Exclusive BF for 6 months may be harmful

[Longtalljosie]

Oh bloody hell

The problem is it's only one study but will be seized on even if later it's put into context.

The other problem is the way it implies that breastfeeding is in some way a problem.

The third problem is the possibility they might turn out to be right, because I loved BLW and want to do it again...

I can hear certain members of my wider family from here...

how strange that Barbara Ellen says 'in hospital they put me on an electric pump which left me feeling that they should hang some grass out of my mouth so that I could complete my impersonation of a cow in an industrial milking shed' in that piece. her second child, i am sure, was premature, i remember her writing about it afterwards. i would have thought pumping some milk would be the least she could to in those circumstances... it certainly felt that way when my dd was born prem. there's nothing else to do in hospital when your child is in an incubator. bit weird to get huffy about pumping for a preemie, imo.

the baby must have been premature Aitch, otherwise the hospital wouldn't have bothered with the pump, i suppose
preemies need breastmilk anyway, so if it wasn't her milk it would have been donated breastmilk

Why isnt the 3rd world chockablock with geniuses

crass, just crass.

doesn't say much for your own genius such as it is that you can't see beyond your own circumstances and work this one out for yourself

do you have any pithy remarks about how women who bf are just like the Gestapo too?

yup, as i thought.

her baby was born early and suffering from iugr, she needed to pump to dilute the formula that scbu had given her. she didn't produce loads but was told 'every little helps', and said she was 'completely fulfilled' while rinsing out pumping equipment etc. does mention having sore nipples but you'd think in the context of having a seriously ill child and living in a hospital for the duration that might be the least of her concerns.

bit of selective memory there, i think.

would that it would have a milk bank, sakura. when dd2 was born i asked for some donated milk for her and the doctor said 'we don't have a bank and anyway eeeeeeeeuuuuuuw, would you really want that?' while pulling a disgusted face.

BE's baby was very prem - she has written very movingly about it in the past. I think she is being unkind to the midwives who helped her express and who offered a pump to make this easier. Using a pump is no fun, but it's not something people are bullied into, usually, when the life and health of a pre-term baby depends on it.

Brock - the reason why 'the third world' is not chock a block with geniuses despite more breastfeeding is because the affect of infant feeding on IQ is a matter of between 5 and 10 points (as well as access to education and so on, already pointed out). There is no controversy about the link - please link to studies to which show formula feeding is better for brains and cognition than bf if you think I am mistaken here.

5 and 10 points does not make much of a practical difference to individuals at the high end of things, and especially not when combined with resources like education and a stable, loving upbringing.

It does make a difference at the lower end of things, where it could be the difference between living independently, or managing some sort of a job; it might make a difference in resource-poor situations.

Hope this helps us debate a bit more intelligently - I was ff too, so we are on a level playing field :)

Barbara Ellen... have a

aitch that is awful...ive always wanted to donate my milk (i have alot of excess) but ive been told that no-one wants it it's such a shame to see it wasted.

I just van't eve get ym breastfed babies to eat as much as the leaflet sth ehealth visitor gives you adn the 3 square meals a day thing never happend untill they are between 3 and 4 and even then can be hit and miss they just seem to want my milk or bottles if I stopped by then and fruit and veg , I feel like my hv does nto like me as im the onyl long term breastfeeder in her postnatal group and her talk of ounces and hungery baby milk adn 3 square meals form 6 months , It jsut doe snto happen , they dont like eating lots of food, does ayone iwth a breastfed baby ever actauuly manage these 3 measl a day with snack from 6 months? as I'd lie to knwo how, 2 hvs I ahve dealt with snigger at blw and say it soes nto really work, in a way they are right my 2 year odl was blw and she onyl eats what seh likes, hardly anything but soup adn fruit an dveg and noodles

sorry shoudla have previewed that post, and need glasses. my point was I cant get my baby to eat 3 meals a day from 6 months, and I think they make it up as it seems like a lot of food in those leaflets on weaning they give you

"Introducing solids before this time can create problems with allergies."

Yes, "can" being the operative word there.

The fact is though Itsgrimupnorth that here is no conclusive proof that it does.

My nephew was BF until he was 9 months old and has asthma.

I'm not saying for one minue that breastfeeding caused this condition - I would be crazy to do that but the fact is that there are a lot of breastfed children who will still have a range of health conditions, allergies and intolerances to different foods. It's a fact.

Breastfeeding cannot and will not confer total immunity to that sort of thing although to hear some people talk, a lot of people who aren't all that clued up might be forgiven for thinking that it will!

The whole nonsense about so-called link between breastfeeding and IQ frankly just panders to middle class pushy parents.

Pathetic.

GH, pathetic? There has been a great deal of research done in the area. In my personal opinion there is not yet any really conclusive evidence that there is a robust link, although some very persuasive studies suggest one, but by the nature of the phenomenon studies are necessarily observational.

If anyone wants to review some of the evidence for themselves about the outcomes of breastfeeding in developed countries such as ours, I found this systematic review to be helpful and straightforward - I have linked to the abstract, as I don't want to violate copyright by linking to the pdf of the full article. It's here. Bear in mind that more research will have been published (and will still be underway) since it came out. However, it is a thorough, well-conducted and evidence based piece (they looked at 9000 studies in the area).

For those that do not want to click on the link, here is a synopsis of the key findings:

We found that a history of breastfeeding was associated with a reduction in the risk of acute otitis media, non-specific gastroenteritis, severe lower respiratory tract infections, atopic dermatitis, asthma (young children), obesity, type 1 and 2 diabetes, childhood leukemia, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), and necrotizing enterocolitis. There was no relationship between breastfeeding in term infants and cognitive performance. The relationship between breastfeeding and cardiovascular diseases was unclear. Similarly, it was also unclear concerning the relationship between breastfeeding and infant mortality in developed countries. For maternal outcomes, a history of lactation was associated with a reduced risk of type 2 diabetes, breast, and ovarian cancer. Early cessation of breastfeeding or not breastfeeding was associated with an increased risk of maternal postpartum depression. There was no relationship between a history of lactation and the risk of osteoporosis. The effect of breastfeeding in mothers on return-to-pre-pregnancy weight was negligible, and the effect of breastfeeding on postpartum weight loss was unclear.

but i think that the two things can co-exist, though. the IQ thing can be utilised by health authorities to encourage people to bf, as can the weight loss thing. in fact the IQ jump is not that high and the weight loss not experienced by everyone, but you can't blame people for pointing them out as just further advantages of bfing, surely?

Jenny I blw my DS2 but DS1 was weaned on purees. DS1 is a picky eater& doesn't seem to get much pleasure from eating, DS2 loves eating. will shove anything in his gob but particularly loves broccoli and mushrooms. I guess you could say its because of the styles of weaning I used, however, knowing my boys I just think it may have been this way with them whichever style of weaning I used. I have friends who used purees and their kids are like DS2 and vic versa.

I know your probably all sick of links to articles but I thought I would drop this article in from a blog. It has a perspective from a women with loads of kids who ff and BFed. It shows we need to stop rattling on about when to wean and when to stop feeding and basically hassling women and start sorting out how to support in those early days.

I feel as if I should be able to stick my tongue out as I was totally berated on here for suggesting someone feed their baby before 6 months. The virtriol was terrible.

I read all of the WHO research and concluded that basically all of the risk factors of feeding before 6 months (but after 17 weeks) only were of importance if you lived in the developing world. But god I was made to feel bad about suggesting such a thing that the WHO (the very same organisation that classed homosexuality as a mental illness til 1991) could be unclear.

I think this is the danger of having too much faith in 'experts' and 'science', Scientists seem so able to be so assertive in their believe in some 'scientifically proven fact' until that fact is disprooven and a new 'fact' is adhered to.

I have to say that I was made to feel terrible for having to formula feed my baby 4 months (long story but no supply/tongue tie issues etc etc)- I was made to feel as if I was not doing the best for my child by people who could not see that it is not black and white. I think this is exactly the same - some children might be better breast fed exclusively for six months - for others it might be preferable to introduce solids earlier.

pm'ed you fruitybaubles

@swallowedafly: "there is a window for weaning between 4-6 months"

And if you don't give solids in this window the baby can't ever have anything but milk?

I don't think that can be true, and I cant think this is what you mean :)

Please - what's the evidence for this window?

Babies do vary in the age at which they require solids - no one sensible suggests they all 'need' solids at exactly the same age.

But to state there is a time-limited window is not helpful, is it?

Sadly an all too familiar story thinkingaboutschools - I refer to "I was made to feel as if I was not doing the best for my child". You are so right - it is not black & white.

I am a breastfeeding mum but I am shocked and saddened at the breastfeeding bullying that goes on. I have been writing posts which champion decisions made upon common sense (rather than dogma) and equality between mums who choose to breastfeeding, bottlefeed, mix feed, wean at 6 months or wean at 4 months. I expected to be "thrown to the wolves" arguing this on Mumsnet but, in general, I have been pleasantly surprised at the posts. I think people are starting to realise that things have gone a bit too far and that breast, bottle, mixed, weaning at 4 or weaning at 6 months are all safe, healthy and legitimate choices and that nobody needs to make anybody feel bad about making any of those choices.

Whoknowswhat in defence of scientists - most scientists, at least those with any integrity, will happily admit that there are no black and white answers to this kind of question. Especially when dealing with things like medical science where there are so many factors that can confound the statistics. That is why these things are usually referred to as guidelines.

Guidance often gets much more black and white when filtered through someone who wants to sell you something (newspapers, baby rearing manuals, etc.). Unfortunately thanks to the corporatisation (sp?) of our universities, the uni press offices are now trying to sell "reputation", which just adds more confusion.

As loads of people on this thread have said, follow your instincts/common sense, and your baby, and you often find things work out just fine.

@brock: can you answer the question in my post of 12.26 today? Ta.

ziptoes - you're right. Nothing is fixed in stone. Guidelines come not from scientists, on the whole, but from public health specialists who look at the science and take evidence from the scientists in the field. It's silly to refer to this as 'dogma' - governments have a responsibility to promote good health among the citizenry (I would argue - not everyone agrees) and to put in place the structures that enable this, and they should look at scientific evidence to help them decide what to promote.

A public health statement on infant feeding is not an instruction to individual mothers - in fact, the UK statement says quite clearly that mothers should be supported to ascertain what is best for their own individual babies, while reiterating that the best health outcomes, qua the science we have at present, are seen with excl bf to six months. In general.