new aap statements re: bf - Page 3

[Mama25]

Will AAP statement really help?

I remember when the last AAP bf statement came out, I was so excited and thrilled finally to have something great to give moms so things could change and to show their drs. And since 1997 I had been giving those guidelines to moms to help them for birth and for ped. visits but really it hasn't changed. To me it really just seems like great words on paper but no action, nothing enforced. Many dr and especially hospitals will not listen and change their policies so all those things will happen. I had my first baby in 1994 in a hospital and then 2 homebirths and then 2004 I gave birth in a hospital again. In those 10 yrs nothing had changed! The policies were the same, same obstacles to overcome to breastfeed (and birth practices that effect bf). The AAP bf statement is like the WHO code here in US, nice words/suggestions but no teeth. I just feel so frustrated telling moms these AAP things and yet they go to the hospital or dr visit and hear and see the exact opposite of that. Now with the added vit D rec. I worry about promoting the AAP statement to moms. It totally undermines breastfeeding, when it is clearly not needed for every baby. Funny how all hospitals and peds WILL be sure to follow that recommendations from the AAP statement and make sure every baby has vit D. I also can see dr around where I live saying just give one bottle of formula a day since it has vit d in it so you don't have to give drops.
Thank you for letting me vent!

Kim Ann

[mom2tig99Nroo03]

Originally Posted by foreverinbluejeans

I had heard that AAP was going to up their recommendation for breastfeeding up to 2 years as the World Health Organization recommends. I was disappointed to see they didn't. I wonder who pressured them this time.

dont quote me, but i still here that this *may* be in the works... just heard this yesterday in fact from one of the few people i miss from working at the health department.

[mom2tig99Nroo03]

Originally Posted by Angie676

I've actually read (in a study I can't locate this morning!) that the biggest risk was from mothers who both breastfed and supplemented with formula. I'm pretty sure I read that an infant may actually be at a lesser risk while being exclusively breastfed than when not being breastfed at all. It only held true while the infant was exclusively breastfed, however, before any other supplement was introduced.

i am pretty sure i have read the same thing, but i cant remember where...

[Arwyn]

Originally Posted by Angie676

I've actually read (in a study I can't locate this morning!) that the biggest risk was from mothers who both breastfed and supplemented with formula. I'm pretty sure I read that an infant may actually be at a lesser risk while being exclusively breastfed than when not being breastfed at all. It only held true while the infant was exclusively breastfed, however, before any other supplement was introduced.

Well, there's this, right there on the AAP statement:

One study in Africa detailed in 2 reports 115,116 found that exclusive breastfeeding for the first 3 to 6 months after birth by HIV-infected mothers did not increase the risk of HIV transmission to the infant, whereas infants who received mixed feedings (breastfeeding with other foods or milks) had a higher rate of HIV infection compared with infants who were exclusively formula-fed.