, then who will?
it shouldn't be a secret
not having a go btw, i have loved your posts on here
but sod the reactions, i say

shock

Yes, of course Nanneh - I do agree with you - formula certainly is open to contamination whereas it is impossible to contaminate breastmilk in the same manner. It is horrific that people seek to make even more profit out of it by selling bogus formula. That truly is shocking. The thing is, whilst I do nod in agreement with you in respect of the wider (world-wider) issues regarding formula, I don't agree with you that formula-bashing is the way to go to encourage breastfeeding in the UK. You probably realised that already didn't you!!

Anyway never noticed any socio-economic references before. Perhaps I'm not reading the full papers? Off to have a Google!

Thank you LucyJu - you've saved me googling!

lol at JoolsToo

nanneh - there are instances where formula per se has indeed killed babies or seriously damaged them......not formula that has been contaminated, but where the formulation has been incorrect (and omitted an ingredient) or where the formulation has been correct, but harmful. These are thankfully rare. There have been other instances where the packaging has damaged the goods inside - again, rare.

I don't know why it seems to make a difference to the argument, whether the formula is contaminated or 'merely' deficient - if the baby is harmed, there is no difference. Seems to me that there are bound to be risks in any processing of any food - the journey the product takes from (in this case) cow's udder to container to transporter truck to factory to packaging centre to transporter truck to store to kitchen shelf to bottle to baby is bound to have risks along the way, of human error, of sabotage, of mechanical error...whatever.

Mostly, the processing is safe and the formula will not - per se - harm the baby. Occasionally, it's not.

Oops the conversation has moved on somewhat since I started my post sorry.

What utter utter gits to feel that they are so bloody superior that view feedback is irrlevant - well guess bloody what the sad F*kers that are the viewers keep you in a job mate.

How do you reply to that sort of supercillious idiot?

Thanks, LucyJo - I think the study I was thinking of was one of the references in that article: looks at how differences apply across all socio-economic groups