For older kids' moms who breastfed....

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
For older kids' moms who breastfed....
73
Sat, 02-02-2013 - 8:49pm

How do you know now (if you're finished breastfeeding your children) that it made a difference?  Formula feeding is much easier, make a bottle, be on-the-go without stopping while out and about, maybe an infant who slept longer.  Would your older children (no longer breastfed) be different if you had formula fed? 

Pages

Community Leader
Registered: 10-01-2010
Mon, 02-04-2013 - 10:05pm

nisupulla wrote:
<p>I do not believe that breastfeeding can prevent ear infections 100%..</p>

I know you know this, but for everyone else...

Breastfeeding does not prevent anything. Breastfeeding does not guarantee anything.

Breastfeeding is simply the biological norm. Not breastfeeding increases your risk.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Mon, 02-04-2013 - 10:42pm

Of course that still means that "not breastfeeding" results in more ear infections than breastfeeding. ;)

Community Leader
Registered: 10-01-2010
Tue, 02-05-2013 - 10:02am

nisupulla wrote:
<p>Of course that still means that "not breastfeeding" results in more ear infections than breastfeeding. ;)</p>

Not breastfeeding CAN result in more ear infections.

Well, I guess it depends on how someone interprets your sentence. I am thinking you mean that over all, there are more ear infections in the formula fed population than in the breastfed population - total.

But I think that moms might read it as their formula fed baby will have more ear infections than your breastfed baby.

Lots of formula-feed children never get an ear infection.

OTOH, my formula-fed baby had 10 ear infections within his first 18 months and tubes put in his ears. My breastfed sons had none.

But it's also possible that laying on his back to feed, going to bed with a bottle, the fact that his father and all grandparents smoked contributed to that as well.

Can Bottle-feeding Cause Ear Infections?

"Bottle-feeding is not the only thing that can cause ear infection. Other causes are exposure to cigarette smoke, allergies, using a pacifier, being in a day care center and, so being in close proximity to other children who may have ear infections. Like most aspect of responsible parenting, it is just a matter of being aware of the dangers."

Article Source: http://EzineArticles.com/247050

Community Leader
Registered: 07-26-1999
Tue, 02-05-2013 - 10:46am
My middle one had quite a few ear infections the first 3 years, we actually went to an ENT for it and were told her adenoids were too large and needed to be removed and tubes in her ears also. I had been seeing a chiropractor for my back and discussed it with him. We ended up doing the adenoid removal surgery but not the tubes and started taking both the little girls for adjustments. The littler one had had a few ear infections, but neither have had any since starting the chiropractor visits. I know the adenoids definitely helped the middle one with it, but IMO the adjustments helped them the most when it came to ear infections.
Photobucket
iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Tue, 02-05-2013 - 5:08pm

Responding to both your posts, I have to agree that either we're lucky or it is the BF'ing that have kept my 3 from getting allergies like their father has.  My husband (and his family) have terrible seasonal allergies (hayfever).  I don't, nor do my bros., sis, parents.  So either it's luck or it was BF'ing each for a year.  When I see what my husband and especially one of his brothers go through with allergies, I'm so glad that - for whatever reason - my kids didn't get allergies.

As far as emergency situations, BF'ing is always available.  If I had been one of those unfortunate New Orleaners in the Superdome during Katrina, I would happily have BF then and there.  But I was a closet BF'er ~ never being comfortable BF'ing in public.  So that was very limiting on me, it put a lot of pressure on me.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Sun, 02-10-2013 - 8:07am

That's an answer ~ you BF without anyone even knowing you were BF so I should have lived that same situation?  And what exactly are pro-NursingInPublic legislations??  We already have the right to NIP in the US ~ what we haven't been able to un-do is the "Ick" factor of men and women around us.  And if I was a forerunner 11 years ago, I can assure you ~ nothing's changed.  So these are all non-anwers.

<<...six decades of research that supports the claim that BF'ing does make a difference.>>

I re-read your post and couldn't see an example of quantifiable measurement where BF made a difference.  Formula has been around for centuries in one combination or another.  In fact, I was born somewhere within that 60 year span and formula was touted as extremely convenient ~ all the moms were using it.  Unlike today's Gen. X'ers and Millenials, baby ear infections were de minimus.  Tubes?  Never even heard of that until much later. The Emporer is wearing new clothes and I and others probably fell for it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-20-2008
Sun, 02-10-2013 - 1:30pm

How do you know now (if you're finished breastfeeding your children) that it made a difference?

There is really no way for a mom who BF'd her child to know that it made a difference for her kid specifically. She can assume that it likely made at least some difference based on the six decades of research that supports the claim that BF'ing does make a difference. I don't think you need to prove that it specifically made a difference for your children. The evidence is strong enough to conclude that in general it makes a significant difference for most children, and thus that it likely did for any BF'd child. While it might possible that for a small number of children that the difference is not very significant, it see no evidence to suggest (absent a few rare medical conditions) a BF baby would be worse off on breastmilk then formula. Thus, I would recommend that every mom BF their child (unless impossible for some reason) since it most does make a difference even if the mom herself may not be able to see or detect it. I think too often, formula defenders try and argue that their is no significant difference between breastmilk and formula because often can't tell that their is a significant  health difference due to BF'ing.. The reality is that the health difference are not of a nature that they will always be obvious when the child gets older. The only true way to know that BF is healthier is to conduct proper studies where you look at large numbers of babies. Science can detect connection between health issues and diet that will not be obvious by the naked eye, especially by a layperson.

 Formula feeding is much easier, make a bottle, be on-the-go without stopping while out and about, maybe an infant who slept longer.  Would your older children (no longer breastfed) be different if you had formula fed?

While the ease of BF vs FF is to some degree subjective, I would disagree that in general FF"ing is easier, especially after the early weeks. While I accept that for some moms, in the early weeks, they may find FF'ing easier then BF'ing, even absent any major BF issues. I don;t however feel that FF'ing is in generally easier, especially in later months. Once BF is firmly established, it's really is easier (in general) to just place baby to breast and feed rather then having to make bottles, feed the baby, then wash the bottles, and make sure you always have a can of formula on hand. While it's true that in some circumstances, bottle-feeding can be easier when out and about (such as when driving where BF'ing would be unsafe), that does not have to be formula in the bottle (mom can pump BM). But in general, I don't see bottle-feeding a baby in public to be that much easier then breastfeeding. With breastfeeding, you needn't worry about having bottles with you or preparing formula in public, and you can generally just place the child to breast to feed. I know some moms worry about criticism and harassment for BF'ing in public but I think that the best course of action is pass strong pro-NIP laws and to encourage moms to stand up to NIP critic. One other thing you can do with breastfeeding that not as easy with FF'ing is nurse hands-fee. If you use a sling, you can BF hands-free, something that is not so easy or safe to do with bottle-feeding. Thus you can walk around and nurse in a sling hands-free while you would generally have to use at least one hand to hold the bottle for the baby.  

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-20-2008
Sun, 02-10-2013 - 2:11pm

That's an answer ~ you BF without anyone even knowing you were BF so I should have lived that same situation? 

I assume your reffering to Whitchmommy's comment about how she nurse in pub;ic with without anyone knowing (or at least letting on that they knew). I think that in recent years, nursing in public has become more in the forefront of people minds such that they are more likely to notice it and as result take issue with it. But I can tell you that it's possible to nurse in public thse days without drawing much attention. It likely depends on whether you live in a pro-BF part of the country or not but where I live it not considered tht big of a deal. Even if I lived in less NIP tolerant area I would not hide away simply to please a few people with a anti-BF hang-up.


And what exactly are pro-NursingInPublic legislations??  We already have the right to NIP in the US ~ what we haven't been able to un-do is the "Ick" factor of men and women around us.

I think you miss the point of "pro-Nursing In Public legislation". Pro-nursing in public legislation is about stopping harassment and discrimination against moms nursing in public. It generally is intended to bare businesses from kicking out moms who NIP in situations where they would not do so for a bottle-feeding moms and prevent general harassment of nursing moms. Unfortunately, not all states who have such laws provide teeth to the law so often a mom who nursing in public can still face discrimination and harassment since there is no punishment for violation of the law. These laws are not intended to get rid of or as you say undo the "ick" factor, at least not directly. But as more and more moms are able to nurse in public without fear of discrimination and harassment then our society as a whole will become more accustom to nursing in public and as a result will become more tolerant of it. That in turn will lead to people feeling less icky about BF in general.

<<...six decades of research that supports the claim that BF'ing does make a difference.>>

I re-read your post and couldn't see an example of quantifiable measurement where BF made a difference. 

I did not list any specific quantifiable examples but if you want a concise summery of the research on breastfeeding so far then read the AHQR (Agency for Healthcare Quality Research) report "Effectiveness of Breastfeeding on Child and Maternal Outcomes ..." available here: http://www.ahrq.gov/clinic/tp/brfouttp.htm

The above report looks at only the reliable sound studies done on breastfeeding over the last six decades and draws conclusions based on them.

Formula has been around for centuries in one combination or another.  In fact, I was born somewhere within that 60 year span and formula was touted as extremely convenient ~ all the moms were using it. 

It is true that formula in some form or another has been around for over a century but the type of formula available in the early 20th Century is not the same as that which is currently sold. Formula has improved somewhat in the last century, though not enough to qualify it currently as close enough or equal to breastmilk. I am also aware that bottle-feeding formula was once touted as superior to breastfeeding largely on the grounds of it being more convenient. I do have to disagree, if you meant it literally as written, that "all mom" were using it. At it's height, formula was the choice of as much as 75% of new moms. There have always been some moms who stuck with breastfeeding, at least for some period of time after birth.

Unlike today's Gen. X'ers and Millenials, baby ear infections were de minimus.  Tubes?  Never even heard of that until much later. The Emporer is wearing new clothes and I and others probably fell for it.

Ear infections were just as much of issue during the height of formula use just as they are today, maybe even more so. The difference was how they where treated and the fact that we did not understand how formula-feeding/bottle-feeding played a role in their frequency. We may not have been treating them with tubes at that time but that was likely due to the treatment being undiscovered at the time rather then a lack of ear infections or they being less serious back that so as not to require such surgery. This is not a case of the "The Emperor wearing new clothes and I and others probably felling for it." as you put it. There is plenty of research to support the links being ear infections and formula/bottle-feeding (See the AHQR report linked to above).

Photobucket

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Mon, 02-11-2013 - 11:19am

Again, it's not about "drawing too much attention" in public.  It's not about tolerance.  And there is no such thing as an "anti-BF hang up."  It's about making others uncomfortable or choose to watch where their eyes are looking.  I BF for  years and to this day, I think women should have the decorum and discretion to BF out of my sight.

There's no reliable, quantifiable support for BFing being better than FFing

As can be seen in my children, years later.  As can be seen from reading these debates and experiential data.  You twice offered just one source for this incredibly important accusation, the BF is better.  And that link is empty.

Again, we don't need Nursing-In-Public legislation.  We already have the right to do that.  But we cannot legislate away people's discomfort with the mom BF'ing in public.  We can't get rid of the "ick" factor.  Especially since the norm is Formula Feeding.  And certainly of the moms who do BF, few BF in public most of the time.

Ear infections are not more common in FFed babies

Every baby has the same risk of getting ear infections.  And they are always treated by a medical dr. the same way initially ~ with antibiotics.  So the whole "antibiotics in BM" argument falls flat.  I think FF moms and BF moms alike understand arguments about the shape of baby's ear and how to hold the baby properly to avoid pooling.

Agains, your only support for BF babies not getting more ear infections than FF babies now and from my memory is an empty link.

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Tue, 02-12-2013 - 12:03am

thardy2001 wrote:
<p> There's no reliable, quantifiable support for BFing being better than FFing</p>

I must be misreading your post again? There are a lot of data showing better health outcomes for BF vs FF. Increased likelihood of ear infections is one of the many health risks from opting for formula feeding.

Pages