Article on breast milk on the guardian today

[OneLittleBabyTerror]

Has anyone seen it?

www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2012/jun/16/breasts-breastfeeding-milk-florence-williams

A lot of interesting things about breastmilk I've learned. First it's got a lot of live culture, similar to probiotic yoghurt. It's also filled with sugar an infant can't absorb. Lastly I'm shocked how much of the chemicals we absorb is passed onto our babies. (I shouldn't be so shocked about the last one because I do know the higher you are in the food chain, the more concentrated things like mercury is in your body)

A very interesting read.

When I read the article today it struck me as negative and unbalanced. Particularly dislikeable was the end conclusion hinting breastmilk might not be best at all. A conclusion that couldn't be drawn from the evidence provided.

When I read the article today it struck me as negative and unbalanced. Particularly dislikeable was the end conclusion hinting breastmilk might not be best at all. A conclusion that couldn't be drawn from the evidence provided.

Can't see a NHS 'behind the headlines' about this yet but I did come across this about heavy metals in weaning foods :(

Indeed, Edgar, we must feed our babies something!

I think all the people who are slating the writer and the paper are missing the point. You would rather people didn't know because they are unable to make their own judgements about risks? That would be considered incredibly patronising if it was, say, a male doctor talking to a woman.

This writer seems to have done quite a lot of research about this if you check out other articles on her site. She sounds to be totally into breastfeeding - just rightfully worried about the effects of these chemicals which really we should be up in arms about. Our issues should be with the huge chemicals firms, lobby groups and governments, not the messenger.

but also: we are in this 'toxic' environment. is it killing us?

maybe making us slightly less well overall than as a population we possibly could be, but in actual fact.... life expectancy is increasing....

journalism is rarely unslanted blue - the bit about Norway was a cobble-together to make the article hint at breast not being best. without consideration of what the alternative options are...

ultimately only 20% of the uk population BF to 6 mo anyway, saying how great it is will only please a minority.

Well that is just flipping' great. I struggled like you would not believe for months to bf my kids. It was fucking hard. Have just about reached the point with ds2 that I am enjoying it and now I find out that I am actually poisoning him!!!

Edgar - have a look at her articles on the site. The one about 'why does my couch smell odd?' or something. She wrote it in 2005 and has clearly been concerned with the issue on a personal level as a breastfeeding mother for quite some time. I was impressed with her research.

crazy - you are not poisoning him as he would still be exposed to all sorts of toxins (but with out any of the protective effects/factors of breastmilk) if you weren't bfing him. That's the point that article misses - everything is full of toxins even formula so it's not a 'safer' option than BM from a toxin protection view point.

So...the interesting part of this article was that really need to think as a society about how many chemicals we use if they are even affecting breastmilk.

The author's argument towards the end of the piece that humans may need to reconsider or stop feeding their children - simply because life is so polluting - is a bit bonkers.

Let's compare. If our veggies have pesticides in them, should we stop using pesticides or stop eating vegetables? Er....

Breastmilk is good for babies. Vegetables are good for humans. If we are compromising those kind of things then what articles need to call for is not a change in breastfeeding guidance but pollution management.

This article plays into the old "is breast best?" debate but it needn't have eveb touched on that. It could have been written with the same content along the lines of:

"Here's what's in breastmilk. It's amazing but we don't understand it. But see how finely balanced it is, with so much there that we can't even work out the role of each ingredient. But worryingly the amount of chemicals in BM is high and so we should demand better research on whether this matters and demand governments cut chemical pollution."

even not eveb - sorry, all the chemicals are rotting my brain as well as my breasts....

crazy- you are absolutely not poisoning your baby! You are giving him the best food there is, please don't worry :)

blue- I don't think anyone is saying that this should all be swept under the carpet, just that stopping BF is not the answer to the question. Of course everyone should be making an informed decision but this article doesn't give all the information, it is quite one-sided.

This article scared me! The author said she questions the wisdom of feeding both her children till 18 months and that made me worried as I'm still BFing my almst 2 year old....it made me question myself and think I should stop

Seems very dodgy to me - like others I wonder who is behind it ?

Could be undermining to women's confidence in the amazing goodness of the milk they can produce for their babies, which is very regretful.

There will be at least as many impurities in FF and any other nutrition we can give our babies - this should surely be obvious - any toxins in the environment will be present throughout - just as much or more in cow's milk as in our own

I've read the article now - before I was responding to other poster's impressions ...

Stand by what I said ... basically first half is rightly so positive about the tremendous benefits of BM - including appetite stimulation and regulation in infants, and the promotion of positive bacteria's in the infant as in pro-biotic yogurts for us ... but then it chooses to end in quite a negative and discouraging way by talking about the contamination of milk by chemicals in our modern society. I think to be balanced it should have concluded with a balanced, positive statement, but I guess for one thing that wouldn't make such compelling journalism.

< Feels vindicated in lack of use of household cleaning products during extended breast-feeding period >

agree its a very wierd article

still intend to continue BFing 9m DD until she self weans

perhaps being vegetarian for 7 years, and since then having mainly eaten organic meat is a good thing? ......
i have avoided things like air fresheners and household chemicals (mostly) for my whole adult life, using maninly ecover or similar, and i use minimul detergents and dont touch fabric softener

though i still sit on a normal sofa and wear clothes.... (though DD has worn cloth nappies since 24 hours old)

I eat alot of organic food (but no way even close to a wholley organic diet), though not sure that helps that much either

despite this i remain certain that human milk is far superior to cow milk for my human infant so will continue to feed her (and her siblings) with it until she self weans (or grows adult teeth, whichever comes first)

Yes ViolaCrayon - I thought it was a very strange article as well.

There was not real evidence either where the writer was getting her facts from ie no mention of any study or paper as far as I could see.

The problem with this article and the reason why it's potentially much more damaging in discouraging women to breast feed than ANY DailyMail article is the fact that the author appears to be pro bf and appears to purport a balanced opinion whereas actually she sneaks in the Norway example and then instils doubt in our heads into possible damage to her bf offspring.
Agreed, toxins are everywhere. However after reading this article some people may naively and WRONGLY believe that what comes out of a factory is less contaminated and thus "purer" and better than what the human body produces.
Research shouldn't be taken at face value. The stuff she quotes doesn't convince me in the least. Total tosh IMO

Well said olimpia

Agreed olimpia.

Good old Analytical Armadillo has written a very in-depth blog post about this- fascinating stuff! Anyone who was worried by the Guardian article should have a read.

I love the analytical armadillo

ah, fact, sweet fact....

and analysis!

rather than vague hinting and inference on the basis of, well...

tosh.

Ah well I've read it but I refuse to believe it. I was breastfed and I am fine

Very good article by Analytical Armadillo - thanks for posting EauRouge. Maybe I/you/Armadillo/someone should write to the Guardian?