Breastfeeding till the age of 4 - what do you think?

[lisalisa]

Message withdrawn

This part in particular interested me...

"Breastmilk is the natural first food for babies, it provides all the energy and nutrients that the infant needs for the first months of life, and it continues to provide up to half or more of a child?s nutritional needs during the second half of the first year, and up to one-third during the second year of life."

Can't imagine it was a breastfeeding counsellor saying that, Louise, but there are a lot of health professionals who would say similar (or be far more ignorant, sadly!)

HM,your tenacity,eloquence,good humour and perseverence are awesome...even in the face of people talking through their arses!!!!!!

God,I love you!

The midwives and HVs you work with are wrong, nurseryjo.

And Louise, the comment you heard on the Vanessa show is also wrong.

This is milk we are talking about, made by human mothers for human babies.

At 11 months 29 days, it is of nutritional benefit, healthy, protective, good all round. And then as soon as the child is one, somehow or other it ceases to be of any value. How does that work, then? Turns to water overnight? Huh?

What about cows at some distance from having calved? Better tell the farmers to cease milking them, because at a certain point, their milk is of no nutritional value.

When babies are of an age and stage to take a variety of solid foods, then breastmilk becomes less essential nutritionally - naturally enough. When the baby is taking nothing but breastmilk, then of course it is of vital importance in keeping him well fed. But solids do not mean the milk is of 'little nutritional benefit' or in the words of the Vanessa show (that well known source of excellent info), 'definitely of no nutritional benefit'.

It's still milk, full of antibodies, full of good stuff, keeping babies healthy and growing.

I despair, really, sometimes. I enjoy Mumsnet being a forum for opinion, but posters really ought to take a second or two to think logically, before presenting something daft they have heard as if it was fact, from unreliable sources (yes, I include midwives and health visitors in that, sadly).

NuseryJo - the World Health Organisation recommends bf exclusively for 6 months & until age 2 at the minimum. The depart of health supports this infomation. Your sources are incorrect here.
It is the norm for kids in non-western cultures to bf for more than 2 yrs. I find your comments about these children being "clingy" offensive.

(I'm going to start calling them 'Health Unprofessionals'....)

Thank goodness - reinforcements!

Drink has been taken, HM (only way to cope with the deathly dull mothers' outing I have just endured for the greater good of my offspring.)

I may say something out of order........

I suppose it is like visiting 4 different midwives or health visitors. They will all have there own opinion, and i suppose you want to have faith in what the medical profession says. Maybe Vanessa needs to appologise for her guest.

I have had to delete and edit and censor myself heavily tonight. Didn't manage it occasionally

Most of my posts have originally begun with the letter F, shall we say!

Hey Nursery lady,I'm a poncey health professional too and have worked with trillions and trillions of *&^^%%$E$$$$.

Still know that a lot of them talk shite, though.

If this is the info you are receiving from the Department of Health, NurseyJo, then I would ask your postman why on earth you are not getting current and correct guidance.

There must be circulars going back years and years, with your name on them, stuck in the post. And there's you, managing centres and doing all sorts of good works, telling mothers all sorts of stuff as fact, and you are basing your info on hearsay and out of date 'information'. That's a scandal, it really is.

For the record, the DH have never said breastmilk ceases to be of value after 12 months. The guidance before the current one said that mothers may continue 'breastfeeding up to and beyond a year' and that was based on the COMA report of 1993 (I think - it might have been 1994). I am not sure what they said about bf at a year before then (though I could find out) but it would be mad if it said to stop at a year because of no nutritional value.

Ok, have read the thread now...and I can't fathom why some people are so anti long term breastfeeding. It's not something I have ever done (we're talking a real light weight here stopping at 5.5 months), but don't for a moment seek to condemn anyone who perseveres far longer. Where's the harm for heaven's sake? - why get hot under the collar about other mother's choices to do what they feel is right for their child...Tsk!

Complete rubbish nurseryjo - feel sorry for the mums that you give mis-information to.

NurseyJo, you may very well be professional, but I'm afraid you don't have a clue what you're talking about

Feel sorry for the kids as well. What's so wrong with kids having breastmilk??? lol at the professional bit.

i must admit this is why i never go to see my hv, becuae they all say something different. With my 1st child i got eally depressed because i was given conflicting answers. Sometimes opinions get in the way from facts and that is dangerous.

Nanny person, hahahahahaha!!!

You remind me of the people who inform you seriously that they are a fully trained X,Y or Z to which I invariable reply

'Oh? As opposed to a half trained one??'

LOL, MD! Like being a practising whatever (religion, profession, etc) - always want to ask why they're not good at it yet if they've practised so long!

NurseyJo, I do hope you are not in bed yet

'Cos I want to hear where the proof is that antibodies are less effective after 12 months. How on earth does that work?

Are you perhaps becoming a little confused (it is late!)?

A baby's immune system does mature over the first year (though it is by no means fully formed). He won't rely as much as he did on antibodies in breastmilk, it is true. But he still gets them, and they are still made dynamically, and in response to his needs.

Why on earth would cows milk be better than human milk at age a year? How does the Mummy Cow know to make better milk than me as soon as my baby is a year? How does that one work?

Cows milk is fine for a baby of this age, and alongside other foods contributes to a good diet.

But it is not better than breastmilk. Unless the department of health and the midwives and HVs you work with have told you something different, of course. You seem to feel your illogical information is special in some way

Louise 1970 - the nct bf counsellors & la leche league will always give unbiased info & support. No opinions just info that respects parents own opinions. Makes a change from "professionals" ramming their own ideas & rubbish info at parents who are just trying to do their best.

Just trawled through thread. I'm neither agreeing nor disagreeing with anyone, but I thought Jo said over two years, not one??

I think it should be entirely up to mum and baby and whatever suits them, although it is a shame that society in uk generally appears to frown upon it, in other countries it is perfectly acceptable as is co-sleeping. I bf till ds was 12 months and would have carried on with night feed for longer although ds and i didnt have a choice there.