Find a Conversation
|Thu, 10-02-2003 - 9:36am|
There are other studies supporting the Sears Asthma study. Even the very article you cited said "...the study in the Lancelot AND OTHERS..."
Bottom of the article:
I also found this interesting: <> This is what I've been pointing out here and it's been debated to the stars.
Also, to address your point that the Sears study was flawed because some infant were supplemented. I agree it may be "flawed" but that's not to say it's completely invalid. I believe it still need to be looked at. Keep in mind I'm not saying I believe or disbelieve that there is any link to asthma/allergies in BF kids. My whole point has been: why don't you ladies give these findings and others virtually no thought but wholeheartedly believe the other ones? Is it because there is MORE studies on the benefits of BM? That certainly doesn't automatically make new ones invalid. It all depends on the qualitity and soundness of the study. One good study could invalidate 100 shoddy ones. And if the tides begin to shift and more studies start showing more evidence of downfalls of BF'ing would you shift your beliefs? (Ah, this is the topic of my other post so you don't need to answer here).