Update on DD (wonderful!)

Your wife's sugar level in her blood stream is immediately 'fixed' with
insulin. I can't see the blood sugar level being high enough to cause
those problems at that precise moment when the baby feeds. The body
regulates things like sugar, fat, protein in the breastmilk so that it
is perfect for the baby. Dairy protein, onion flavours, etc aren't
something that are regulated by any bodily function that I am aware of,
so the level found in breastmilk would probably coincide with the level
in the mother's bloodstream.

Does that make sense to anybody?

Jo

If it "regulates protein" why doesn't it regulate that specific protein?

Insulin doesn't always counteract all the sugar. IF so, kids would
never get sugar highs.

legbuh writes:

Your wife's sugar level in her blood stream is immediately 'fixed' with
insulin. I can't see the blood sugar level being high enough to cause
those problems at that precise moment when the baby feeds. The body
regulates things like sugar, fat, protein in the breastmilk so that it
is perfect for the baby. Dairy protein, onion flavours, etc aren't
something that are regulated by any bodily function that I am aware of,
so the level found in breastmilk would probably coincide with the level
in the mother's bloodstream. Does that make sense to anybody? Jo

If it "regulates protein" why doesn't it regulate that specific protein?

The body regulates protein in the sense that it ensures that the proportion
of protein in the milk is right, and similarly for the other components.
Foreign proteins, e.g. those from cow's milk, can still get into the
breastmilk in tiny quantities; unfortunately, for some babies, those tiny
quantities are enough to upset them. Think of these things as contaminants
in the milk, coming from the blood - that's basically what they are.

Insulin doesn't always counteract all the sugar. IF so, kids would never
get sugar highs.

They don't, at least, not nearly as much as many parents seem to think.
There was a lovely study that I read some time recently (didn't keep the
ref unfortunately) in which kids whose parents believed them to be
susceptible to sugar highs took part in the following experiment. The kids
were given foods with either contained sugar or sweeteners, without the
kids or parents knowing which it was. The parents were asked to rate the
kids' behaviour afterwards (according to the parents' theories, the kids
should have been wild after sugar, but not after sweeteners). No
correlation between behaviour and sugar intake. And this wasn't a random
sample of kids - it was a sample of kids whose parents firmly believed that
they were susceptible to sugar high effects!

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

Sidheag McCormack wrote:
They don't, at least, not nearly as much as many parents seem to think.
There was a lovely study that I read some time recently (didn't keep the
ref unfortunately) in which kids whose parents believed them to be
susceptible to sugar highs took part in the following experiment. The kids
were given foods with either contained sugar or sweeteners, without the
kids or parents knowing which it was. The parents were asked to rate the
kids' behaviour afterwards (according to the parents' theories, the kids
should have been wild after sugar, but not after sweeteners). No
correlation between behaviour and sugar intake. And this wasn't a random
sample of kids - it was a sample of kids whose parents firmly believed that
they were susceptible to sugar high effects!

I wonder who funded that study. Coke or Pepsico.