Want to exclusively FF

[justpoppingintosayhello]

I'm being made to feel inferior because I want to formula feed my baby, how do I carry on with this? I'm being made to feel bad because of my choices.

Get you, Tik. A few more paragraphs might have helped but I apologise for misunderstanding you.

raindrips

I'm pregnant and planning on bottle feeding from the start. I feel no guilt for that, its the right thing for my, myself and my husband.

I'm fed up of people judging already. People that have for the most part not done the research into breast vs formula that I have. When its come up in conversation that I'll be bottle feeding, I've had to fend off a barage of questions from friends already. I've never asked them why they want to breastfeed, and whether its the right thing to do, so perhaps they should offer me the same courtesy.

Even here, when someone is asking for support (ignoring that she may have been a troll), instead, she gets criticism and judgement from some people.

The benefits from breastfeeding are marginal, and limited to a few things like tummy bugs and ear infections. The other benefits that are spashed about in the media either come from horrifically poor studies , for example ones which don't take into account socio-economic factors or are very theoretical, and not backed up by actual data. For example, I had to laugh at a study on formula and tummy bugs - they were comparing formula fed and breastfed infants in the slums of Lima. Clearly a slum with questionable drinking water and poor access to sterrilisation is exactly like the UK...

But you shouldn't just look at the physical benefits and drawbacks, but the wider situation. The ability to share the feeding, so that mum is able to sleep, is a massive advantage. That mum can go back to work earlier if she wants, without the faff of expressing is an advantage. That dad gets some extra time bonding with his child through feeding is an advantage. It means that mum isn't tied to the baby 24/7, which is very beneficial for a lot of women's mental health.And thats before you get to the discomfort of breastfeeding initially, cracked nipples, scarring, mastitis. A happier mother is more likely to have a happier baby.

From formula feeding at the outset, babies are less likely to become dehydrated. Babies have died from waiting for mum to produce enough milk.

There are advantages and disadvantages to both. Its really up to the parents, and no business of anyone else.

Do you think it odd that the NHS has been taken in by these dodgy studies into the benefits of breastfeeding? Or do they have some kind of agenda?

Blueskyrain - any baby dying of dehydration after inadequate breastfeeding has died because of dreadful neglect from the healthcare professionals supposed to be caring for the mother and baby. I don't think there is any case in the uk of this - one sees very occasional stories in the news from elsewhere, where the mother has not been in touch with/has chosen not to be in touch with the healthcare system.

You are right of course to point out that for some families formula feeding is a choice that suits them better. And that it's their business! But don't back up your choice with scare mongering about dead babies :(

I'll try to find the page. It was something I read about 6 months ago so may take some digging

Please dig away! If you find a story of a baby who died waiting for the mother's milk to come in, this will be a story of neglect and dreadful care.

I can't find the exact one but this link discusses breastfeeding hypernatremic dehydration. Bear in mind that 1.9%of infants (not sure if that's for bf babies, or all infants, in which case, the rate amongst bf babies will be much higher) , and how serious it is, it's quite worrying.

www.pediatricsconsultant360.com/articles/breastfeeding-hypernatremic-dehydration-potentially-grave-threat-breastfed-newborns

If you've got any evidence that the only babies affected by this are out of touch with the health service, then I'd be glad to read it, but that's not the feeling I'm getting from these reports.

I'm not saying that babies frequently die from breastfeeding complications, but that they can sometimes get very ill, and can occasionally die.

Agenda? Yep, the NHS definitely has an agenda.

It promotes BF because it creates healthier humans. The NHS would save millions if the BF rates were higher in this country.

I'm not saying that babies frequently die from breastfeeding complications, but that they can sometimes get very ill, and can occasionally die.

Exactly the same applies to FF.

In any case, it's irrelevant as I think people who choose to FF are not doing so because of any (vanishingly rare) risk of dehydration among BF babies ... it's because it's a choice that suits that particular mum and her circumstances better, for whatever reason.

Petrie sorry but that's absolute tosh

Bluesky- there are several studies of hypernatraemic dehydration, and breastfed babies not being fed effectively are at risk - no one argues that is not the case. . Any baby not being fed adequately in the first days of life risks dehydration. This is why babies - all babies - need to be fed! Midwives ask mothers how the baby is feeding, the. baby is observed, his nappies checked, and he is weighed. That way, babies who are not doing well with their BF (or their FF) are supported with appropriate Interventions long before it gets to the stage of the baby dying - the BF is fixed, or in some cases they are supplemented with expressed breastmilk or formula, until they are OK.

You might as well say 'babies can starve to death if they are not fed properly' - well, of course.

This article has more analysis of the rates of dehydration of breastfed babies:

www.google.co.uk/amp/s/bfmed.wordpress.com/2016/01/31/of-goldilocks-and-neonatal-hypernatremia/amp/?client=safari

They come up with a rate of 0.1% of babies studied that developed severe dehydration.

It also has a link to the tragic story I think you might be thinking of.

I've read those links and stories ... close to my heart as DD was BF and lost a high % of birth weight in first few days, and we ended up mixed feeding. Those aren't stories of a failure in BF, but of a failure in health services to monitor babies correctly. In the UK any baby in the situation described (e.g. 15% of birth weight lost by end of day 3, in one case) would have been supplemented with EBM or FF immediately, and probably admitted to hospital.
The fact that neonatal care is insufficient in some parts of the world isn't a reason to choose not to BF here.

I can only access the abstract s of these
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11437141
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16027579

Irish woman whose baby ended up in intensive care
m.independent.ie/life/family/mothers-babies/i-nearly-killed-my-baby-because-of-breastfeeding-31105710.html

Article written by a Spanish doctor on how breastfeeding hypernatremic dehydration has left her child permanent disabled.

Breastfeeding also leads to far higher levels of jaundice in newborns.

I'm not saying that breastfeeding is bad, or worse than formula, but both have their pros and cons.

fedisbest.org/2015/04/letter-to-doctors-and-parents-about-the-dangers-of-insufficient-exclusive-breastfeeding/

This was the Spanish article.

Maybe the hospitals should take some of the blame, but so often bfing mums get told (including on here), to persevere, and persevere. In doing so, they may well be putting their babies at risk.

It is scaremongering though. To suggest your baby might die or be seriously disabled because of breastfeeding, when in actuality it's to do with just lack of feeding full stop.

People do it all the time re formula feeding...

I can read those papers in full Blueskyrain. They are discussing babies that were seen for the first time by HCPs generally at around 10 days old, in one paper 14 days old.
The conclusion of the second paper you linked to is that:
'the lack of early routine postpartum follow up by the health care providers' is to blame.
As I said, this doesn't happen in the UK. The 14-day old baby was born to a young African-American mother in Brooklyn. It could well be that she did not have any postnatal care.
This doesn't happen here, thanks to daily home visits by MW etc.
It is NOT relevant to someone debating BF or FF in the UK.

"Breastfeeding also leads to far higher levels of jaundice in newborns." isn't it more reasonable to say that it is normal for breastfeeding babies to be slightly more jaundiced than formula fed babies. I.e. Its normal and not problematic.

People don't say that babies will die or be seriously disabled because of being formula fed. And even if they did, how does it help to scaremonger about breastfeeding?

In the first paper you linked to (from the US), the authors (paediatricians) state that: 'the physical examination in all cases consistently revealed a lethargic and emaciated baby with clinical signs of dehydration including dry mucous membranes, sunken eyes, doughy skin, and a depressed anterior fontanelle.'
They also state that these babies may not be seen by any HCP 'until 2 to 4 weeks of age'.

Here, there is very little chance that a baby in the state described above would not be spotted by a MW or HV way before the situation became critical, if dehydration was developing.

This is a problem with the US medical system, not with BF!! There's a reason why you can't find any UK-based studies showing this kind of thing.

This discussion is leaving a nasty taste in the mouth now, the death of a baby in any circumstances is tragic - arguing over whether the parents cause it by BFing/FFing is counterproductive, surely? I don't think the answer is a tit for tat "Well BF babies die too".

Support those who want to BF to do it successfully, support those who want to FF to do it in the safest way, stop all the stupid shaming that creates a ridiculous rift between women at a vulnerable time, campaign against unethical practices by formula companies and just feed our babies the way we want to and the way we are able to.

The debate is an important one, but when it descends into talking about dead babies, it's time for a little perspective, right?

If it's normal, why do we treat it.?
Anyway, normal doesn't necessarily mean better. It's fairly normal for someone to die from a heart attack, but if we can stop it with medical advances that's good, although it's not the natural course of events.

Louise, when you say you've read them all, I assume you mean the papers I gave abstracts for? The links show quite prompt medical attention - by day 3 she was speaking to the hospital consultant. The baby was hospitalised the next day. Not 10-14 days without medical attention!

The Irish baby was admitted 24 hours after coming home from hospital!

Yes these are failures in feeding rather than breastmilk being dangerous, but if you can't access your food then then it's pretty dangerous. Lots of women are told to preserve at just a few days in - and sometimes the outcome of that can be devastating.

This is ridiculous. To treat jaundice means in most cases to feed more frequently and babies are not hospitalised because it's a normal possibility for newborn babies. It's not a reason to suggest women shouldn't breastfeed, just in case their baby would have got jaundiced.