Study reveals link between breastfeeding and child IQ

[Callisto]

Independent: news.independent.co.uk/health/article3132481.ece

Times: www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/health/article2813696.ece

its such a shame that people cannot even say a single positive thing about bf without being accused of attacking ff
fgs

maybe thats why in this culture bf in public is often [but not always] frowned upon?

I hate the way these infant feeding threads go tits up. All mothers do what is best in their particular circumstances. If it is not the same choice as you, so what?

harpsi - yes please to link.

Why breastfeeding your toddler is a good idea (I would add to this that one might prefer to give your toddler fresh milk from source rather than processed product or cow's milk to meet his needs.

here

? Even though your child is now getting most of his nutrition from solid food, breastmilk still provides valuable immunities, vitamins, and enzymes. In fact, studies have shown that breastfed toddlers get sick less frequently than their peers do.

? As your child becomes more independent, breastfeeding can be an important source of reassurance and emotional support. The strong attachment your child feels with you while feeding will foster independence, not make him overly dependent or clingy as some may have you believe. Our culture tends to believe that "pushing" children away will help them develop a strong sense of self-worth and independence, but forcing a child to stop breastfeeding before he is developmentally ready will not necessarily create a more confident child; rather, it could make him more clingy.

? If your child is ill, breastmilk may be the only thing he can keep down. You'll feel better too, knowing that you're helping him fight off the illness.

? If you travel a lot, breastfeeding is a lot easier than carrying around milk or worrying about having to buy supplies at your destination. And when you're staying overnight in a strange place, the comfort of your breast may be the best way to ease your child's fears and make him feel more secure.

? Breastfeeding may delay the resumption of periods, a plus for anyone who dreads the thought of dealing with cramps and bloating again after a long break. But bear in mind that breastfeeding is not an effective form of birth control; it's a good idea to use a backup such as a condom.

? Weaning when your child is ready is more natural and less abrupt than picking an arbitrary end point. Breastfeeding a child beyond the first year was common around the world before the invention of infant milk substitutes.

harpsi yes would like link to make me feel what I'm doing is worthwhile!

DS2 is 7m and I work, so it's hard to bf. I do wonder at 2 am while feeding if it's actually doing him any real, tangible good at all that formula and some healthy solids wouldn't give him, given that the statistical evidence seems not to translate into real life and the cultural setting of bf is nigh on impossible to take into account.

a really good article by a marvellous man called Jack Newman

hmm. Agree about the illness thing, but ds2 has a continual cold atm so clearly bfing doesn't have that much of a protective effect in his case... it's statistics vs. my 'anecdotal' experience again I know...

I dont' think I am going to get much past 1 year with ds2 either, maybe not even to that point, so he is clearly not destined for genius either.

I have to say, despite the alleged 'convenience' of breastmilk per harpsi's post above, it's bloody hard work when you have a job outside the home. Never being able to travel by yourself anywhere even for 1 day without your pump... and then getting there and finding there's nowhere to go except the toilet and then everyone expects you to come to lunch/ attend a meeting rather than sit in the loo for 20 mins... but this is for another thread altogether I think....

yes but you don't have to pump, you can just feed when you are there.
I have to say that I am always madly sceptical of IQ tests because I think they are baloney.
but if the study said "what we eat as children influences our brain development" I don't think anyone would be massively surprised.
or "what a woman eats during pregnancy influences the brain development of the foetus" that wouldn't be surprising either.

sorry didn't mean to be dismissive about pumping! I mean, I have bf for years and when I wasn't there I didn't take a pump with me, even when I left for three days.
it is a bit more flexible if you want it to be

harpsi didn't you get breast pain and/or have no milk left when you got back??

because last time I left ds2 for only 28 hours, I pumped morning, evening and once in the day, and was in agony by the time I got back, plus my supply was really really low and he was not happy....it went back up of course, but took effort.

My DH who hasn't been that supportive of my BF my 10-month old DD said when he saw the news "It's worded the wrong way round really. It should say that not BF your child might lower their IQ by a maximum of 7 points".
It's true that BF is the norm in terms of history, biology and evolution.
Not that IQ means anything.

Breizhette yes your dh is right of course.
no, I have never experienced engorgement or breast pain and my milk supply is very stable, but I have been bf for cracking on for five years!

I agree IQ isn't hugely reliable or relevant- unless perhaps you look at a child such as my DS3 who has Sn and then I wonder what he'd have been like if I hadn't BF him for 16 months.... that benefit (assuming he ahs the gene obv) might be that bit extra that allows him to converse eventually, or know his age- iyswim?

I am constantly staggered by the number of people on here who are willing to dismiss important studies as bollocks when they clearly haven't read the paper or understood the slightest thing about how scientific research is conducted. Does anyone really think that scientists haven't thought of confounding factors like social class and taken into account? Of course they have. It's a careful, detailed, non-judgemental, non-sensationalist study. It is worth reporting, however difficult it might be for people to hear if they haven't managed to breast feed because it will help inform future decsions.

I think it is difficult to look at these studies in isolation and I think there is a lot more research to be done, which should be done and can continue to feed (excuse the pun) in to the debate over years to come. I don't think we yet know the full story of pros and cons because there are so many other factors e.g. genetics, social environment, exposure to different factors etc. It will take a lot of research to untangle all the contributing factors to healthy feeding. Hopefully further research will enable further clarity of choice and feed through to formula production to make it as close as is humanly possible to breastmilk so for those infants who aren't breastfed to get the benefits. Similarly, we must not neglect things like iron content of breastmilk, an area where, I believe, formula actually comes out on top.

However I do think that whether you were/are a BF/FF there is a tendency among many women to get defensive of their choice, and that's undedrstandable, it IS an emotive subject. But it gets compounded because of the defensive language used in these debates from BOTH sides. Of course "breast is best" - I know very few formula feeders who would dispute that. But it is not "best" for each individual woman and child. There are too many other factors influencing the circumstances over each mother-child feeding relationship for it to be so clear cut. I never post on these threads usually (they wind me up because people get very blinkered) but this thread was in active convos. But these threads do a lot of harm to those in the throes of working these things out for themselves when emotion and hormones are running high. And also those looking back on a difficult time/decision. Of course we can debate these things, and we SHOULD debate them, but there needs to be more acknowledgement from both sides that feeding babies needs to be looked at on a person by person basis, and that AS YET we don't know the full story.

Phew, got that off my chest.

Right.

I've read the paper. Tamum's read the paper. We both think it's a very good, very convincing study.

Would any of the bollocks faction like to read the paper and discuss with us exactly why it's bollocks?

Oh good, you got it- I was just going to ask if you'd like me to CAT you and send it. Otherwise, bring it on

Thanks! Yes, i've read it now.

In fact have noted some impressions on a new thread here for anyone wanting to discuss the study rather than the media coverage of the study.

The possibility that breastfeeding might raise your IQ by up to 7 points - but you only get the points if your child carries the FADS2 gene. This possible enhancement of IQ is surely down to genetic advantage then.

Well its a combinatioon of genetics and choice isn't it? And if you don't know whether you ahve the gene (as all of us don't) then yyou're wise to assume you do given the percentage of carriers is higher than the not. Personally all being equal 9and for many women it simply isn't that simple with BF) it has to be worth the chance, on balance. Or at least takne into account with all the otehr factors when BF decisions are made.

Prehaps breastfeeding does boost the baby's IQ, but does it reduce the mum's IQ?

When I was breastfeeding I was permamently knacked. Or does the tireness involved with looking after a baby/ toddler temporarily reduce IQ however the child is fed?

Is the child's IQ raised by the high level of skin to skin contact with the mother. Do babies who are fed EBM have their IQ raised by the same number of points as babies who get their milk from source. Would a formula fed child's IQ be raised if the mum used a nursing supplementer to feed the baby instead of a bottle?

nursing supplementer

Even though it nearly killed me I would breastfeed another baby. (If I am mad enough to get pregnant!)

Swedes2turnips1 90% of people have the gene.
and the advantage only kicks in if a baby is bf,
therefore there is a genetic advantage, but the baby will only benefit ifs/he is bf.
the only reason why bf would be irrelevant is if the baby is one of the 10%, which of course you wouldn't know.

RT, the gene cluster they report in this study realtes to fatty acid metabolism, and those fatty acids are known to be related to brain development in humans and other animals.

So the most likely explanation for the result is that the more common gene variant allows babies to utilise the fatty acids in breastmilk more fully. (A bit simplistic, but I think that's the gist of it).

I don't think anything like skin to skin contact would influence this at all- the gene in question affects the metabolism of fatty acids, so there is a direct physiological connection with breastmilk, but not other factors that might be connected to the act of breastfeeding, so EBM would confer exactly the same advantages assuming none of the relevant FAs have deteriorated.