Benefits of breastfeeding 'being oversold by the NHS'

[sleepsforwimps]

As someone who was about to stop breastfeeding but carrying on because of the Swine Flu situation I find this article mighty confusing

'there is little evidence that mothers milk protects babies against illness or allergies, says a leading experts.'

So who am I to believe... 'Michael Kramer' or the 'NHS'?

Is it the same research that has been done in past week? Guardian article and Times article both reporting on same report, as it seems that there is has been quite a bit of anti b/fing going on...

ilove - nope. Guardian thing was an overview of bottle feeding mothers' experiences in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood. This current thing is a journo asking a major bf researcher what he thinks of a new book by someone called Joan Wolf.

newspapers just telling the people what they want to hear

so few mothers reading it have actually breastfed, stuff like this makes them want to keep buying that paper

I'm suprised that more hasn't been made of the costs involved in FF vs BF to be honest, credit crunch and all.

I don't know what formula, bottles, sterliser and all the other paraphenalia costs but I must have saved at least a couple of hundred pounds by exclusively breastfeeding for 6 months.

There's an idea for an article there!

I thought there was strong evidence about protection against heart disease too? Tiktok?

goingnowhere.....for mothers and babies, or both?

Yes, there is evidence, and for both, too.

But it can never be strong enough as 'proof', because it is mainly epidemiological (get a sample of a zillion people, see what has happened to them, then look at certain factors - in this case, breastfeeding - and see if there's a difference between what happened to them, related to these factors. Do your best to control for other stuff eg with heart disease, smoking, or heredity, or adult diet. Crunch the numbers. See what comes out).

Kramer's bf research was the 'highest' form of research, the randomised controlled trial, where you follow different samples, where the only different thing is the intervention - in his team's case, breastfeeding promotion, which one sample had and the other one didn't.

On the heart disease thing, this report is quite good, and clear:

www.webmd.com/heart-disease/news/20090421/breastfeeding-cuts-moms-heart-risk

It shows that in individuals, the effect is small, but of course over a population, the effect will be larger and will save lots of money.

Thanks tiktok. I meant for babies, as it states on the nct "reasons to be proud" leaflet. I wasn't aware it might be the case for mothers too! Very interesting.

For babies, the research is mainly inferential ie you look at the risk factors for heart disease and you see one of them is high blood pressure and when you get a study that finds babies who were bf have lower blood pressure later on , you can infer a protective effect.

aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/161/1/15?ct

There are other studies like this.

This report about mouth development, with these illustrationsis interesting, and something which is rarely mentioned.

(Apparently, bottle-fed infants are nearly twice as likely to have malocclusions of the teeth compared to those which are bf, although things like dummies, thumb-sucking and genetics also play a part). This interests me as I have an overbite, and have had molars removed due to overcrowding - I was obsessed with my bottle up until I was around 4 or 5!

As others have said, women will probably just 'choose' what they personally believes suits their situation. From my experience, you are pretty much left on your own to deal with feeding your baby, and it's pretty hard to buck the trend if most of your family have ff. Articles like the one linked to by the OP don't help matters.

So will it help a child not get swine flu or not then?

Breastfeeding doesn't really decrease the risk of anything - it's just the normal, physiological way for babies to feed. There is a nice comment under the Times article which points this out (from Jack Newman, who, if he is the Jack Newman, is a bf-friendly paed in Canada). The onus is on formula makers to show how using their product does no harm, and this can't happen.

Not breastfeeding increases the risk of breast cancer (probably) because it does not allow the normal, physiological suppression of oestrogen - the more oestrogen you 'get' in your reproductive life, the higher the risk of breast cancer. So more pregnancies = less oestrogen = less cancer risk. You enhance the anti-oestrogenic effect of pregnancy if you breastfeed, and if you breastfeed several children, for a long time, you enhance it even more (there is a 'dose response' effect).

Please don't ask me to explain why oestrogen increases the risk of cancer, 'cos I don't know, but someone on mumsnet wil be an endocrinologist or an oncologist and will know, I am sure

A quick google for 'swine flu breastfeeding' comes up with several articles like this. Personally, I find it easier to deal with a feverish baby/toddler if he/she is still being bf.

I had understood from all the millions of references to reduced likelihood of allergies, respiratory problems, ear infections etc etc that there was some concrete research to back this up? Personally, this is the main reason I am breastfeeding - i don't find it easy, so I am a little disappointed to read that alot of these assertions are just heresay?

if I understand it correctly, what these studies are actually saying is that once you allow for the fact that mothers who obey advice on breastfeeding may also obey other advice, like healthy eating (thus ending up with healthier families all round), then it is less easy to be sure if the health benefits actually arise from the breastfeeding itself, or from a more generally healthy upbringing

not that they can prove it isn't good, just that there might be more than one reason

but the protection against ear infections, respiratory infections and breast cancer apparently is beyond doubt- sounds good enough to me

admittedly, dd is a sickly thing despite all the breastmilk I syringed into her, but then- how can I know how many more ear infections she might have had if I hadn't

swine flu immunity would clearly only work if the mother had already been exposed to the flu and built up immunity; so a bit early for that unless you are old enough to have had it back in the sixties

jasper, no one doubts the increased risk of infections of not breastfeeding, truly, and they include respiratory problems and ear infections. This is pretty rock solid stuff.

The asthma and allergies research is less robust - but it's not hearsay, honest.

In any case, breastfeeding becomes easier and more convenient and more pleasurable (usually) as time goes on. The health benefits are great but the experience is what keeps most mothers and babies at it

I never really enjoyed breastfeeding despite having done it for 7 years in total. However it was a godsend in times of sickness (them and me), tiredness, being upset, calming down etc. I am not sure how I personally would have coped without it (I am no mother earthy type).

Sorry, my point was allergies etc aside the "benefits" are still huge for all the reasons I mentioned.

I spent a while last night reading the thread triggered by The Guardian piece (great thread and annoyingly I had nothing to add to what seemed a very constructive discussion) and then found this T2 article today.

What I found really sad about the article was the way that the actual journalist felt that she'd somehow been duped into bf. She seemed to regret bfing which I actually feel really sorry for her for.

Evidence either way aside there does seem to be one hell of a backlash bulding alhough I am at a loss to see why. When my DS was born I experienced zero pressure to bf. In fact I experienced pressure to top up with formula as my milk was "late." I remember very clearly a midwife telling me that nipple confusion was a myth. Whether that was true or not I have no idea but I loved bfing my DS and am glad I could do it. To me, as others have said it just seems "normal." It's a special experience and one I intend to repeat.

tiktok - thanks for the reassurance. Just a little confused ! DD1 had severe reflux, dairy intolerance and has repeated ear infections - I only managed to bf for about 6 weeks (she has been on hypoallergenic formula since). Hence my focus on these issues with DD2 (now 15 weeks). I dont have a great supply and so the whole thing isnt easy. I have not been under any pressure to bf except for myself for the above reasons (DH comes from a french ff family).

I will have to introduce mix feeding at 5.5 months due to return to work and am trying very much to manage exclusive bf til then, BUT I am doing it for specific reasons. I dont feel i bonded with DD1 any less for not bf (though it was a disappointment at the time ) but i do wonder if she would be 'healthier' if i had managed to bf.

but if I get swine flu, will I pass on antibodies to a breastfed child, or will I pass on swine flu?