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'?

It's the nomenclature that's so objectionable. 'oversold' as if b/fing is a commodity and women are consumers.

My DS also has a dairy intolerance, and not sure what else I could have done to prevent it. I went dairy free myself for awhile, but it may not have been long enough, or he has another intolerance, so had to give up b/fing him

However, my DP did point out that despite the Paediatrician suggesting that he has essentially been poisoned since birth DS also got colostrum and most of the benefits of b/fing...

It has to be an individual choice and I do think that the NHS pushes it way too much. I am still bf my 3 yo dd (she has not intention to give up whatsoever, although it is more suckling during the night now as I work full-time). According to her it is better than anything, even chocolate. We have had difficult times and because her jaundice I did express (so doctors could monitor exact milk intake) during first months (was really hard all the feeding , expressing, feeding etc). At two months gave half formula and half bf, after 4 months switched fully to bf and even after I went back to work (1 year) kept a mix of bf (whilst home in evening and night and she bf like mad during weekends) and formula. Now she still bf. In spite of all this she has had numerous ear infections, but then again without bf she might have had even more??? I get quite a few negative reactions from some friends when I tell that she still bf and I do want to stop when she goes to school because don't want her to get teased. She is very open about it, whilst on holiday sitting in a bus she said 'Mommy, can you please explain again why I can't drink mommymilk on the bus because I am a bit thirsty"/

UNICEF Baby Friendly respond to the notion that the differences between bf and ff are small:

www.babyfriendly.org.uk/newsletter/email_updates/news/news_update_210709b.htm

Tiktok Seeing as you seem to know your stuff on this subject, how do you counter this "confounding" argument that a lot of benefits of bfing can be attributed to the fact that bfing mothers are more likely to be following advice re health, lifestyle etc.?

This actually seemed to be the most persuasive part of the argument IMO because of the differences on bf rates among different social groups.

I'm not argusing with you at all - far from it. I'm just generally curious and would like to have an answer for my MIL next time she starts prattling on about it and using all these articles to back her up!

Can I just ask, isn't the higher risk of gastro infections in ff babies connected to the way the bottles are made up? If the bottles are sterilised properly and the correct temp of water used, the water freshly boiled and they are stored properly etc, there would be very little scope for infection. Or is their an assumption in these studies that ff babies are all being fed formla which has been made up according to correct instruction? I don't know if this is taken into account or not.

Incidently, I bf'd DS1 and 2 for 7months (and luckily found it easy, pleasurable and convenient) but as I cut down the feeds and replaced them with formula (going back to work, couldn't be bothered expressing) I used to feel guilty about buying and using formula! This was because the "breast is best" thing was , I felt, forced down my throat. The fact that the article points torwards minimal health benefits, does help make me feel less guilty.

wasabipeanut - good, scientific studies control for social, economic and maternal/familial factors.

So the middle-class, highly educated, likely-to-be-older mother, who is known to be the most likely to have a generally healthier lifestyle, and to breastfeed, is a 'confounding variable' in the studies.

Any study which does not control for these factors, in order to be as sure as possible it's the feeding you're comparing and not the lifestyle or the heredity can't begin to make claims for breasfeeding itself.

Read the systematic reviews linked to in my previous post, and you will see how they discount 'poor' studies and only judge the 'good' ones.

Hope this helps

Cool, will do. Thanks Tiktok

HateHoovering - the gastro risk of formula feeding is increased even more when the powder is made up incorrectly, this is true. This is why people using formula need to know the recommended way of preparing feeds. There is not a serious, widespread issue in the UK of dirty bottles and dirty water, however, and the UK figures still show that the majority of hospitalisations for gastro infection could be prevented with breastfeeding (see the link I gave).

Babies who are formula fed don't get the antibody protection of breastfeeding - so they become more suseptible to infection from sources other than the bottle and milk, too.

wasabipeanut, this is interesting on socioeconomic factors:

"Professor Stewart Forsyth, Consultant Paediatrician at Ninewells Hospital and Medical School in Dundee studied data from 543 children and parents. Health outcomes examined were gastrointestinal, respiratory illness and ear infections in the first year of life, and blood pressure, respiratory illness and body composition at age 7 years.

As expected, all health outcomes were more favourable in breastfed children, and this applied in both the higher and lower socio-economic groups. But, remarkably, children in the lower socio-economic group who were breastfed had health outcomes better than or similar to formula fed children in the wealthiest group. This was the case for each of the health outcomes measured."

sleepsforwimps I too read that article with dismay. However I have read this wonderful piece today which gives some perspective on where J Wolf is coming from and refutes the opinion the Times seems happy to print as if it's news. There have been several pieces on bf in the news/on gmtv lately, seemingly quite anti bf... disappointing.

once you open the link, page down to get to the essay.

"But even if education, class and wealth is taken into account, there is known to be a big difference between the type of mother who follows the advice of her doctor and breastfeeds, and the one that ignores it to give the bottle."

What about the women who are told by HCPs to give their baby formula?

Of course it's impossible to prove, purely because every aspect of lifestyle makes a difference. Therefore it is impossible to reliably quanitify.

Instinct tells me that probably something that comes in the form of a powder is not the best thing for my baby, however. The HCPs seemed to disagree though

I really hope it just helps woman to put bf into perspective though. If it works for you fantastic, there is no reason to stop as it's obviously what nature intented. But, if you are one of the very many who have considerable problems then just don't let it destroy the relationship you have with your newborn and give it up. Being a matyr doesn't make you a better mother!

earplugs it may help women 'put bf into perspective' but unfortunately as the article misrepresents the truth it will be an incorrect perspective. It will be tragic if some women reading that article think it's not worth bfing - it's irresponsible to print badly researched opinion dressed up as scientific critique.

You can argue, however, that raising awareness of the benefits of breastfeeding also helps raise awareness of other facets of a healthy lifestyle: mothers who make the relatively huge commitment to exclusive breastfeeding are probably not going to want to throw away the benefits of that investment by letting their children lead unhealthy lifestyles in other, less investment-heavy, ways.

I have read articles here in France that basically say that a baby's chance of ending up in hospital with a gastro-intestinal or ENT infection in his/her first year is directly correlated to the amount of time he/she spends outside the home. So babies in full-time crèche (which are not run on the same principles as British nurseries) are five times more likely to be hospitalised than babies who stay at home (whether with a nanny or a mother) in the first year.

I very rarely post here, but the article in the times has raised questions in my mind about breastfeeding. I have never been 100% convinced on the validity of some of the research into the benefits of breastfeeding. However, my instinct tells me that BF is probably the best food for babies as its how nature intended them to be fed.

Reality of life means that some of us couldn't breastfeed successfully, and have used formula. My problems with bf (and lack of support from the NHS) sadly led to PND. I desparately wanted to succeed but couldn't. Once I switched to formula I began to recover and am just so grateful to be now enjoying motherhood. I also have a happy and healthy baby.

I am also very grateful to my friends, family and GP for supporting me in my decision to ff. One thing about the debate on bf that saddens me is women's tendency to criticse mothers for not bf. Why can't we all support and encourage each other? Formula is not poison or evil, I believe that its just a 'second best' option that doesn't make me a bad mother.

Also, I strongly believe that the NHS should not promote bf so strongly unless they are prepared to fully support mothers like me who found it incredibly difficult. I feel that many women may develop PND by pressure to bf but lack of support when they encounter difficulties. This makes me sad.

Finally, I also think there is also a lack of practical support/info from the nhs on ff e.g. how to make bottles up safely, how much to feed your baby etc.

Sorry this is a bit of a ramble!

MrsFT - not a ramble, but a succinct account of the issues, I would say

I think the actual incidence of true mother-at-mother criticism is really rare. You do see it occasionally on here (mumsnet), but it's always jumped on. I have never come across it in real life though of course I believe people when they say they have experienced it.

The research - despite the news items - that breastfeeding makes a real difference to health is actually very robust, but it is absolutely no good at all merely saying this, without the structure, training and resources to support women's choice to do it.

Usually, in maternity units and health services where the practical support and info for formula feeding is lacking, the practical support and info for bf is lacking as well....