who *isn't* ashamed to admit using formula?

[LookingForwardToSummer]

feeling crap after reading the 'exclusive breastfeeding' thread! i find bf really hard and have set myself the target of 5 months, i intend to feel very proud that i went that long and then use formula happily! i can't be the only one! all the stats show low bf rates - so where is everyone?

Sabire - was going to ask you this question on another thread. You said your brother is a biologist, and I was wondering if you or he could make sense of some of the recent evidence that babies (animal and human) that suffer from lack of nutrution in the womb or in the months after birth, when their bodies and brains are dveveloping at a tremendous rate, are then at risk of serious health problems, whether or not they catch-up later in their childhood?

This may be something or nothing, but I am a bit concerned when I see posts about babies not gaining weight and being hungry, as my DD was, and then see them being advised to ignore HV's advice to supplement. This can go on for weeks or months, and I'm just not sure that anyone can say with such certainty that it's ok.

If you or he can say how I'm misinterpreting this I'd be happy, as it makes me a bit concerned, TBH.

??????????? what is the discussion here?? op bf's, wants to stop around 5 mnth, and ff. She has commented that she wouldnt want to bf at 3 yrs, and this pisses you all of? why?

I have been on a thread on bf ff, and been told I was ill-informed and that ff causes diabetes, and I dont know what rotting flesh smells like, then amputation. All these aliments are connected to ff, oh blindness, incontinence, the list goes on, so yes, the bf mothers on the bf threads do like to lord it over the ff mothers,

Beggers belief, if a mother choosers ff, good for her, if a mother chooses to bf, good for her, why is it anybody elses place to try and trash that decision.

LFTS, you're either being disingenuous or just a bit daft:

By LookingForwardToSummer on Thu 01-May-08 11:44:13
...

oh, but i do think that bf 3 year olds is a little odd as they can eat food then. [lfts runs off and hides again]

That is what you actually said and then you qualified it later. And then you wondered why BFers get upset...?

Sabire in all the posts I've read of yours(on several other threads) I haven't read your view that the maj of ff babies are fine and healthy.

I had always assumed you were a bit of a 'militant' with your doom and gloom references, stats etc. I apologise if I assumed (sorry can't spell,witching hour)incorrectly.

I do think you and others need to put this view that the maj of ff babies are absolutely fine across a bit more though when you post as I for one find it intensely irritating when it isn't included. The mistake I made is very easy to make when this happens.

you may aswell not starte threads on here of this nature because they all end the same
its fact

Coolmama - thanks for that - will discuss it with midwife tomorrow.
Breasts feeling full and heavy this pm so hoping milk on way

I'm not sure what you're referring to here. Do you have a link?

I've seen discussion of the possible implication of very fast weight gain in the first few months of life for babies who are born small for dates.

I think, re: slow weight gain in bf babies - there's a signficant difference between true 'failure to thrive', signficant malnutrition and the slow growth that you see in some breastfed babies in the second two thirds of their first year. What many hv's finger as being problematic growth patterns in bf babies are nothing of the sort - they're just normal variations from the ff 'norm'.

"I see posts about babies not gaining weight and being hungry, as my DD was, and then see them being advised to ignore HV's advice to supplement. This can go on for weeks or months, and I'm just not sure that anyone can say with such certainty that it's ok."

No - I'm not sure that it's ok to tell people they should continue to ignore a strong suspicion that their baby is hungry and not thriving at the breast. However - when it's been said on here it's not usually said to someone for whom this has been an ongoing problem. I do think that the soundest response is to encourage mum to get lots of skin to skin contact - feed on demand for several days (or very frequently) and see if that remedies the situation if the baby isn't in immediate danger of dehydration or other other clinical problems associated with severe breastfeeding failure. But mums should also be encouraged to see a bf counsellor, who would not encourage her to take any risks with her baby's health. Significant, ongoing problems with breastfeeding need expert attention - and I think that this is something that comes across very strongly to mums who come to this site for help.

Well the first reference I came across was in a rather technical book on child nutrtion in the baby section of a bookshop. It basically said that if a child was underfed but then caught-up to normal weight and height later, the catch-up growth just wasn't as good in terms of development as when it occurred at the correct time. Didn't remember the title. There is no definitive study that I've seen about infants with a poor milk supply, but here is one of the articles:

www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/apr/09/medicalresearch.children

I'll have to do them in separate posts as I can't do the links otherwise

news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/277779.stm

There are other studies where the find that the same thing applies if the food is restricted after birth, and others wwhere the catch-up groeth ddoesn't occur, but that leads to stunted growth and other problems, so letting them never catch up is not a good option either.

This one too:

www.nged.adelaide.edu.au/member_profiles/Wlodek_Mary.html

"I do think you and others need to put this view that the maj of ff babies are absolutely fine across a bit more though when you post as I for one find it intensely irritating when it isn't included. The mistake I made is very easy to make when this happens"

I couldn't express that view because I don't know if it's true! (that ff doesn't affect the health of the majority of babies) There are many things we don't know about the subtle ways infant nutrition impacts on health in the long term. If it's possible for doctors to identify the impact of infant feeding on blood pressure in adolescence, on the chance of a baby dying of SIDS and on rates of heart disease in adults (which now seems to be the case) then I'm not personally particularly reassured by the fact that the majority of ff babies are percieved to be 'healthy' by their parents.

Colacubes - "I have been on a thread on bf ff, and been told I was ill-informed and that ff causes diabetes"

But ff is linked to diabetes. This information is widely available in NHS sponsored information on baby feeding. Why is it wrong for people to mention it?

"so yes, the bf mothers on the bf threads do like to lord it over the ff mothers"

I do find it really odd that you interpret people's comments in this way. Why do you see this as a status issue? I don't think anyone is implying that they are a better mother than you. I can appreciate it must be very unsettling to read people's concerns about formula if you are a ff mum who hasn't previously encountered this information, but can you not understand that people offer this information because they genuinely think it's important and that others have a right to know about it - not because they're trying to make you feel bad about your choices.

redadmiral - hopefully tiktok will be along at some point to shed some light on this. I'm sure it's something that she and other bf counsellors have discussed.

However - I would reiterate that like you I would also be concerned about a baby who was signficantly malnourished for any length of time.

LSTF - just imagine if I said to you I found you intending not to breastfeed past 1 a little odd as there is no need to stop and in fact I found giving formula a little odd.

Oh, that's why you started the thread as you find such things offensive......

How is it productive, or informative to tell a mother that her childs legs are more likely to drop of, and the stench of rotting flesh is like nothing I have ever smelt, because I ff?????

How is it right to tell a mother that she is ignorant because she possess an opinion that is differnt from yours????

I was not and am not mis informed about ff, I am though, flabbergasted that bf mothers truly believe that they are the holy grail when it comes to feeding, and the rest of us, must have made an ill informed choice to ff.

I didnt realise all bf mothers thought that .

i can't be bothered to read all of the extermist views on here. i mixed fed from about 5 weeks then exclusively ff from about 4months and, feel free to shoot daggers at me, i gave my ds solids before the prescribed time because he was a really big baby and hungry. there i've said it!

by the way he's not overweight now (he's about 98th percentile for his height and weight) we've bonded absolutely ok and he's doing all of the things that you would expect a normal 2 year old to do. I suspect most people's kids are absolutely ok whether they were breast fed or forumla fed.

IMO there's no right or wrong way, just different ways that suit different people.

It does always end the same and people repeat themselves quoting the same references about the contra indications of ff and the positive outcomes of bf for mother and baby. What people do not mention is the psychological well being of the mother through failing to bf/ sleep deprivation of a baby who demands feeding every hour for 45 mins, as I had with dd1. (who also threw up after every feed) This lasted for 5-6wks. I was exhausted, baby was exhausted and we were both miserable and this led on to PND, I resented the baby and began to view her as a parasite 'sucking' the life out of me. It damaged the relationship for a long time and only got back on track when she was about 9mths. For me that was far more damaging than any amount of ff.

My dd2 is 5wks and has taken to bf really well, sleeps well (2230- 0600 last night)and is thriving and therefore it is not the awful experience I had last time. If 2 babies from the same mother can be so different and the experience so different, how can we judge the experiences that other people have and the choices they choose.

The point I am trying to make is that just because breast feeding is nutritionally best for the baby doesn't mean it is the best way to feed, especially if it is making mother and baby miserable. It can cause psychological damage to both, especially if the baby gets vibes that the mother resents it.

thank you colacubes! i still don't understand why people are so angry - if you are bf for ages then great - just leave the rest of us alone. why are you allowed to 'feel sorry' for ffers but i'm not allowed to say anything. in fact why even read the thread if are not ff. well, i'm off for a g&t smoothie now.

I think if a bfer on here was to recite/type out a bus timetable, what would actually be heard/read by some people would be "everyone should bf and people who don't are bad parents". It doesn't seem to matter in the slightest what people actually say! Who, anywhere, has said that everyone who currently ffs should bf? No one has! Obviously in any parenting decision psychological factors are relevant - you bring them in at the right time, put them in the mix, and come to a decision based on those and all other factors. But psychological factors don't change e.g. allergy risks - so if someone's talking about allergy risks, they shouldn't be ignoring those because some individual mothers may end up ffing anyway due to psychological reasons.

"How is it productive, or informative to tell a mother that her childs legs are more likely to drop of, and the stench of rotting flesh is like nothing I have ever smelt, because I ff?????"

I don't know about the particular comments you're referring to and I wouldn't want to comment on it without understanding something about the CONTEXT in which these somments were made.

"I was not and am not mis informed about ff"

Well - good. That's you.

However, at the moment about a third of mums say they get no detailed information on infant feeding from their midwives during their pregancy, so the fact remains that there are many, many women who have NOT been told about the drawbacks of formula feeding by their midwives and so do not possess this important information while they're still in a position to make a choice. I personally wasn't given this information when I was pregnant - I stumbled across it by chance and was very shocked.

"I am though, flabbergasted that bf mothers truly believe that they are the holy grail when it comes to feeding"

What an odd way of putting this. Many bf mums are convinced that breastfeeding is best for babies (if this is what you mean by 'they think they are the holy grail when it comes to feeding). Of course they do - otherwise they wouldn't be doing it! That doesn't mean they feel they are personally superior to you.

"What people do not mention is the psychological well being of the mother through failing to bf/ sleep deprivation of a baby who demands feeding every hour for 45 mins, as I had with dd1. (who also threw up after every feed)"

No - this is not true. This issue is OFTEN discussed here on Mumsnet. There's not one person who is clued up about breastfeeding who doesn't acknowledge that when bf goes badly wrong it can be emotionally and physically excruciating for mums. However - where they differ perhaps from ff mums is that they don't always jump to the conclusion that the only answer to bf problems is formula. I'd be the rirst person to stand up and say - all women who are struggling with breastfeeding should have immediate access to intensive and expert support, and if their bf problems can't be overcome then they should be given help to make a happy transition to formula.

"It can cause psychological damage to both, especially if the baby gets vibes that the mother resents it."

Link, please, tori?

Or have you made that one up?

I totally agree a mother's mental and emotional state postnatally is important, and it can certainly effect the baby because she may become less able to respond and to bond.

But some mothers who breastfeed and who resent it, or hate it, or who have to grit their teeth to do it, still continue, because they have decided to place their own negative feelings to one side while their baby needs breastmilk - and hats off to them, if that is their choice. Not everyone finds it a wonderful experience, you are right there. Breastfeeding is not just for the people who love every moment!

I don't think you will find any study that links dislike of breastfeeding to 'psychological damage' to the infant or mother - but it would be interesting to see the research.

In the meantime, if there is no research, it's potentially hurtful to mothers who have disliked breastfeeding, but who have plodded on with it, to read they may have damaged their babies in so doing

My tuppence worth:

I met a really lovely group of ladies at antenatal classes last summer. Out of 12 of us, only two haven't introduced formula. Not one of my friends feels ashamed or guilty about this, and rightly so! Quite the opposite - I almost feel ashamed to admit I haven't given formula, as I am terrified of coming across as one of those 'superior BF mothers who lords it over FFers' . I just keep quiet, as I've already had a raised eyebrow or two when the subject has come up in the past.

This isn't right, and it's one of the reasons I am so grateful for MN, where I can feel proud of breastfeeding my 9mo boy because I consider it an achievement, for me, personally.

I stopped breastfeeding at 10weeks. It just never worked for us and my son was not gaining the weight he should be (was born on the 50th centile, was on 9th centile by 10weeks). I decided it was only pride that kept me trying to breastfeed and moved on to formula. Once all the stress surrounding feeding was removed, I was happier, my partner was happier and my son was happier and more content.
Breast is undeniably best, but formula is not the devil's milk!