Bringing up a discussion....

Avatar for all_girls4me
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Bringing up a discussion....
248
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 1:07pm
from down below. Do you compare formula feeding to let's say using the wrong carseat? Or other things that could be potentially dangerous? Why or why not?

I personnally think that you can't compare it. I think that a carseat can be a life or death situation, whereas formula is perfectly fine and not harmful.

Like I said down below, nobody can convince that my kids would have turned out differently if they would have been BF.

Ilka



Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket

Pages

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-08-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 1:20pm
I agree with you word for word.

"I personnally think that you can't compare it. I think that a carseat can be a life or death situation, whereas formula is perfectly fine and not harmful.

Like I said down below, nobody can convince that my kids would have turned out differently if they would have been BF."

Avatar for kfira71
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 1:27pm
I agree. IMO, the two are not at all comparable. I do not view formula as harmful or unsafe for my child, but I certainly believe it would be extremely unsafe to not put him in an approved, properly-positioned carseat when driving.

~Kim

"Becoming a parent means agreeing to allow your heart to go walking around outside of your body."

Avatar for cl_sunny_side_up
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 1:34pm
Good question.


Formula is in no way.....in my "potentially dangerous" file. It is simply another feeding method.

However, I am not ruling out that my children could have possibly not suffered from eczema if bf'd. I also believe that my first ds who had terible colic and switched formulas on often...could have been better off on bm.


Carseats are in a category all their own. No room for movement there. This is one of my black/white isssues:)


christine


~christine~

Avatar for luv_my_boyz
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 2:45pm
Actually I think there is a good comparison here.

Car seats are an excellent safety device. But, you still assume risks when you put your child in one and drive away in your car. Are you a bad mother because you put your child in a car and put his life at risk? No, you are not. You do what's necessary. But you must acknowledge that there is potential danger there. You cannot say that putting your child in a car seat is "perfectly safe" because your child has never been harmed in an accident. Children die in car accidents all the time even in carseats.

You assume risks when you use formula. Are you a bad mother because you've used formula because bf didn't work out for you? No, you are not. You do what's necessary. But you must acknowledge that there is potential danger there. You cannot say that giving your child formula is "perfectly safe" because *your* child has never been harmed by it. Children get sick and do die from formula use (or "lack of breastfeeding" if that sounds more palatable).

I'm going to acknowledge something before I get called on it. No, I cannot give you any *exact* statistics for formula use because nobody knows for sure. And no, I may never be able to *prove* that formula *directly* caused an illness or a death. But this is the case with most health practices. Generally healthy lifestyle practices are *correlated* with better health outcomes and fewer deaths. Incontrovertible causation can rarely be established because there are so many confounding variables. And even though one study may contradict another or give differing results, you have to look at the broad scope of the evidence. The broad scope of the evidence shows that you assume risk when you choose to formula feed over breastfeeding. Is that risk responsible or reasonable? I don't know, you'll have to decide that for yourself.

No, this isn't a perfect analogy, but analogies are rarely if ever perfect.

Danielle

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 3:25pm
"But you must acknowledge that there is potential danger there"

Why would I acknowledge that if I didn't believe it? You said yourself you can't *prove* it, and I don't believe it... so I'm certainly not goint to "acknowledge" something I don't believe. I do not for one minute believe that formula is harmful.

-Deb

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 3:26pm
I'm with you on this one. -Deb

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-08-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 3:44pm
Yes, I'd like to know WHY I'd acknowledge something I don't believe. Good point. I agree with your whole post.
Avatar for luv_my_boyz
iVillage Member
Registered: 04-07-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 3:51pm
How come hundreds of scientists have studied this but somehow you're right and they're wrong? I said that I can't prove a *direct* cause, but I can show correlations. Exercising correlates with lower cardiovascular disease, lack of it can never be shown to be the *direct* cause of a heart attack, but the correlation is strong. I don't know, maybe you don't even believe that exercising reduces your risks of disease and death.

You must be much smarter when it comes to epidemiology than all of the dumb scientists. This is the best way we have to study health practices and their effects on health outcomes. If you have a better approach to epidemiology, please enlighten me!

BTW, definition of epidemiology:

1 : a branch of medical science that deals with the incidence, distribution, and control of disease in a population

2 : the sum of the factors controlling the presence or absence of a disease or pathogen

Danielle

Avatar for all_girls4me
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 4:04pm
I don't agree. I don't see the risk in feeding my kids formula. Then you can't eat anything anymore. I'm sure you don't live on a total organic diet, without any sugars or fat. I'm sure you also eat the occasional burger,(and NO...I'm not comparing Formula to fast food). All I'm saying is that there are risk far greater in your every day food than you will find in formula. There also have been case of babies that died BECAUSE the mother BF. They either didn't get enough food, or the mother was actually on drugs and the baby got it's fair share.

Neither one of my 3 kids had colics or rashes or anything else like that. They were perfectly happy babies(one of them still is a baby), and I have seen more problems with babies that were BF exclusively than in my own kids. Do I think now that every BF baby has more problems? NO....I think that it's each individual child that's unique, and I don't think it has anything to do with BF or FF, just the way the child is.

JMO....Ilka



Photo Sharing and Video Hosting at Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 05-08-2003
Tue, 05-13-2003 - 4:11pm
After being on this strict gestational diet I can tell you I couldn't keep up THIS way of eating. I feel so deprived and it is going on 6 wks now! And even on this diet, restricting everything, I have a hamburger (one of those smithfield fully cooked varieties from walmart that you just warm in the oven w/steak sauce) for about every lunch and every dinner. I'm a picky eater and there isn't much to choose from. I know I've read over and over again that my diet, no matter it is, would be fine for bfing. But I do question that since about every day I have a sausage & biscuit w/coffee for breakfast, hamburger for lunch, hamburger with baked potato for dinner. Throw in my sugar free candy (it is either good or I'm starved for my chocolates lol). I've lost 16lbs in a very short time. I do question if this would be good.

Eat a salad? No. Eat raw vegs? No. Eat cooked vegs with my dinner? No. Eat grilled foods (better than fried)? No. Soy milk? No. Some of things I've read that should be consumed for a better bfing friendly diet.

My favorite thing right now to eat when going out. Chicken McNuggets and their french fries, they are just too yum!

Again, I agree with your entire post, good going.

Pages