Another horrible article disputing breastfeeding benefits

[Claire and Boys]

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/story?id=7424844&page=1

:

But a mathematician's analysis of breastfeeding studies found some of them mathematically questionable, and her conclusions have touched off a debate on whether some of the purported health benefits are overblown.

The mathematician, Rebecca Goldin, director of research at STATS, a non-profit group designed to improve the quality of statistical information in the media, said in her review of studies, she really was only convinced of a few health benefits of breastfeeding for full-term healthy babies living in developed world.

[Mama~Love]

O-M-G, that is horrible! So, just one mathematician's opinion on BFing is suddenly regarded as truth??? Was she completely unbiased? I doubt it.

[G8P4]

There is bad science in some of the breastfeeding studies. But there is also some very good science. Particularily the recent Kramer work (on IQ) and the May Journal of O and G which has the data about breastfeeding and cardiovascular effects. And Lancet 2002, on breast cancer.

What makes me sad is that people like Rebecca Goldin do a great deal of harm. There will be women who read her work who say, see, I don't need to breastfeed, the science isn't good. I have already read these women's posts on blogs. I only hope that these people would be right....that there won't be any long term consequences of not breastfeeding for any of them. They won't be the ones who get heart disease or strokes or breast cancer.

I really don't know how people like her sleep at night, I honestly don't.

[teale]

Originally Posted by G8P4

I really don't know how people like her sleep at night, I honestly don't.

Yeah, count me in on that one too.

What is with this sudden attack on breastfeeding, and attempting to debunk it's importance? Have we all forgotten that this is the very same method that sustained the human race for thousands of years?

[G8P4]

I googled Rebecca Goldin and it looks like she's been attacking breastfeeding for years. I agree, why the sudden attack on breastfeeding in the media?

I can't help but think we are such easy targets. No one makes a lot of money "proving" breastfeeding is what we should all do unless we can't or chose not to. Maybe it all comes out this way simply because we can't afford to pay for the spin that other more wealthy branches of nutritional medicine can.

[runes]

I don't give a sh!t what "science" says about breastfeeding. It's so stupid that they even have to do these studies.

We are mammals and human babies are born to drink human milk.

[frogautumn]

Originally Posted by kidspiration

I don't give a sh!t what "science" says about breastfeeding. It's so stupid that they even have to do these studies.

We are mammals and human babies are born to drink human milk.

:

[*MamaJen*]

Originally Posted by kidspiration

I don't give a sh!t what "science" says about breastfeeding. It's so stupid that they even have to do these studies.

We are mammals and human babies are born to drink human milk.

What? I though formula is better 'coz it's all, like, modern and scientific. It's called formula, right? That sounds super scientific.

[G8P4]

What is with this sudden attack on breastfeeding, and attempting to debunk it's importance?

I wonder if the answer is in Claire and Boys' siggy line...

All truth passes through three stages: First, it is ridiculed; Second, it is violently opposed; and Third, it is accepted as self-evident. -Arthur Schopenhauer, 1788-1860

Maybe the sudden attack on breastfeeding is because we are in that middle stage, the stage right before we get to generalized and mainstream self-evidence of what breastfeeding does.

[Sileree]

Originally Posted by teale

What is with this sudden attack on breastfeeding, and attempting to debunk it's importance?

Its driving me nuts. :

[mammal_mama]

Originally Posted by G8P4

I wonder if the answer is in Claire and Boys' siggy line...



Maybe the sudden attack on breastfeeding is because we are in that middle stage, the stage right before we get to generalized and mainstream self-evidence of what breastfeeding does.

This makes sense to me!

[teale]

Originally Posted by G8P4

I wonder if the answer is in Claire and Boys' siggy line...



Maybe the sudden attack on breastfeeding is because we are in that middle stage, the stage right before we get to generalized and mainstream self-evidence of what breastfeeding does.

I most certainly hope so.

The rates are most certainly declining though- in Canada, by 6 months, only 14% of the woman who started out breastfeeding are still breastfeeding exclusively.

I believe the beginning number is something like 82% of woman start out breastfeeding as well.

I have to wonder if articles like this are the cause for the decrease in those numbers. Besides being bombarded by formula advertisements, mom's are now seeing it in the news, and not in a positive light. It's rather disheartening.

[RoseRedHoofbeats]

I'm sure the premature, sick, poor babies will be just delighted that the West continues to support formula companies that take advantage of them. I'm sure their mothers are simply thrilled we've gotten to the bottom of this vast lactivist conspiracy.

I bet the WHO really appreciates being told by a mathematician that the 1.3 million kids that died last year because they weren't breastfed, that they don't matter, because they're not applicable to those lucky first world babies, with that clean running water and everything.

You either support breastfeeding for all babies, everywhere, or you don't. There is no middle ground. You either help women get the support they need, and get the education and the healthcare they need to breastfeed to protect their babies, or you undermine it because you've got a chip on your shoulder about it, and you don't want to believe that you 1) put your own child at risk and 2) put someone else's child at risk by funding formula companies' ad campaigns.

Know what I think? Breastfeeding never killed anyone.

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT YOU.

~Rose

[proudmomof4]

Oh dear, just what I needed to hear today.
I have been in China since February and today was the first time I saw a woman NIP (supermarket) - apart from the LLL meeting I attended. I started crying (!) when I saw her because it has struck me ever since we've been here how aggressively formula is marketed here.
So, for my own statistics: in our family it was quite obvious that the long-term nursers did catch fewer colds and milder cases of the stomach flu from school and preschool, and I have learnt of several cases at LLL meetings where the nursing toddler was the only one from his or her playgroup not to end up on infusions in the hospital. (We are talking U. S. and Germany here!)
Science? No. Plain common sense? Yes!

[Tine]

Originally Posted by RoseRedHoofbeats

Know what I think? Breastfeeding never killed anyone.

IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT YOU.

~Rose

[mom2tig99Nroo03]

Originally Posted by kidspiration

We are mammals and human babies are born to drink human milk.

makes too much sense. that idea'll never fly.

[mammal_mama]

The more I think about it, the more I think this IS a backlash because of formula companies feeling threatened, as well as women who don't find it easy to breastfeed for whatever reasons -- and those reasons, I think, are usually rooted in our society's attitudes toward breastfeeding in public.

For instance, Goldin talked about how it only saves money if a mother's time "isn't worth anything." And she's a mathematician, so her time is worth A LOT. And I'm just wondering -- why in HECK would breastfeeding interfere with her work as a mathematician? There's really no reason why breastfeeding moms can't do quite a few things, even while their babies are latched on (WE all do, you know?) ...

It all stems back to societal views that it's somehow not "professional" for women to care for their babies while in the workplace. If we could just get over that hump (and I believe we will -- haven't they got over it in places like Sweden?), then I believe the rates will start to pick up again.

[songbh]

Originally Posted by mammal_mama

For instance, Goldin talked about how it only saves money if a mother's time "isn't worth anything." And she's a mathematician, so her time is worth A LOT. And I'm just wondering -- why in HECK would breastfeeding interfere with her work as a mathematician? There's really no reason why breastfeeding moms can't do quite a few things, even while their babies are latched on (WE all do, you know?) ...

At one point Goldin is quoted in the article that breastfeeding costs her in time because she had to sleep more and spend an extra hour a day eating.

I don't know about you all, but it doesn't take me an entire hour to consume the extra 500 calories a day needed to support lactation. (In fact, truth be told, I was eating those extra 500 calories/day all along, and certainly didn't stop with weaning, LOL!) But I read that and thought -- Goldin's math sure doesn't add up with that particular statement. Sheesh.

[mammal_mama]

Uhm, yeah, I can consume 500 calories really rapidly!

[teale]

Originally Posted by mammal_mama

Uhm, yeah, I can consume 500 calories really rapidly!

Haha, yeah, me too.

Honestly, I think a lot of women like Goldin just want an "intelligent" reason NOT to do it, and will go to any lengths to try to debunk breastfeeding. I mean, really, if she stopped researching this crap and writing negative articles, I'm sure she'd have extra time on her hands to do other things :P