I don't think this is a question of what's best for the family. There's agreement that breast is better than formula for every *child* regardless of his/her family situation.
Is it best for your family because right now your 3 yo is comforted by bf'ing? I wonder if that isn't short-sighted since so many 2's and 3's begin experiencing frustration and some even have temper tantrums. The best thing we as parents can do, is teach them how to cope with that frustration sooner rather than later. They need coping skills eventually - bf'ing the 3 yo inhibits the attainment of that particular milestone. And that's a biggie in society today when so many abuse alcohol and drugs - better to learn coping skills and self-soothing when the child is becoming independent and walking.
Those who do extended bf'ing are not looking into the future. Many adults will have the ick factor if they were extended bf. Even you said that's a "valid" feeling many of us here have raised. And that's why I think extended bf'ing is wrong. How do you explain to a grown child that, while there were no nutritional benefits to bm that they weren't already getting in their diet after age 1, mom continued to bf? There's no good reason that would get rid of the ick factor.
I sympathize with how reluctantly many make the decision to wean. Some do so for work, some do so because of poor supply, etc. But that does not mean my sympathy extends to the mother who continues to bf the 8 yo. I will never see any benefits to that because there are none. I see harm. The 8 yo will be negatively affected by it. How in the world does she/he develop coping mechanisms when things don't go her way and mother's breast is no longer there to comfort her? And how does a mother kindly and gently wean the 8 yo? She simply can't.
Well, SAHP children are exposed to others with illness, but just not for hours at a time or for days in closed quarters like they are in dc. So SAHP children can get sick in playgroups, at indoor or outdoor play centers, Mommy & Me, etc., but it's obviously reduced because of time and space factors.
<>
There's no truth to that. There are so many germs and viruses. Unless dc kids are infected with each and every one of them before school, they can still get as sick as SAHP children upon entering school. My sahp children didn't get unusually sick. They've been quite healthy.
Do you actually KNOW anyone who was breastfed well past the "norm"? What are you basing all of this on? I know several people who were, both children and adults. I have not seen any problems with any of them. I just do not see how BF a 5 year old is harmful.
As far as I know, a current popular theory involves the presence of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in bm that have traditionally been absent from commercial formulas. These fatty acids are components of neural tissue. I think that some of these fatty acids are now being added to formula, if I recall correctly (I think DHA, possibly AA)? In any case, here is a fairly reasonable overview of the some of the literature on the subject:
"The data for supplementation of DHA in infant-formula milk for pre-term infants are more compelling. One study compared pre-term infants on formula without supplemental DHA with infants getting breast milk. The breast-fed infants had an IQ 8.3 points higher at 71/2 to 8 years of age.
Another study comparing pre-term infants receiving formula supplemented with DHA with those receiving formula unsupplemented with DHA demonstrated a significantly higher Bayley Mental Development Index at 12 months in the infants receiving the DHA-supplemented formula. Large scale retrospective studies have shown that pre-term breast-fed infants have an average 5- to 12-point higher IQ later in life than babies fed formula milk without supplemental DHA. The difference in term infants is 2 to 5 IQ points."
"And if children in daycare who are being breastfed are considered, then that whole 2 year thing is disproved. Children in dc notoriously get more ailments and more frequently than do SAH children - formula fed or not."
Don't you mean only children with a SAHP? I'm pretty sure that the disease rate for younger siblings is similar to that of dc kids if they have siblings who regularly attend any kind of preschool/school/mother's day out etc. I know my dd was far more frequently sick in the first year than ds was (I was a SAHM with both of them during those times). Dd started dc when she was nearly 3 and she was hardly ever sick. I suspect she caught everything possible already thanks to her big brother :-/. And the weird thing is...he wasn't even in any kind of preschool until she was 8 months old. Luckily, other than the chicken pox, she shrugged things often much faster than ds did (he'd throw up for 3 days, she'd throw up once and be done).
Pages
<>
I don't think this is a question of what's best for the family. There's agreement that breast is better than formula for every *child* regardless of his/her family situation.
Is it best for your family because right now your 3 yo is comforted by bf'ing? I wonder if that isn't short-sighted since so many 2's and 3's begin experiencing frustration and some even have temper tantrums. The best thing we as parents can do, is teach them how to cope with that frustration sooner rather than later. They need coping skills eventually - bf'ing the 3 yo inhibits the attainment of that particular milestone. And that's a biggie in society today when so many abuse alcohol and drugs - better to learn coping skills and self-soothing when the child is becoming independent and walking.
Those who do extended bf'ing are not looking into the future. Many adults will have the ick factor if they were extended bf. Even you said that's a "valid" feeling many of us here have raised. And that's why I think extended bf'ing is wrong. How do you explain to a grown child that, while there were no nutritional benefits to bm that they weren't already getting in their diet after age 1, mom continued to bf? There's no good reason that would get rid of the ick factor.
I sympathize with how reluctantly many make the decision to wean. Some do so for work, some do so because of poor supply, etc. But that does not mean my sympathy extends to the mother who continues to bf the 8 yo. I will never see any benefits to that because there are none. I see harm. The 8 yo will be negatively affected by it. How in the world does she/he develop coping mechanisms when things don't go her way and mother's breast is no longer there to comfort her? And how does a mother kindly and gently wean the 8 yo? She simply can't.
<>
Well, SAHP children are exposed to others with illness, but just not for hours at a time or for days in closed quarters like they are in dc. So SAHP children can get sick in playgroups, at indoor or outdoor play centers, Mommy & Me, etc., but it's obviously reduced because of time and space factors.
<>
There's no truth to that. There are so many germs and viruses. Unless dc kids are infected with each and every one of them before school, they can still get as sick as SAHP children upon entering school. My sahp children didn't get unusually sick. They've been quite healthy.
As far as I know, a current popular theory involves the presence of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids in bm that have traditionally been absent from commercial formulas. These fatty acids are components of neural tissue. I think that some of these fatty acids are now being added to formula, if I recall correctly (I think DHA, possibly AA)? In any case, here is a fairly reasonable overview of the some of the literature on the subject:
http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food/8F174e/8F174E0k.htm
Here is some information on DHA:
http://www.pdrhealth.com/drug_info/nmdrugprofiles/nutsupdrugs/doc_0093.shtml
"The data for supplementation of DHA in infant-formula milk for pre-term infants are more compelling. One study compared pre-term infants on formula without supplemental DHA with infants getting breast milk. The breast-fed infants had an IQ 8.3 points higher at 71/2 to 8 years of age.
Another study comparing pre-term infants receiving formula supplemented with DHA with those receiving formula unsupplemented with DHA demonstrated a significantly higher Bayley Mental Development Index at 12 months in the infants receiving the DHA-supplemented formula. Large scale retrospective studies have shown that pre-term breast-fed infants have an average 5- to 12-point higher IQ later in life than babies fed formula milk without supplemental DHA. The difference in term infants is 2 to 5 IQ points."
"And if children in daycare who are being breastfed are considered, then that whole 2 year thing is disproved. Children in dc notoriously get more ailments and more frequently than do SAH children - formula fed or not."
Don't you mean only children with a SAHP? I'm pretty sure that the disease rate for younger siblings is similar to that of dc kids if they have siblings who regularly attend any kind of preschool/school/mother's day out etc. I know my dd was far more frequently sick in the first year than ds was (I was a SAHM with both of them during those times). Dd started dc when she was nearly 3 and she was hardly ever sick. I suspect she caught everything possible already thanks to her big brother :-/. And the weird thing is...he wasn't even in any kind of preschool until she was 8 months old. Luckily, other than the chicken pox, she shrugged things often much faster than ds did (he'd throw up for 3 days, she'd throw up once and be done).
Absolutely.
Do you have statistics on the relationship between SES and breastfeeding?
I'm curious to see them, mostly because I'm in So Cal which is a very heavily pro-BF area, but I'm from rural PA, which is the opposite.
Don't worry, I'm not feeling defensive.
Pages