Hypothetical Question for BF'rs

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2003
Hypothetical Question for BF'rs
45
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 2:02pm
All this talk about studies and the creedence different people give them got me thinking. Alot of BF'rs here give the medical studies about the benefits of BM alot of weight, (while paradoxally giving the studies suggesting effects of potential contaminents very little weight).

If, hypothetically speaking, in a couple of months new studies come out that clearly point to ill effects from contaminents in BM (weather it be chemicals, PCB's, whatever)and these studies showed a clear difference between BF kids and the rest of the population, would you stop nursing?

I'm truly just curious and I hope and pray this never happens, as BF is very prevelant and it would be a horrible thing.

Pages

Avatar for queen_brat
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 5:41pm
Wasn't going to post but I will bite. Since I don't think many studies are not flawed and have explained the only way I would whole heartly trust a study already I won't again unless someone wants to know how and missed it, lol. There is no way I would believe a study like this. I also do not believe formula is evil. I do agree there are times it is needed. i used it with 2 of my babies. My best friend said she was going to nurse and then didn't. I would rather her baby get formula then her having to nurse when she didnt want to. i don't think there is

Image hosted by Photobucket.com
iVillage Member
Registered: 07-31-2003
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 6:47pm
Just so you know, maybe some women will find contaminents in their breastmilk. BUT those children who are ff and then given processed non-organic foods will be getting much higher a dose of contaminents anyway.

If the contaminents were coming from the air. So that I was breathing them in and there was nothing I could do about poisnening my child... wouldn't my child be poisened anyway by breathing himself? And I eat about 90% organic so I'm not too fearful of ingesting poisons. I don't use bug spray. I take many precautions to keep my body (and my milk) clean. So --- I'm not sure if I would stop bf'ing. If the formula provided could somehow stregthen the child against the poisons in the air/food and there was no way my bm could I would have to consider it.

Kimberley & Nursling Baylor Dale

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 9:35pm
<>

I could be wrong on this point but it seems to me that research into the benefits of BF seem to include a much wider test group than the studies that have recently been popping up about the different pollutants, chemicals, etc found in breastmilk. Also, more time has been spent researching BF benefits, so I think the info is more conclusive. Therefore I do tend to put more faith in the findings that say BM is best, although I don't feel as f I'm blindly falling into the hype.

<>

I think it would really depend on what those "clear differences" were. There are clear differences now between BF & FF, but to a lot of people, those differences don't matter enough to choose BF.

J&S

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 10:46pm
<<>>

hmm? haven't you done just the converse in most of your posts? that is, not find creedence in any pro-bf studies?

otherwise...

to me, contaminants are kind of tough to really evaluate. if i'm exposed to something that's turning up in my milk, my baby is exposed to it also as we are breathing the same air. i think science would be hard-pressed to separate the sources of effects of exposure from child-mother pairs living together. i guess bf child-mother pairs would have to live with ff child-mother pairs for the first 2 years of life? breathing the same air, etc.

however, to answer your question...i'm just not sure. we kicked a similar topic like this before around. on one-hand, i'm tempted to say i would bf, we are afterall mammals. on the other i would want to provide the best for my child so i would do whatever science supported -- pretty much what i'm doing now by bf-ing.

anyway, i'm not really concern about this happening. i think that science will continue to support bf and we will continue to discover more risks associated with ff. i do believe the 2 will move further apart rather than closer together.

Avatar for queen_brat
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Wed, 10-01-2003 - 11:49pm
I was watching animal planet tonight, actually getting hooked on that channel today lol. But there was a mommy dog bought it for treatment with her 7 (think it was 7)

Image hosted by Photobucket.com
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2003
Thu, 10-02-2003 - 7:09am
<>

Somewhat true! I don't believe the data shows hard proof of any significant difference between BF/FF. But don't you see, this was my whole point? I'm AKNOWLEDGING that I am skeptical of some of the claims of the advantages of BM, I've always aknowledged that.

Where you've got me wrong is, I don't take the flip studies showing potential dangers of BM and call it gospel. But I do find funny that many BF'rs so wholeheardedly believe the studies supporting BF'ing and quickly dismiss the new data that suggests there may be some effects or negative results from it (asthma/allergies/and effects of contaminents). I find this paradoxical and illogical. I wonder how or why many of you can dismiss them so easily but continuously bring up the studies touting BM benefits.

As Christine pointed out yesterday, my whole "Flame Retartdant" post was to point out to BF'rs that data exsists on BOTH sides and I wanted to hear what BF'rs had to say about it.





iVillage Member
Registered: 09-24-2003
Thu, 10-02-2003 - 7:19am
<>

That's true, but then again, so are things like differences in IQ scores, or "healthiness" especially when there are so many other variables that can affect those things.

Also, contaminents aside, what about the studies already out showing an asthma/allergy link in BF babies? I read the study and don't think it can be dismissed as "flawed" so quickly. I think it at least deserves further testing, which I'm sure they are working on but many BF'rs seem content to not give it another thought? That I find odd because it's the medical studies supporting BF'ing I keep hearing BF'rs tout, why would they put such faith in them and so little in the others?

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-25-2003
Thu, 10-02-2003 - 8:30am
Don't you understand why that study was flawed yet? They claimed that ebf babies have higher incidences of asthma and allergies yet they didn't use a sample of ebf kids!!!!! I don't understand how you can miss such an obvious flaw as that. Some(they even claimed not to know how many) of the kids were also given formula. How does that work????? Do you have any real studies besides that ONE flawed study to support the contention that ebf babies have higher incidences of asthma and allergies??? I'll be waiting, probably a very long time:) Ftr, I didn't dismiss the pcb study but I wonder why they didn't run similiar tests on ff infants because they also live in an environment with pcb's. If I were a ff mom, I would certainly want to know what effects it has on my kid.~Lisa
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 10-02-2003 - 8:57am
<<<>>>

studies aside, we could refute those all day long (though AGAIN, i've yet to see one that expressly suggests that i ff my baby). i must touch on the idea that bm and ff "maybe" could be equal as you've said in some previous posts.

i don't need a study to discuss the properties of both. the ingredients are vastly different. we are not comparing apples to apples here. in fact, its is a PROVEN fact that each mother's bm is different -- and is created specifically for her child. i don't see it has being much different from say the placenta that my body created during pregnancy for my son (who was 10lbs at birth) being different from the one created by my body for daughter (she was only 9lbs 1oz). they were each nourished differently. of course, their needs were dictated by genetics, but my body met their individual needs (as it continues to w/ my bm). someone else's bm is probably not as good for my dd as mine is....bm to bm isn't even equal.

however, formula is manufactured in a factory. all babies (no matter their needs) get the exact same, never changing product. equal? not even a maybe? hands down *very* different.

a more basic example, dh has some great off the rack dress shirts, but the ones custom made for him by a tailor fit better.

you're pretty clear that you can't see this having any impact on adult lives...i of course see it differently. all the technology and studies in the world don't change the fact that humans ARE mammals. that is one thing that i KNOW FOR SURE.

bm equal f?

nope, there's no "maybe" about it.

p.s. most of this was posted below already...just moving it up out of that crazy fray

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Thu, 10-02-2003 - 9:02am
<>

Why is that odd? You have faith in the ones that say its okay to feed your baby a substitute.

Seriously, I don't need a study to know that BM is better my baby. It's custom-made for her.

Otherwise, as far as contaminants go, I can't really address that until they test FF babies breathing the same air....Again, we don't know what's bioavavailable in BM.

Pages