10 tips for nutrition (by Nestle)

wrote
You can advertise the perils of formula and the advantage of breast all
you want but if a mom has to go back to work after 6 weeks the odds are
firmly stacked against a long term BF relationship.

I'll bet you'd see your BF numbers rise then.

Sidheag McCormack wrote:

It's an appealing theory, I agree - but according to
http://www.lalecheleague.org/cbi/bfstats03.html

the US has does not have strikingly worse proportions of women
breastfeeding, either at initiation or at 4-6 months, than the UK which has
much better maternity leave.
....
Maybe we can draw some comfort from Scandinavia, which is much better than
either US or UK on both counts, but it's clear the relationship is not
simple.

I think a significant amount of detail is lost in those stats though
and they don't really reflect breastfeeding in practice. Initiation is
likely to be high -- most women try it in the hospital, after all.
However, a lot can happen between birth and four months. Furthermore,
the 4-6 month stat is for *exclusively breastfeeding*. Many people who
breastfeed also start to give some cereal around that time frame, so
they would be taken out of the statistic on the LLL page, even though
they might be breastfeeding 99% of the time and they've never used
formula. We can't tell from those numbers who has switched to formula
entirely, who has simply introduced solids a little early, or who is
supplementing because, say, they have gone back to work.

Unless I am misunderstanding the chart, which, I admit, I only briefly
looked at.

By the way in Canada we get 1 year off at 55% of our salary capped at
$455/week. Dads can take some of the time too. Everyone I know has
taken the time off (probably something to do with the high cost of
childcare), and almost everyone breastfeeds. I am talking dozens of
moms and the few I know who didn't BF interestingly belong to a certain
demographic. It is definitely the norm in my big city. Our public
health campaign in my city is a cartoon of cherubic multicultural
babies with the slogan "Born To Be Breastfed". We even have fridge
magnets

Elle

Also the LLL table is out of date for Canada. There was a community
health survey done in 2003 that showed:
15% of mom never breastfed
85% did at some point (initiation)
48% breastfed at least 4 months
38% breastfed exclusively for four months
38% were still breastfeeding at 6 months
and only 18% (!) breastfed exclusively until 6 months.
And that is where the data stops.

Now this data is collected from women who have had babies in the past 5
years. The LLL stat for Canada is from about 1993 I think. Initiation
might have plateau'd but we have to get people to lay off that cereal
for a bit longer and keep nursing past 6 months.

Wow we still have a far ways to go, although there are regional
variations of course so in some areas BF is a lot more prevalent than
others. I wish they would collect data on longer-term BF, and also
better data in general.

Elle

writes:

: I am talking dozens of
: moms and the few I know who didn't BF interestingly belong to a certain
: demographic.

: Elle

Well..... Care to tell us what that demographic is?

Larry

wrote in message ...
writes:

: Brookben wrote:

: I think Larry is on to something when he mentioned that formula should
: be prescription only.

: So you think it morally, emotionally and physically ok to *FORCE* women
: who are in GREAT PAIN to continue bf'ing unless they can persuade their
: GP to give them a prescription because all else had FAILED.

What ever makes you think a GP would not immediately write a script if
a mother came to him/her and asked for one. He is NOT going to further
endanger the health of the child by trying to force the mother to feed.
This is a specious argument.

I'd actually be concerned about the other possibility-the pediatrician or GP
who writes a prescription for a mother with what may be a transitory
problem-and then considers the mother to be going against medical advice
when she wishes to continue breastfeeding. Since not giving your child
medication prescribed by a doctor can, at times, be grounds for getting CPS
involved, that's a concern. There are quite a few mothers on this group who
kept working to give their child breast milk even after most doctors would
have suggested going to formula, or at least supplementing. I'm afraid that
having a prescription would give it even more weight and make it even less
likely that such a mom would seek out a good LC, La Leche, or similar
resources.

Donna Metler wrote:
wrote in message ...
writes:

: Brookben wrote:

: I think Larry is on to something when he mentioned that formula should
: be prescription only.

: So you think it morally, emotionally and physically ok to *FORCE* women
: who are in GREAT PAIN to continue bf'ing unless they can persuade their
: GP to give them a prescription because all else had FAILED.

What ever makes you think a GP would not immediately write a script if
a mother came to him/her and asked for one. He is NOT going to further
endanger the health of the child by trying to force the mother to feed.
This is a specious argument.

I'd actually be concerned about the other possibility-the pediatrician or GP
who writes a prescription for a mother with what may be a transitory
problem-and then considers the mother to be going against medical advice
when she wishes to continue breastfeeding. Since not giving your child
medication prescribed by a doctor can, at times, be grounds for getting CPS
involved, that's a concern. There are quite a few mothers on this group who
kept working to give their child breast milk even after most doctors would
have suggested going to formula, or at least supplementing. I'm afraid that
having a prescription would give it even more weight and make it even less
likely that such a mom would seek out a good LC, La Leche, or similar
resources.

I'd be concerned also for the mom who lacks insurance, and in turn
waits for the 2 week (1 month? geez, how I forget these things) WBV to
get her Rx.

Caledonia

snapdragon writes:

Furthermore, the 4-6 month stat is for *exclusively breastfeeding*.

No - none of the UK or US figures are annotated with a or * , which are the
markers for exclusive breastfeeding at those ages. I'm afraid the
percentage of women exclusively breastfeeding at 6 months in the UK would
surely be in single figures.

By the way in Canada we get 1 year off at 55% of our salary capped at
$455/week. Dads can take some of the time too. Everyone I know has taken
the time off (probably something to do with the high cost of childcare),
and almost everyone breastfeeds. I am talking dozens of moms and the few
I know who didn't BF interestingly belong to a certain demographic. It
is definitely the norm in my big city. Our public health campaign in my
city is a cartoon of cherubic multicultural babies with the slogan "Born
To Be Breastfed". We even have fridge magnets

Interesting that the headline bf figures are still not strikingly higher,
then :-( Demographics is touchy to talk about, but yes, almost everyone I
know breastfeeds too; it is clearly very uneven across the population.

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

wrote:

Well..... Care to tell us what that demographic is?

Income and education primarily. I really don't know why that is but it
seems like a lack of both can contribute to a tendency to formula feed
(right off the bat, I mean. From the numbers it's clear lots of moms
start then give up). I would have thought that a shortage of
disposable income would encourage breastfeeding but somehow it doesn't
seem to in many cases.

BTW, there was a segment on our public radio about a new breastfeeding
counselling clinic that has opened in a lower-income neighborhood. The
guy who runs it (at first I thought it strange that this man was so
passionate about breastfeeding, then I thought of you and realized
there are men who are very strong advocates of BF!) and he was
emphasizing how critical it is that the message gets out into these
communities where access to primary care/postnatal care perhaps isn't
as good, maybe there are language/cultural barriers. He referred to the
"lost womanly art" of breastfeeding I thought that was excellent.

Elle

Sidheag McCormack wrote:

Interesting that the headline bf figures are still not strikingly higher,
then :-( Demographics is touchy to talk about, but yes, almost everyone I
know breastfeeds too; it is clearly very uneven across the population.

The rates are really dismal, no matter how you slice them, no doubt. I
don't get why BF isn't the norm -- sure some people have difficulties
but really it's not that hard. I just can't believe that over half quit
before their babies are 4 months old. We need to get Malcolm Gladwell
on the case

Elle

On Wed, 10 May 2006 12:34:58 -0600, mcmahan wrote:

writes:

: Brookben wrote:

: I think Larry is on to something when he mentioned that formula should
: be prescription only.

: So you think it morally, emotionally and physically ok to *FORCE* women
: who are in GREAT PAIN to continue bf'ing unless they can persuade their
: GP to give them a prescription because all else had FAILED.

What ever makes you think a GP would not immediately write a script if
a mother came to him/her and asked for one. He is NOT going to further
endanger the health of the child by trying to force the mother to feed.
This is a specious argument.

Because what would be the point of women having to get a prescription from
the their GP if they are automatically going to get one. I think you will
find the NHS would see that as a colosal waste of GP's time. Their job is
not bf'ing advocacy, it is to help them when they are ILL. Being unable
to or not wanting to is not an illness - mental or otherwise. If you make
GP's give out prescriptions then by the nature of their job they are
*required* to make a decision about whether that is necessary. Otherwise
we would all be rolling up to our clinics to score some nice free drugs.

: What if a mum *just doesn't want to breastfeed*.

She gets a script.

Again see my argument above. That is not a GP's job. If you make it their
job then they will have to make a decision. Scripts are paid for out of
public funds and like or not GP's are required to keep that in mind. See
the recent cases of women battling to get the cancer drug herceptin.
Funds are limited in the NHS and scripts for formula would cost billions.
Thefore, scripts would be handed out on need - and it would be the GP's
job to assess that need.

: You cannot just chuck away
a woman's right to choose how she uses
: *HER* body. We are in the 21st century for goodess sake.

Others in this thread have talked about the right of the mom versus the
right of the baby. I think even framing the question in these terms is
totally unrealistic, because I don't think it would ever get to this
point.

See above.

I think the more likely possibility is that it would be one more
opportunity to to educate and convince the uncertain mom who would
otherwise run out and buy a tin of formula and compromise her supply by
supplementing because she is afraid her supply is not enough, although
she has no real evidence to that effect.

Education comes through good midwives and health visitors. All making
women get a script will do is iss make them to continue struggling for a
little longer before she 'cracks' and gets a script. Perfect recipe for
an unhappy mum and baby.

: At such a *vulnerable* time in a new mum and babies lives I cannot
: believe this idea is even being considered. It's completely bonkers. I
: find the concept completely shocking and I am appalled that so many
: here really truly cannot see how awful it is. With attitudes like
: that there really is no future for me here. I am so so sorry for new
: bf'ing or ff'ing mums who come across you all and are faced with such
: attitudes. You are doing more harm than good but you just cannot see
: it. It's very sad.

I think posing the question as a rights argument is a red herring and
totally ignores the reality of how insidiously formula marketing is used
to make it a replacement to breastfeeding without any concious thought.

I disagree totally and have given my reasons which you refuse to accept.

I think that the only forcing that would occur is that it would cause a
woman to make a conscious decision to stop breastfeeding rather than
having it happen as a slippery slope of unconsiously taken actions, and
she would have to take decisive action (asking for the script) in order
to take the actions. I think it would be a vast social improvement.

What you sugar coat by calling 'decisive action' in practice would be the
woman getting to breaking point. And I know because I've been there. I did
not make a decisive action to feed my baby a bottle one night, I did it
because I was physcially not able feed on a nippled with a bleeding open
wound that would not heal when being nursed on very hard every 2 hours. If
I had been forced to find a GP open at 10pm on a sunday night, wait for
hours in total misery whilst I get to see that GP, then find an all night
chemist to get the script or go to A&E and wait hours to get one - all
with a screaming hungry baby and a mum at breaking point, I would have
concievably cracked in another way - THAT is inhuman and cruel.

Jeni

Jen,

I think we are just going to have to disagree on this subject.
Perhaps there will be other areas we can agree on more.

Larry