The Lancet - a good sign?

[MotherWol]

The medical journal The Lancet have published their deep dive into breastfeeding, looking at the health impacts, and the often dubious tactics of formula milk companies: The Lancet - Breastfeeding 2023

Reading the introduction, I was struck by this author's note; they've chosen not to use gender neutral language because the majority of those who breastfeed are women, although they acknowledge that some people do not.

Is this an indication that, at least in some parts of science and healthcare, the push for gender-neutral language is encountering resistance?

Ah that's refreshingly sensible.

I'm part way through these articles now. Very good and an interesting update on breastmilk research.

I was also pleased to see this and that they have used woman throughout.

This has to be good news. Perhaps next time they cover the subject they can drop the performative virtue-signalling and then we'll be back where we were in a world of biological reality circa 2015.

I was just filling out the ZOE health study and gritted my teeth to get past 'what sex were you assigned at birth?' to finally go, 'Oh, fuck this shit!' at the gender ID question.

So I'm pleased to see that the Lancet is un-drinking the Kool-Aid. Maybe the protests at that idiotic headline a year or two back has made them think again.

the issue in that sentence is the word chest feed which is not possible.

We use the terms women and breastfeeding throughout this Series for brevity and because only women^ breastfeed; we recognise that not all identify as women^, and that some prefer to describe breastfeeding as chestfeeding.

There. Fixed it for them.

No idea what happened to the formatting. It was all supposed to look the same.

I don’t know what the obsession with “chest feeding” is. Men still have breasts and can get breast cancer.
I think the Lancet has been very sensible.

Most 'people who breastfeed' dont "identify as women", they just are women. And yeah, "chestfeeding" is a nonsense, newborns can't chew raw flesh, they need breasts (remember those, Lancet person, nipple, mammary gland thingies)

So.... could have been worse but I'll damn with faint praise.

Just no to the pandering muppetry.

Lancet journals have always been very clear about the difference between sex and gender. Page 4 of their author guidelines says:

For all study types, we encourage correct use of the terms sex (when reporting biological factors) and gender (when reporting identity, psychosocial, or cultural factors). Where possible, report the sex and/or gender of study participants, and describe the methods used to determine sex and gender. Separate reporting of data by demographic variables, such as age and sex, facilitates pooling of data for subgroups across studies and should be routine, unless inappropriate. Discuss the influence or association of variables, such as sex and/or gender, on your findings, where appropriate, and the limitations of the data

This ⬆️

I am praying this ship is slowly turning around.

I work with some of these researchers and I’m pleased to say a lot of them are massively GC.

I need to decide today whether to follow the style guide for the journal article I'm working on... or leave in the phrase 'conditions that are unique to women'.

Let's see what happens.

Are you aware of this paper @NatureWoman ? You may find it helpful to back up your choice.

www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fgwh.2022.818856/full

Or this one
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/232363

Thanks!
Though 'Sex assignment typically happens at birth based on anatomical and physiological markers' is not a statement I'd get on board with. I knew the sex of my own children well before birth, and it was recognised rather than assigned.

I know you know that. Sigh.

At least they mention chromosomes and not just hairdos! 😁

Excellent also that the outrageous tactics of formula companies are becoming recognised.

FannyCann, thanks for the Frontiers article. Having trawled through to the Supplementary material, I've found some useful phrasing that might pass muster without using bullshit wording about 'only choosing to include cis-gendered individuals in this study'.

I'm grumpy about the amount of time it's taken to consider whether to say 'women' in a paper all about women's health, though.