>>>Or prehaps we are looking at it all wrong. Its my understanding that not WANTING to feed your baby came from the ability to have an alternative. Sure others *could* nurse ones young, but did women (in caveman times) really *not* want to feed their child? I think it kinda went hand in hand with having a baby in the first place. Have a baby=feed your baby. No if, ands, buts or coconuts! <<<<
Well since we don't have a modern day cavewoman to ask, we can only guess. My theory comes from the idea that whatever led women to seek out alternatives *might* have some part of it related to some women having incredible difficulties bf'ing (not just supply, but pain and lack of desire). Even today, ff'ing mom's want to feed their child, just with an alternative. Maybe back then women wanted their child to eat, just from someone else's breast. Not all or most women, but maybe something more than 1-3%. I'm just guessing, not saying I know for certain.
>>>For this loss of BF knowledge to have occurred before formula was invented would have required their to have been an viable alternative to BFing which their wasn't. You would only loss the knowledge of how to do something only when there was no longer a need for most if any people to know how to do it. <<<<
Did you read any of my links about alternatives attempted decades and decades before the introduction of modern day formula? Women sharing cookbook recipes for infants, people coming up with all sorts of homemade utensils to feed their babies with?
I posted the links in attempt to support my point. Did anyone look at them? They were very interesting. At least I thought.
I agree with you there, but like Rachael said, in the rest of the animal kingdom this is a rare occurrence when there's something wrong with the mother.
So going down that road..... some of those modern practices - though OVERused now - of c-sections and induction came about as an attempt to keep women and children from dying in childbirth. I know the c-section rate is way too high in our country, I specifically chose where and who with to have my children based on that and factors related to that. Despite never having an epidural and managing the pain and process of labor just fine, I had two c-section. Two of my babies would have died without that surgery, in the first case without a c-section I would have died too. I labored through full dilation and pushing for several hours the first time (I was pushing for 4.5 hours before we went to the hospital). So let's say babies that are born too early or under extreme circumstances can't latch properly due to those circumstances... then we could say ff'ing is yet another attempt to keep babies alive that long ago might not have made it. Would that be a fair statement? Then you can argue it's been overused, just like c-sections and other interventions?
My oldest has no allergies but she could not take tylenol as a baby, even now she doesn't do well with it and I rarely ever even try it. She would immediately spit it back up, and the only thing I could use for a fever was the suppositories. Someone suggested it was the dye in the tylenol... why do they even need the dye??? Does it serve a purpose?
Pages
>>>Or prehaps we are looking at it all wrong. Its my understanding that not WANTING to feed your baby came from the ability to have an alternative. Sure others *could* nurse ones young, but did women (in caveman times) really *not* want to feed their child? I think it kinda went hand in hand with having a baby in the first place. Have a baby=feed your baby. No if, ands, buts or coconuts! <<<<
Well since we don't have a modern day cavewoman to ask, we can only guess. My theory comes from the idea that whatever led women to seek out alternatives *might* have some part of it related to some women having incredible difficulties bf'ing (not just supply, but pain and lack of desire). Even today, ff'ing mom's want to feed their child, just with an alternative. Maybe back then women wanted their child to eat, just from someone else's breast. Not all or most women, but maybe something more than 1-3%. I'm just guessing, not saying I know for certain.
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
>>>For this loss of BF knowledge to have occurred before formula was invented would have required their to have been an viable alternative to BFing which their wasn't. You would only loss the knowledge of how to do something only when there was no longer a need for most if any people to know how to do it. <<<<
Did you read any of my links about alternatives attempted decades and decades before the introduction of modern day formula? Women sharing cookbook recipes for infants, people coming up with all sorts of homemade utensils to feed their babies with?
I posted the links in attempt to support my point. Did anyone look at them? They were very interesting. At least I thought.
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
Our Lamaze instructor told us that in the hospital where I gave birth, they routinely kicked dad out of the room for the epi for this reason!
<>
Prehaps.
I agree with you there, but like Rachael said, in the rest of the animal kingdom this is a rare occurrence when there's something wrong with the mother.
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
Malcolm Gladwell Blink
Pages