Okay, so basically here:
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr4703.pdf
it says that there's no data from NHANES III (where all the "normal" iron levels are taken from) to determine the normal iron levels for babies under a year so "the values listed for children aged 1-2 years can be used for infants aged 6-12 months." ...whaa???? Seriously? How is THAT logical?
So, if ANYONE can find out any more information on this. I'd also like to figure out as much information on the group the based it on. What I've found so far, it was done between 1988 and 1994 in the US (and we all know infant feeding was a joke then, and of course still is now, not to mention birth practices and general nutritional health that likely would've further affected baby's iron stores)....basically I'm trying to debunk the whole "breastmilk isn't enough after 6 months" because I didn't give birth to jars of pureed crap along with my baby. haha.
Sorry for the hurried post, I gotta get going, but TIA!!!!!!!! Will post more tomorrow!
http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/PDF/rr/rr4703.pdf
it says that there's no data from NHANES III (where all the "normal" iron levels are taken from) to determine the normal iron levels for babies under a year so "the values listed for children aged 1-2 years can be used for infants aged 6-12 months." ...whaa???? Seriously? How is THAT logical?
So, if ANYONE can find out any more information on this. I'd also like to figure out as much information on the group the based it on. What I've found so far, it was done between 1988 and 1994 in the US (and we all know infant feeding was a joke then, and of course still is now, not to mention birth practices and general nutritional health that likely would've further affected baby's iron stores)....basically I'm trying to debunk the whole "breastmilk isn't enough after 6 months" because I didn't give birth to jars of pureed crap along with my baby. haha.
Sorry for the hurried post, I gotta get going, but TIA!!!!!!!! Will post more tomorrow!
