Stupidest article about extended BF ever?

[EauRouge]

Here.

Warnings- DM link, idiot comments from a doctor (and possibly from readers once they get going). Get your bingo cards out, you'll need them.

Ignorant comments from lay people are enough without an actual doctor spouting loads of bullshit.

"I laughed at how bf is 'draining' because it can require up to 500 extra calories a day."

I had a HV tell me a couple of months ago that because I'm tandem feeding I could be using up to 1500 calories a day (no idea where she got that figure).

I just laughed and replied "you aint seen me eat".

AA's done yet another fantastic post about CBC here.

Although i think its a shame someone who is a doctor is allowed a personal platform to air their views, i do think she has a point about this type of article masking the probem, that such a small percentage of women feed thier babies to even 6 weeks. I met up with a friend last week who has a five month old baby, and none of the babies in her ante natal group (6) were even breastfed for a week, surely that is a bigger issue?

mrsred - I don't understand the dichotomy. We can be concerned about the large number of women who want to breastfeed and who stop after a poor experience and be concerned about the prejudice and misinformation displayed about and towards women who bf for longer.

Ffs.

I can't find the words.

In addition to the comments made, I would also say that the Dr is confusing two issues: extended bf and attachement parenting. Most of the article's thrust is pointing out possible developmental problems of keeping children too close to mum too long. And then saying that EBF is thus damaging. This logic doesn't work for me.

And misquoting the WHO guidelines (bf up to 2 years!!??)...from a Dr...I'm dumbstruck. My 14mo walks up and pulls my top up when he wants bobo. I suppose I should stop now before he becomes damaged for life...! What a load of claptrap.

From her website:

Dr Ellie is currently involved in a number of health-related PR campaigns for big brands covering a variety of products ranging from prebiotics to pelvic floor exercisers.
How DR Ellie can help
She has extensive experience in
media advisory boards
quotes and media advice
campaigns including corporate videos and radio days

Formula company involvement? Whatyathink?

mrsred - I don't think it's masking a problem. I think it is symptomatic of our society's attitudes to breastfeeding that we think we can't talk about specific aspects in isolation. You wouldn't do it with anything else would you. For example, every time there is an article about obesity you don't expect them to also cover starvation. Every time there is an article about new fashions in shoes you don't expect them to cover footwear for those with mobility problems. It's such a shame that breastfeeding is given so little press space that it feels like we need to cover everything every time.

...it is not so well matched to toddlers? needs and can accentuate common problems such as vitamin D and iron deficiency, hindering growth and development."

I'd better go and tell that to my DS, who's the tallest in his (reception) year, on the school's 'more able pupils' register and has never needed to see a GP in his life - he clearly hasn't realised that he's meant to be stunted and damaged Awful, awful, awful article!

She also seems to be affiliated with SHE WHO MUST NOT BE NAMED.

I'm really angry! What a misinformed, prejudiced, inaccurate article. Misquoting WHO as a start, she's supposed to be a health professional.

People (looking at you MIL) will take her 'professional' view and run with it.

Sorry. Wrong about the gf connection.

...it is not so well matched to toddlers? needs and can accentuate common problems such as vitamin D and iron deficiency, hindering growth and development.

yup, better tell my DS too, who couldn't look more fit and healthy if he tried - tallest in his nursery class, and also least frequently ill, so far as I can tell.

However, from seeing that article, at least I now know why my wee sister and her twat of a fiance are so repulsed by me a) daring to bfeed directly from the breast and b) continuing to do so once my child has teeth/can walk/can talk/can ask directly for it

luckily they are the only family members who read the DM.

These articles make my blood boil! I am afreak ebf. Ds1 was 2 an a bit when he stopped an ds2 is now 17mo and still has bm. I know the good it it doing for my boys, including keepin them from being seriously I'll as babies. Ds1 had suspected salmonella and I was told because he was bf it save him from being properly I'll. Ds2 had rotavirus and bronchiolits, bf meant that he wasn't admitted for either. He has been coldy for the last week and off his food, he has had more bm instead and that has kept him going and helped him get better.

I have had Friends talking about the freaky (their words) time article and Because I dont make a to do about bf my boys they are shocked and don't know what to say when I tell them I am still feeding ds2 and how long I fed ds1 for. Suddenly it takes the oddness away I think, they know I'm not doing it for me and starts to change their minds.

The media need to stop publishing such damaging articles and quote frankly dr elli should be struck off and Claire buy my book never allowed to speak again.

I tend to get a bee in my bonnet about articles like this - it's a good job my OH isn't here or he'd be telling me to get down off my soapbox!

Recent research has actually indicated that safe co-sleeping may actually be beneficial . See here

Obviously she has never breastfed a toddler - my DD BF until aged 2 and a bit and self-weaned. I was sad that it ended but I could not have forced her to BF even if I'd have wanted to. How she thinks it's narcissistic to BF an older child is beyond me??

My family already thought it was weird that I BF her for as long as I did without articles by Drs claiming to have the monopoly on truth "But as a doctor, I must advise there is little benefit and possibly harm to be done by the latter."

Hmf...

Oh and ds1 reached all his yr 1 levels in February.

Clearly this doctor has never breastfed. Otherwise she might have read a bit. And otherwise she might understand the lovely bond it promotes, the calm child who's needs are being met, the frustrated ready to throw a tantrum child who's immediately calmed by a little feed, and who grows up (so far!) with a certain self assurance and - dare I say it - independance (I'm not biased, of course ).

She's a twat. This article is so detrimental as to possibly call it unethical. Could we call it unethical? I think we could. I wonder how the WHO would comment on it?

I'm a Doctor admittedly not a medical one, but fuckit, the medic who wrote that article is probably less educated on the subject of ebf than I am

So as a doctor, I must advise that mothers who choose to continue feeding their children for as long as both mother and child are happy, should ignore all pseudo-science spouted by DM journos with an agenda.

What a horrible horrible article. Argh it makes my blood boil it really does.

Most doctors in my opinion know nothing useful about breastfeeding. A GP I once saw, told me that no baby needs night feeds after 3 months and they should be sleeping through by then. I made up my mind after that that I would never take BF advice from a doctor again.
My HV told me that at 11 months old my DD should be eating more as my BM is "only a drink now". ONly a drink, yeah it turns to water after 6 months, or maybe I should be giving her juice instead.

WHy are HCPs so clueless??

Good grief. The only good thing about this article is that virtually all the comments beneath it (there were 10 when I last looked) rip it to bits and point out exactly why it's such crap (everything people have said above).

Why is there such suspicion and hatred of bf (and even more so of ebf) in the UK? I live in Germany and brought up my dc as babies here and there was total support of bf - but also no great criticism of those who didn't/couldn't do it. It just wasn't an issue. I have read articles, though, complaining about the low levels of bf in Germany - the author thought it was dreadful that only 48% of mothers were ebf at 6 months, compared with the Scandinavian rates of 90% or so! Compare that with the British rate of 3% (is that right?)!

yes Darrow, 3% of babies are EBF at 6 months in the UK, that is what I have read too.

Probably won't do owt but if you'd like to complain to the PCC about the misquoted WHO guidelines then here's a link. Clause one of the code covers accuracy and distinguishing between fact and bullshit the author's opinion.

On her fb page she may have told someone to do their research (re vaccines) and I may have just implied she was a hypocrite

and bang, its deleted

Lol bronze

I've never breast fed (hope to be doing so soon) but this kind of article is what makes me really happy I remember breastfeeding myself, not avidly clear memories they are a bit fuzzy but sexual????!!!! Um no, don't know what planet these people live on but that is so wierd to even think knowing my first breakfast was just something nice and snuggly we did in the morning. I was parent-led weaned eventually too so it wasn't even for as long as I wanted to. Silly,silly people.

BTW my mum went back to work part time when I was 5 months old so we were hardly 'each others world'.

I mentioned some problems I was having with bf to my GP when I went for the six week check. He looked a bit alarmed, and then relieved when I went on to say that I was seeing the bf counsellor at our local maternity hospital.

He then went on to say, and I paraphrase as it's been 5 years, "I don't know anything about bf so I'm definitely not the person to ask about any of this".

At least he was honest. It would be great if doctors (and professionals in any sphere really) would be clear about when they were giving advice based on their professional knowledge and when they were giving advice based on their personal experience and prejudices.

I suspect the vast majority of bf opinion and advice given by GPs is based on personal (rather than professional) experience and prejudice.