Side Effects to Bottle Feeding

iVillage Member
Registered: 07-11-2006
Side Effects to Bottle Feeding
5
Sun, 01-27-2013 - 5:27pm

Side Effects To Bottle Feeding

Bottlefed babies are twice as likely to die from any cause in the first six weeks of life. In particular, bottlefeeding raises the risk of SIDS (sudden infant death syndrome) by two to five times. Click here to read an article by Dr. Sears as to the link between breastfeeding and lower SIDS rates. Bottlefed babies are also at a significantly higher risk of ending up in hospital with a range of infections. They are, for instance, five times more likely to be admitted to hospital suffering from gastroenteritis.

Even in developed countries, bottlefed babies have rates of diarrhoea twice as high as breastfed ones. They are twice as likely (20% vs 10%) to suffer from otitis media (inner-ear infection), twice as likely to develop eczema or a wheeze if there is a family history of atopic disease, and five times more likely to develop urinary tract infections. In the first six months of life, bottlefed babies are six to 10 times more likely to develop necrotising enterocolitis – a serious infection of the intestine, with intestinal tissue death – a figure that increases to 30 times the risk after that time.

Even more serious diseases are also linked with bottlefeeding. Compared with infants who are fully breastfed even for only three to four months, a baby drinking artificial milk is twice as likely to develop juvenile-onset insulin-dependent (type 1) diabetes. There is also a five- to eightfold risk of developing lymphomas in children under 15 who were formulafed, or breastfed for less than six months.

In later life, studies have shown that bottlefed babies have a greater tendency towards developing conditions such as childhood inflammatory bowel disease, multiple sclerosis, dental malocclusion, coronary heart disease, diabetes, hyperactivity, autoimmune thyroid disease and coeliac disease.

This article was published in the UK’s Ecologist Magazine in April 2006, titled, ‘Suck On This’.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Sat, 02-02-2013 - 7:35pm

Mom can breastfeed and still have a life.  I pumped, made bottles and got outside my house.  Darned if I was going to embarrass anyone by "whipping it out" in public while holding a conversation with them.  And darned if I was going to be confined to home or be slowed down while out and shopping by breastfeeding.

I was completely formula-fed and went on to do good things in this life.  I breastfed my 3 for a full year (bottle or breast) and they've suffered no ill effects.  11 years later and there are no health problems.  I call baloney on the bottle feeding theory.

Community Leader
Registered: 10-01-2010
Sun, 02-03-2013 - 11:09am

<<I was completely formula-fed and went on to do good things in this life.  I breastfed my 3 for a full year (bottle or breast) and they've suffered no ill effects.  11 years later and there are no health problems.  I call baloney on the bottle feeding theory.>>

Perhaps I am wrong, but I think the article was talking about formula in the bottle, not breast milk?

However, saying "well, my child survived without any of these  health issues" - does a diservice to those children who did suffer, or even die. Plus, your children are still young - you have no idea what the future will bring for them.

I was just reading something the other day that was connecting adult-onset diabetes to formula feeding. If you had formula fed your children, how would you know now, whether they will get diabetes as an adult? There is no way to know...

I was "formula-fed" too (well I don't consider it formula since my mom used evaporated milk and Karo syrup) and I do think that my health issues are related. Of course I can't know for sure - but since several of my problems are gut related, I think not getting the biological norm as a baby must have had some effect.

<< Darned if I was going to embarrass anyone by "whipping it out" in public while holding a conversation with them.  And darned if I was going to be confined to home or be slowed down while out and shopping by breastfeeding.>>

I breastfed my sons back in the late 70's, late 80's, early 90's - and I never used a bottle. Nor did I stay home - we went everywhere. I never "embarrass anyone by 'whipping it out'" - I am much too shy of a person to do such a thing.

In fact, there were many times that people wanted to see the "sleeping baby" or marveled at how he would just lay down in my arms and go "right to sleep". No, I was breastfeeding, and they never even realized it.

iVillage Member
Registered: 09-01-2002
Wed, 02-06-2013 - 11:16am

<I breastfed my sons back in the late 70's, late 80's, early 90's - and I never used a bottle. Nor did I stay home - we went everywhere. I never "embarrass anyone by 'whipping it out'" - I am much too shy of a person to do such a thing.>

<No, I was breastfeeding, and they never even realized it.>

You might be surprised how many people noticed it.  But I'm glad you were able to feel comfortable at home or out and about.  OTOH, I live in an area where most women FF.  And a lot of families here seem to have at least 3 children, if not more...It can get difficult out in public (say, the playground or a museum where you have to keep everyone moving and together) BF'ing the baby.  I couldn't juggle that so went a little crazy pumping during those few minutes baby was asleep and the others attended to. 


I also think bringing up adult-onset diabetes as a way of promoting BF'ing is a complete nonstarter.  You were speaking of the '60's and '70's, and you were not alone ~ many in that generation were FF.  But they are not the ones with the early-onset adult diabetes.  Rather, it's children born after those decades, and it's generally agreed that fast food and out-of-control eating has caused this.  It's the opposite of the '60's and '70's children.

Community Leader
Registered: 10-01-2010
Wed, 02-06-2013 - 11:46am

Although I was very careful to be discrete (I am a very shy person, and did not like exposing any skin) I DID think that the people around me would notice. So I was always shocked when people would make comments about how quickly he went to sleep or ask to see the "sleeping" baby.

I mentioned the years I breastfed, because most women used formula back then. I was an anomoly - something like 2%. And yet, I was very involved in the community, and had my boys out and about every day. Staying home was not an option for me, nor was pumping - I didn't respond to the pump.

Having three children myself (plus a child I did daycare for), I do know how difficult it can be to deal with many children - and breastfeed.

But one of the reasons I quit nursing my first child at 3 weeks, was because of the social isolation of not wanting to nurse in front of anyone. I even hid from my husband and family.

So I worked hard to get over my uncomfortableness and shyness - because I didn't feel I had any other choice. I am not saying that everyone should "get over it" - just grateful that I found LLL back then, and they helped me to do it successfully.

Regarding the "diabetes epedemic" - I have to agree that fast food and out-of-control eating is a big factor. Personally, I have read that switching to a low carb/high fat diet seems to be the answer for many. I don't know how many would be willing to do so though...

However, I was not "bringing up adult-onset diabetes as a way of promoting BF'ing" - it was a medical study I read, and thought was interesting. Is formula the only factor? Of course not.

I was just saying that you cannot know when your children are young, if they will not get health issues as an adult.

iVillage Member
Registered: 05-20-2008
Wed, 02-06-2013 - 6:06pm

Mom can breastfeed and still have a life.  I pumped, made bottles and got outside my house.  Darned if I was going to embarrass anyone by "whipping it out" in public while holding a conversation with them.  And darned if I was going to be confined to home or be slowed down while out and shopping by breastfeeding.

While it's your choice to no nurse in public, I really don't think other people's potential embarrassment should play a role in whether one decides to NIP or not. I would never not NIP simply because someone I was talking to might feel embarrassed. Fortunately, where I live NIP is pretty common and normal and thus less likely to cause embarrassment. Even if I was with someone from some part of the country where NIP was unusual, I would not changed my ways just to avoid their embarrassment. I would expect them to learn to get over it. The only way to make NIP normal and accepted as I and many others believe it should be is to protect it by law and to just do it without getting all hung up over how others might react to it. As more and more moms NIP then more people will see it and become more accustomed to it. What would you do if some people found you bottle-feeding in pubic embarrassing to them?  Would you allow your baby to go hungry until you could go somewhere private to feed?

I was completely formula-fed and went on to do good things in this life.  I breastfed my 3 for a full year (bottle or breast) and they've suffered no ill effects.  11 years later and there are no health problems.  I call baloney on the bottle feeding theory.

Actually, the claims about bottle-feedings negative health effects, even in developed countries, are back at least to some degree, by scientific studies. Not every bottle-fed baby will suffer those negative health effects and thus you can't really use your own health (as a formally bottle-fed baby)or any other bottle-fed child's health  to judge the validity of the claims. Far to often, people assume the health risks of bottle-feeding and formula are all or nothing and thus all they have to do is provide an example where they did not prove to be true to disprove them. But the science has never claim them to effect all babies so the existence of some babies who seem relatively healthy despite being bottle-fed formula does not prove them to be false. They simply point to a risk not a guarantee health-wise with using formula and bottles. It's much the same as how not warring a seatbelt does not guarantee you will die if you get into a car accident but it does greatly increase your risk of doing so.

Photobucket