Mothering › Forums › Breastfeeding › bad BFing advice from a ped....vent
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

bad BFing advice from a ped....vent

post #1 of 7
Thread Starter 
A family member gave me some baby books from when her DD was little, and I found a booklet that was printed by her ped's office stuck in one of them. Now, this was from around 1996, so I'm hoping that it's just outdated advice, but a lot of it was either misleading or just plain bad.

-In regards to newborn weight loss of up to 10%: "No feeding for the first twelve hours and water only for the next twelve will account for some of this loss." Was it really standard practice at the time to not feed a newborn for 12 hours, and then give only water for another 12? This is the first time feeding is mentioned, so it sounds like it....anyone know? What on earth would the reasoning be behind that?

-In the feeding section, there is no discussion about BFing vs FF, no recommendation to BF if possible, nothing about the benefits of BFing. There are a couple of generic paragraphs where neither method is specified, and then there's a section on how to FF and one on how to BF. FF is discussed first and sounds fairly straightforward and simple. The BFing section does have *some* decent info, but it also implies that there is only one correct way to nurse (holding baby a certain way, squeezing your nipple with certain fingers, having to stroke baby's cheek to get him to open his mouth and turn towards you, always nursing on both sides) and makes it sound kinda complicated. At one point, it does say to nurse the baby "frequently," and later says that it is "not unusual" for a baby to nurse 10 times a day at first, but the wording makes it sound like any more than that would be. The next part is more concerning:

"You may nurse the baby on EACH breast for:
3-5 minutes the first day
5-10 minutes the second day
10-15 minutes the third day

...The baby gets 90% of your milk in the first five minutes of sucking, and if allowed on the breast too long, your nipples may crack and bleed."

I could go on for a while on this one, but suffice it to say that those time recommendations would not have worked at all for my kids, especially if they weren't supposed to eat more than 10 times a day. This is of course assuming that I wasn't already scared off by the promise of cracked and bleeding nipples.

-In another section, under the heading "Can a baby really get too much milk?" it says: "Yes, a baby really can get too much milk...that can result in irritability, vomiting, diarrhea, and eventually a fat baby." It is not specified anywhere whether they are talking about breastmilk, formula, or both.

-Under "How do I know when the baby is hungry?" the answer is: "If it's been awhile since the last feeding and baby starts yelling, it's a pretty good assumption that baby wants to eat." No mention of rooting, hands in mouth, or the fact that crying is a late indicator of hunger. On the plus side, it does at least say that a "demand schedule" is better than a "clock schedule."

Ugh, I hate how much bad advice there is out there about BFing!
post #2 of 7
wow, I know in my Dr. Jack Newman book it says that in the 1970's it was 'usual' for the baby to be away from the mother for 24hrs and so receive no milk.
post #3 of 7
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by bubbamummy View Post
wow, I know in my Dr. Jack Newman book it says that in the 1970's it was 'usual' for the baby to be away from the mother for 24hrs and so receive no milk.
I had heard that there was a lot of separation back then, but I hadn't heard about it being standard practice that recently. So you got me thinking....the booklet also said, in very strong language, to put baby to sleep on their tummy, which is another thing that I thought changed prior to the late '90s. So I looked it up, and the Back to Sleep campaign started in 1994. Also, I read through the section on diapering, and it talks about washing diapers as if it's the norm. (I CD, but I think it's safe to say it wasn't too common in the mid-late '90s.) So I'm guessing the info hadn't been updated since the '60s or '70s, even though it looks like it was actually printed well after then.
post #4 of 7
Scary!
post #5 of 7
Thread Starter 
Well after my last post, I went looking for a copyright date....there isn't one, but on the back cover is a little note: "Courtesy of Enfamil and Prosobee." I guess that explains it, but you'd still think the ped would read it over and know if it's got wrong info!

The front cover, BTW, has the name of the ped, the practice, address, phone number, etc, making it look very much like it was something they produced. Also, it says things like "call us," meaning the ped, and it looks like something a small practice would put out, not a corporation with tons of advertising money (cardstock cover, very plain text, black & white). Hell, I've been looking at it for a couple days as someone who knows that formula companies put misinformation out there, and I thought it was done by the ped!
post #6 of 7
Well my ped told me not to feed my babe at night when she was 4 months old because there is no physiological need...

Also, about 30 years ago, my DH's pedi told his mother that if he couldn't go 4 hours without breast feeding, to give him cereal and formula at one month old, which she did, and tells me to do . I think 4 hours was the recommendation at the time.

My point, medical advice on breastfeeding changes with the times, but a mother always knows best.
post #7 of 7
I hate bf advice. Most people that give it have no idea what they are talking about.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Breastfeeding
Mothering › Forums › Breastfeeding › bad BFing advice from a ped....vent