Were you formula fed as a baby?

[Janni]

Do you believe you would be healthier or more intelligent had you been breastfed?

Do you believe you were disadvantaged in any other way by being formula fed?

I was not breastfed.

I breastfed my own children for 20 months.

I realise though that I do not feel in any way disadvantaged for not having been breastfed myself.

I just wondered how others felt.

Hi all just found this thread! Could I just say that myself and my 3 siblings were all FF from the word go and w are all fine although I have atopic eczema it is hereditory. My 22 month old was also FF as I couldn't get him to latch on properly and had vry unhelpful MW! My son also has aopic eczema but he was actually born with it covering his face and limbs. So ho can that be blame on FF? Oh ang greenmonkies thanks for makng me feel even worse about not being able to BF as I have now condemned my son to a life of miery according to you!! You need to ralise it's unfair to say that people are putting their childs health at risk feel sorry for your child if they ouldn't feed their cild would you make them feel like shit too? As you have probably done to others reading this!

Thanks to the OP for helping the sharing of some rational stories on this

I?ve been reading through these posts with interest and feel that something should be said. I managed to BF my baby for about 8-weeks, after a Caesarean. Rightly or wrongly I was advised to give formula top-ups owing to rapid baby weight loss in first week. Post-natally I don?t feel I was particularly well-supported on feeding owing to conflicting advice. However, the tipping point to use formula full-time for me was meeting two so-called breast feeding peer supporters ? their shoddy communication skills and tendency to hide behind statistics and their scary, starry-eyed ?join us? demeanour, was so at odds with the way I was feeling at the time that I knew I couldn?t carry on being trapped in my home, glued to the sofa with a miserable, hungry, biting baby. That was truly how I felt and most times I read a ?lactivist? post on here I swear I get flash-backs. I would have liked to have carried on with BF, but the mental and emotional costs to me would have outweighed the benefits.

All of this is to say that there are many pro-BF MNers who probably don?t realise that with their angry, defensive and militant argument styles, they are frightening women, particularly emotionally fragile first-time mums and achieving the very opposite of what they are setting out to do.

Yes, every woman is entitled to support and information, but we need to take a close look at the quality, methods and consistency of that support and the manner in which these messages are conveyed both ante and post-natally. Frankly bleating that formula is the sperm of the devil (last time I checked, it isn?t), is not going to achieve a blind thing.

KMUN, 'every woman is entitled to support and information, but we need to take a close look at the quality, methods and consistency of that support and the manner in which these messages are conveyed..."

Amen

There is an approach on here from some which just SO does not help the cause. I am extremely pro-bfing, I love to see people do it, I want everyone to be able to do it who can, I will fight for women to feel able to do it when and where they like; I couldn't be much more pro - but some threads on here make me feel so cross it's bizarre. Certainly shows how some people can totally cloud the message

Kmun and H Glossop great posts!!! You both voiced exactly how I feel,your views and concerns are very similar to mine, couldn't word it any better

Kmun your experience and subsequent feelings was almost exactly the same as mine, I could have written exactly the same post except I struggled on for just 6 weeks with all 3 and finally ended up with my youngest being rushed into SCBU with dehydration and jaundice and a touch of PND for me thrown in for good measure. God the sofa thing and the pain !!!!! Chuck in 15 month old twins rampaging round the house too!!!! Mentally,
physically and practically it was the best thing for me to move onto ff-both times.

I didn't have Mumsnet 4 and 3 years ago and I do have concerns that fragile mums in a state like I was will read the type of posts we're concerned about and at best feel guilty and frightened at worse spiral needlessly into PND. That is my main concern really. Although pro choice I am actually very pro bfeeding too and have always tried to support and encourage bfeeding family and friends.

Anyway enough from me, sorry if this is a bit garbled(marauding pre-schoolers about) got to feed my monsters

"Frankly bleating that formula is the sperm of the devil (last time I checked, it isn?t), is not going to achieve a blind thing"

Sorry - I think this comment is very unfair. Lactivists on this site - including myself, DON'T see formula as 'sperm of the devil' or 'evil' - Using this sort of language achieves one thing: it polarises opinion and distorts the issue in the most unhelpful way possible.

I'm sorry that you were spoken to insensitively at a time when you were struggling with feeding your baby - but that doesn't mean that there is NEVER a time or a place to discuss the health risks associated with using formula: as far as I'm concerned there is no reason why we shouldn't feel free to dicuss these issues here on mumsnet without being sniped at.

I was formula fed, I have asthma and am overweight. My brother and sister were breastfed and don't have asthma anywhere near as bad as mine and they are both slimmer than me. I am the oldest and my mother had very bad advice re breastfeeding (only every 4 hours from the off - it was the 70s!) but they pretty much ignored her when she had her second and third babies and the breastfeeding went much better...
I am extremely proud of the fact I'm still breastfeeding my now 22 month old dd, she doesn't have asthma or eczema which dh has very badly so I'm hoping it's helped her.

I am not denying the right of anyone to debate this issue from wherever they are coming from. From a historical viewpoint, this thread has been fascinating on how things have changed and understanding the perspective of older relatives. However, I really wish people would show a bit more sensitivity and responsibility when expressing their views on the more controversial topics like this and consider the wider impact they might be having. I?m not sure they always do.

Those of you who can BF: good on you all, science says you are giving your babies a superior and certainly more economical product. If I?m in the situation again, I?d love to retry and find better support. However, please remember that FF-ers are not ignorant, eczema-lovin?, IQ-hatin?, gin-toting, jezebels (well not all of us ) and this path hasn?t always strictly been our choice; so what I and others perceive as pompous, preachy tactics are actually rather unhelpful and I would imagine sometimes damaging.

Here endeth the lesson . Oh and getting back to the original topic after this digression, I think I was BF for 4 months, it was the mid 70s. Well done mum, you did better than I did and thanks for the extra brain-cells .

I was a premie and formula fed because my mother was told she was not a cow, therefore, don't act like one. This was early 1970s. If she knew then, what we know now about the benefits of breastfeeding especially premies, i bet she would have given it a good try.

Do I feel disadvantaged? Most undoubtedly YES!!!!!!! Why? because there is a generation of us left without a proper natural breastfeeding support network. I don't care if people say they turned out perfectly fine even though they were FFed - frankly their personal opinion doesn't disprove what is now known about breastmilk! This thread does make those who feel guilty about not breatfeeding feel better. I think the majority of people who ff their children give up because of lack of good and thorough support. I have experienced every breastfeeding problem imaginable (and really, I am not exaggerating) and have had to battle with health professionals to get the help and medications even (like for raynaud's phenomenon of the nipples - mega painful) that i've needed. But I did it because I am stubborn and want nothing best for my children and am very proud of breastfeeding.

I was fomrula fed.

I am 6'1 and very healthy (other than beiong overweight but that is caused by my own bad eating habbits)

I have an IQ of 157.

I do not feel at all disadvantaged.

I did not BF my own children for pesonal reasons and do not feel guilty for it at all.

"However, please remember that FF-ers are not ignorant, eczema-lovin?, IQ-hatin?, gin-toting, jezebels (well not all of us ) and this path hasn?t always strictly been our choice;"

Sigh.....

Kmum - Again your words are unfair. You imply that lactivists deliberately set out to stigmatise and label women who don't breastfeed.

In my experience, people who now the most about breastfeeding and who are most passionate about it also tend to be better informed than most about the challenges that mums in this country face in trying to breastfeed their babies.

That's not to say that at a social level there's not a huge amount of ignorance and misunderstanding about the differences between breastfeeding and artificial feeding - in my opinion it's this that lies at the heart of our general complacency about the terrible support women who are struggling with breastfeeding get. If you start from the position of assuming that formula is very similar to breastmilk and that it doesn't really make any difference to babies whether they're breastfed or not - then why bother to go to all the trouble and expense of changing things?

"so what I and others perceive as pompous, preachy tactics are actually rather unhelpful and I would imagine sometimes damaging"

Yes - maybe just as damaging as the emotional blackmail and casual censorship that mothers constantly engage among themselves when it comes to discussing this subject, in order to suppress uncomfortable truths.

greenmonkies I notice that all your evidence comes from pro breastfeeding websites. I would therefore suggest that the information will be heavily biased against ff. There is no way to assess what may have been, given whether a person was bf or ff or mix fed. The individuality of people ensures that this is not possible. It is pure speculation, unscientific and scaremongering.

I am currently bf my 2.5wk old baby btw so not anti bf. I dare say if I went to the SMA website etc that I could find evidence to suggest that just as many babies were hospitalised who were bf. In my experience I have seen lots of babies/ children who were bottle and breast fed who have had a range of illnesses.

I was breast fed (IIRR) but I don't think it was for that long as my mum was pg by the time I was 7 months old.

My brother wasn't breastfed because of a medical condition. He had to be spoon fed infact.

My little sister was breast fed and for a lot longer than I was.

I can honesly say I have no memory of my babyhood and have no concens over how I was fed, or for how long, or that it had any effect on my health or illigence. I doubt my siblings have any concerns either!

My sister and I have no allergies and none of us had any skin conditions as children.

My borhter has one allergy - penicillin so don;t think that is related.

I have psorass now I am older but as both set of grandparents have it I think it is more genetic than because of any way I was fed as a baby.

We are all pretty healthy and robust.

tori32 that was my point exactly though you have put it more punchily grin]

It is not about being anti-bf as you so clearly show, it's about not wanting the pro-bf lobby to be so rabid that it actually makes people want to go the other way!

I am sorry but could you clarify exactly where anyone on this thread has been "rabid"
i.e. mad and foaming at the mouth???
it really is a very offensive and insulting term to direct at people who are sharing facts and opinions, just because they care passionately about something.

I was BF for 4 days followed by FF, my brother was BF for 6 weeks followed by FF.
I passed my 11+, went to Uni etc.((e.g 4 days off school in 11 years), rarely ill now although I have struggled with my weight for years.
My brother had his tonsils out at 5, he was always scrawny and weak before that. He is still not fat.

Having said that I have BF my daughter for the past year and we are still going, despite the 'you don't know how much they are getting, it's all very unscientific' arguement from my family. I think the other food she gets is likely to make more of a difference and the other stimululation. She is advanced for her age, I have a letter from the hospital telling me this, so maybe there is something in it. I'm BF because it's cheaper and more convenient too
Nicky

I was formula-fed, as were my siblings.

We all have some level of allergies - I get hayfever, so does my brother, and my sister has always been prone to eczema/dermatitis.

However, I think we have inherited this from my dad (who, interestingly, was breastfed) as my mum has no allergies.

My siblings and I are all pretty healthy now and none of us is overweight.

However my mum (who was bottle fed on ordinary fresh cows milk (not formula))developed heart disease and had to have a triple bypass, aged 68. She never smoked, and was not even slightly overweight, and was physically active. I often do wonder whether the cows milk played any part
in this.

"So, if you were bf and still had excema, then chances are you would have had much worse excema if you'd been ff.." from greenmonkies

Despite numerous requests no evidence has been forthcoming for this assertion and as Tori32 says this is "pure speculation, unscientific and scaremongering."

This is what I mean about the pro lobby doing themselves no favours at ALL. Caring passionately is great, I care passionately about breastfeeding too and I find it offensive that you would think I wouldn't. Sharing facts is great. Sharing that sort of thing is not IMO

"greenmonkies I notice that all your evidence comes from pro breastfeeding websites. I would therefore suggest that the information will be heavily biased against ff. "

In which case, I wonder how you can account for the NHS spending so much money on promoting breastfeeding, along with giving up smoking, taking regular exercise and eating five portions of fruit and veg a day as a 'healthy behaviour' if, as you assume, there are no proven benefits?

Has it crossed your mind that the NHS (along with every other major health organisation) promotes breastfeeding because there is clear, reliable evidence that higher rates of breastfeeding in populations result in lower levels of ill-health among children and babies?

You don't need to go to 'pro breastfeeding' websites to read about the PROVEN risks of artificial feeding. Just hop over to NHS Direct (which I'm sure even you will admit is not going to be a hotbed of lactivist propaganda) and you'll find this:

"babies who are bottle fed using formula milk are more likely to develop illnesses, such as diarrhoea, or a chest, ear, or urine infection. There is also an increased risk of premature babies who are bottle fed developing a rare, but serious condition called necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC), where the intestines are damaged due to infection and a poor supply of blood"

And pick up any mainstream, recently published midwifery textbook on breastfeeding and you'll find a chapter on 'the risks of artificial feeding'.

Personally I think it's quite troubling that any mother should have been left so in the dark about received medical opinion on this issue.

I can see how it happens. Imagine being a health professional charged with the task of informing a mum who has made it clear that she doesn't want to breastfeed that there are risks associated with formula feeding? It might be their professional duty but it's not going to win them any popularity contests is it? Most mums would rather not know, and I suspect most midwives would rather not have to tell them......

Makes a mockery of the concept of 'informed choice' though.

I was ff - in the 60's so probably on carnation milk and National Dried. My two siblings were also. All of us have reached our 40's in good health - none of us have allergies (other then me to the cold and sunlight which appears to be hormone related)

I do have a bowel problem which was possibly as a result of dodgy weaning.

Totally agree with Honoria's last post.

HG I think you are well-meaning but naive - what you would, I guess, call being pro-BF but not rabid is usually just making a token statement that BF is good for babies but then going along with the very attitudes, platitudes and cliches about choice that ultimately contribute to the most miserable feeding experiences for women - the ones that take place in a world where they hear breast is best but don't get the support they need to do it. That happens because the support, the sheer effort on the part of the NHS and so on, can only take place when the society and health professionals truly work from a feeling that BF is worth enabling. If they're working from a baseline view that BF is nice but not essential, that FF is fine (because we must whisper and not put anyone off by seeming 'rabid') then the support just does not happen. What I think you see as a courtesy issue - not being 'rabid' - actually has much more fundamental implications. There's no way round that. Sometimes truths are uncomfortable but by expressing them we may create a context in which women feel strongly enough to demand the help they need with BF and health professionals actually feel some obligation to provide it, rather than everyone thinking oh well BF is worth a little try but if anything goes wrong no reason no to just switch to FF.

I think if you don't really get that there's a causal link between the language we use, between the cosy reassurances about formula and the lack of support for BF, it may seem hard to see why people speak so plainly and seem hardline about it - but that link is there and that's why people talk so plainly about the risks of formula and so on - in discussions like this at any rate, if not in casual social discussions. You won't get more women who want to BF managing to do so if you go along with cosy reassurances about formula being the way to go - just more of the same: women trying to do so but being let down by the system, not getting the support and so on, as well as women not trying to do so because they've taken the cosy reassurances and the message that it's all about choice as a sign that really it's six of one and half a dozen of the other between breastmilk and formula. It's not, and you won't get the NHS behaving as if BF matters enough for them to help women so long as as a society we're so obsessed with making mums who've already FF feel OK that we completely abandon giving honest information and help to parents who've yet to either choose a method or seek support.

Okay, I've read through a lot of the messages on here and I do have to take a stand when it comes to believing everything doctors and/or the NHS tell you... causes of eczema/asthma/allergies? You'd do better to find independent (truly independent) research than to ask a doctor. Sorry if any of you work in the NHS and feel otherwise but when comes down to it, it's all about who profits from disseminating the information. Rather similar to pro-vaccination propaganda being in the best interests of the drugs companies. A lot of people get paid of lot of money for 'research' to support spurious claims that benefit corporate interests. Drink a pint of milk a day? Best not, actually, unless you're a calf...

my point radio is that the other approach actively puts people off in that if it relies on people spouting things that are not true and are actually scaremongering then it's doing no good at all

I don't feel I'm naive on this issue; I have been a social worker for 17 years and have worked with many, many families to promote breastfeeding often where the experience and expectation of it is nil

I prefer to work with facts though