Question about nutrition & BF. - Page 2

[JaneS]

Ok, so I first wrote, "Using the word *all* is maybe pushing it."

But then I thought about it some more. I don't think that is overstating it, I really don't.

Yes, environment and genetics are causes, absolutely. However, excellent nutrition does play a role in keeping the detox pathways of the body open and functioning to mitigate the damage toxins can do. And there are many genetic illnesses that can be effected with extraordinary nutrition.

So, yes, that is my belief right now.

I do believe in the harm of environmental toxins, especially now in this day and age, we are completely bombarded from every direction as no other time in history. Got my mercury fillings out for that very reason. And I'm on the path to healing the damage with nutrition. And cured myself of an autoimmune condition, which may or may not have had its root in mercury poisoning.

(The theories on causes of autism show this for example. Deficiencies in liver glutathione levels prevent a lot of ASD kids from excreting mercury and other metal toxins properly, thus damaging the brain. Is this really genetic though, since vitamin C raises glutathione levels? Perhaps a combination, we don't know for sure.)

I'm currently on a Weston Price kick. His research on the diets of native populations and their low incidence of disease is startling. It is a must read for anyone interested in nutrition.

http://www.mercola.com/2001/jan/21/weston_price.htm

www.westonaprice.org

Also, the modern cookbook based his findings, "Nourishing Traditions", which is only half cookbook and the other half fascinating excerpts from books and research on nutrition.

http://www.mercola.com/2003/mar/8/no...traditions.htm

And regarding genetics. Weston Price found that poor nutrition carried on to the next generation. I think it plays much more of a role than modern medicine is willing to study.

For ex., if all the children in a family (mine) needed glasses and braces, is it genetics? Or because my mom believed in a lowfat diet, and didn't eat enough preformed vitamin A in butter, eggs, cream and fish?
http://www.westonaprice.org/basicnut...aminasaga.html

And we were all formula fed, which the recent article in Mothering showed changes to the dental arch as a result of the hard bottle nipple vs. the soft breast. Interestingly enough, Price found changes in the dental arch, tooth crowding, changes in facial shape as well from poor nutrition. So again, are narrowed nostrils and faces genetic to a family or are they the results of lack of nutrients in the diet as Price's pictures so obviously show?

This is very interesting to me to research and think about. Don't feel shamed. We are all on a path of learning. No mama can know or do everything. I've done some things I regret too, but they only spurred me on to to learn more, and in the long run, our health will be even that much better.

[its_me_mona]

Sorry, but saying that the food we consume is all broken down to be similar on a cellular level is simply not true.

Not sure if you were talking about something I said but I suspect you are since I'm the one who used that term, "cellular". Let me be more specific.

From Kellymom.com in speaking about certain "gassy" foods:

"...breastmilk is made from what passes into mom's blood, not what is in her stomach or digestive track. Neither the gas nor the undigested carbohydrates (whose breakdown can cause gas in mom) pass into mom's blood, so it is impossible for these things to pass into your milk..."

This is what I was speaking about. Of course certain proteins (such as soy and dairy) are capable of passing into mom's milk.

Also from Kellymom.com:

"you do not need to maintain a perfect diet in order to provide quality milk for your baby. In fact, research tells us that the quality of a mother’s diet has little influence on her milk. Nature is very forgiving – mother’s milk is designed to provide for and protect baby even in times of hardship and famine. A poor diet is more likely to affect the mother than her breastfed baby."

Kelly goes on to say

"Are healthy eating habits recommended for mom? Absolutely! You will be healthier and feel better if you eat well. It is best for anyone to eat a variety of foods, in close to their naturally-occurring state, but this is not necessary for providing quality milk or for maintaining milk supply. Although it is certainly not recommended, a breastfeeding mother could live on a diet of junk food – mom would not thrive on that diet, but her milk would still meet her baby's needs."

I'd love to see some professional research published in scholarly journals that compares the quality of breast milk in a mother who eats "perfectly" compared to one who does not.

[JaneS]

whoops wrong post in this thread ... sorry!!!

[henhao]

I agree with a pp that all disease is rooted in nutrition and I also believe it's all rooted in the colon (related to nutrition).

That said, I'm not a perfect eater. During pg I did SOOOO well. I ate lot sof protein, which did help with sugar cravings.

Now, like many of you, I have a new baby and crave junky sweets. I'm tired and have so little time to make real food. It's nice to know I'm not the only one.

Bfing makes me RAVENOUS. Dh has done a good job of keeping me fed with healthy food, but I could eat even more...am just realizing I need to up my calorie intake.

hh

[JaneS]

Sorry can't do quotes right now... this is re: Carol's post

However Kelly Mom does not talk about leaky gut... which is a relatively new concept. Very few lactation professionals even know about it, and studies have not been done on it.

We simply don't know what passes through the bloodstream in a permeable intestine b/c there is no scientific attention paid to this sort of thing. But is seems reasonable to assume since we are now getting reports that a wide range of foods are causing reactions in exclusively BF babes. This has to mean that food is not being broken down on a cellular level as we assume it is “supposed” to happen.

A mom with a damaged gut is not going to break her food down to a cellular level. Further study of what it means to have a leaky gut shows that the digestive enzymes and intestinal villi do not breaking down food adequately. And whole food molecules pass through to the bloodstream and implicated in a wide range of auto immune disorders, fibromyalgia, allergies, etc.

I haven't read the studies adequately re: quality of BM so I don’t know the parameters (such as what is classified normal could really not be optimal b/c everyone is on the SAD, Standard American Diet, ykwim?) But I do know in the case of intestinal flora for example, a poor and deficient diet does indeed pass yeasts and bad bacteria as a result on to the child, to effect their intestinal flora balance, it doesn't just hurt the mom.

Also, so many women experience low supply around AF that is resolved with calcium/magnesium supplements... which clearly show that low minerals in your diet effect your milk. Might that be the reason why a lot of women also claim to not have enough milk from the beginning, I don't know.

(Because it's not just about eating foods with calcium, sugar strips minerals out of your body, it's about what you don't eat as well. And we all know sugar consumption is at an all time high in this country.)

So in my mind those two examples that I state prove diet of junk food is not going to produce adequate milk, I’m truly shocked Kelly Mom would say that. It does a serious disservice to both moms and babes to espouse this point of view.

I totally agree with you re: studies! But modern medicine treats nutrition as basically irrelevant. It's so frustrating. We are just not going to know definitively the answers to some of these questions.

Also eating “perfectly” is going to be so hotly debated. My idea of perfect used to be low fat vegetarian. It is completely opposite of that right now and I know and see the difference in my health.

[its_me_mona]

What is "leaky gut"? I've never heard this term, although I have heard of "virgin gut" as well as read some information regarding "open gut". But, if mom's gut is inadequate to the point that she does not digest her food down to the cellular level then she's not going to pass those undigested foods into her blood and thus, into her breast milk. Her body is simply going to rid itself of those undigested foods, not unlike how the human body rids itself of corn kernels, lol.

The quote I gave from Kellymom regarding a less than desirable diet isn't Kelly's opinion. Kelly's information comes from reputable scholarly journals based on actual research. So if what I quoted was her opinion then I could see how you might disagree. But it's relatively hard to dispute scientific fact if you do not have your own scientific fact(s) to call upon.

I still fail to see any proof that a junk food diet in mom will produce inadequate milk for her baby based on what you say. Because you've seen studies that show that if mom takes calcium/magnesium supplements then her milk supply doesn't decrease during AF and that an imbalance of intestinal flora in mom can cause the same in baby? These ideas seem to be like comparing apples and oranges. Of course it stands to reason that if mom eats crap then her milk will be crap too. But it's just not that simple. Nature has a way of insuring that babies receive what they need.

And by implying that breastfeeding mother's should eat "perfectly" we reinforce the myth that breastfeeding mother's have to somehow be perfect in order to give their baby the best. A great way to turn someone off from breastfeeding

Peace,

[jocmtl]

Originally Posted by heket

First, this is but you guys have got Taurean babies, not Pisces. (Says the stubborn, bull-headed Taurean mama... :LOL )

Sorry to chime in when the discussion has moved on, but ds was born March 14, so he is a Pisces; I just misread Nora's dates!! I do that all the time, read numbers wrong....

[heket]

No apologies! I just didn't want you guys to wonder why your babe's traits weren't quite what you might read. It would get awfully confusing... :LOL

This is a very interesting thread. JaneS, I can see where you're coming from. It's a shame that money isn't spend on things like this for studies so we could get a bigger picture with more concrete data.

I guess my personal motto in this matter would be "all things in moderation." We are guinea pigs for this post-industralized world but those items are going away. So while I do want to eat healthy to provide the best nutrients for my nursling, he also has to adapt to this world we're in. I'm not saying that we should eat only junk food or only healthy food, but I feel that a balance of both is needed so that his body can learn to respond to the large varieties of bad things out there (for the lack of a better phrase...). Not sure if that makes sense, but maybe someone out there will get my drift...

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by its_me-mona

I still fail to see any proof that a junk food diet in mom will produce inadequate milk for her baby based on what you say. Because you've seen studies that show that if mom takes calcium/magnesium supplements then her milk supply doesn't decrease during AF and that an imbalance of intestinal flora in mom can cause the same in baby? These ideas seem to be like comparing apples and oranges. Of course it stands to reason that if mom eats crap then her milk will be crap too. But it's just not that simple. Nature has a way of insuring that babies receive what they need.

And by implying that breastfeeding mother's should eat "perfectly" we reinforce the myth that breastfeeding mother's have to somehow be perfect in order to give their baby the best. A great way to turn someone off from breastfeeding

Here is some info for you originally posted by toraji in the Nutrition forum I am posting it here so you don't need to go searching through the thread for it which is long:

"Lactation, therefore, appears to be relatively robust in the face of poor nutrition. Maternal diet can, however, affect the breastmilk concentrations of many minor constituents, particularly long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, some vitamins, zinc, selenium, iodine, and fluorine [51]. The profile of fatty acids in the mother's diet and adipose tissue stores is reflected in the fatty acids of breastmilk [5, 47]. The concentrations of two water-soluble vitamins, riboflavin (vitamin B2) and ascorbic acid (vitamin C), show rapid, dose-related responses to maternal supplementation [4, 50]. The fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K are less responsive to diet because of the buffering action of maternal stores and carrier proteins, but large supplements can result in increased breastmilk concentrations, occasionally to potentially toxic levels [51]. Maternal zinc supplementation may slow the decline in breastmilk zinc concentration during lactation, although the magnitude of this effect and its significance for the breastfed child are still uncertain [41, 54]." from http://www.unu.edu/unupress/food/8F174e/8F174E04.htm

"The vitamin and mineral content of breast milk can be affected by maternal diet. The amount of thiamin, vitamin C, and vitamin B12 in breast milk, for example, varies based on the types of foods and supplements that the mother ingests. Thiamin deficiency (beriberi), iodine deficiency, cretinism, vitamin D deficiency (rickets), and vitamin B12 deficiency (pernicious anemia) have been diagnosed in infants breast-fed by mothers lacking sufficient nutrient levels." http://my.webmd.com/content/article/4/1680_51733

"Breastfed infants generally receive ample DHA from their mother's milk, although amounts vary considerably depending on maternal intake of omega-3 fatty acids. Vegetarian and vegan mothers have lower concentrations of DHA in their milk (26,27), although infant levels of DHA appear to be only slightly less than that of infants of omnivorous mothers (28). A DHA supplement based on cultured microalgae (under the trademark Neuromins) is now available from natural food stores nationwide." http://www.vegetariannutrition.net/...fatty_acids.htm

Surviving on breastmilk isn't the same as being optimally nourished by breastmilk. In order for a baby to be optimally nourished on it's mother's milk the mother need to have an optimal, nutrient dense diet. Sure a mother doesn't "need" a perfect diet, but I can assure you her baby would be much, much better off with one. We would not have so many children with trashed guts nor would we be seeing the chronic diseases, both physical and mental, we have today, and for the most part our children's mouths would be free of dental caries.

I think we should stress the importance of a good diet for nursing mothers and not sugar coat or even ignore the issue just to get women to nurse their babies regardless of what junk they are eating. This was of such great importance to all the indigenous peoples Weston A Price studied that they or their families would go out of their way to provide pregnant and lactating mothers the most nutrient dense of foods they had access too. These people also understood the importance of the pre-conception diet for both the mother and father.

PS: I am no longer breastfeeding, but all of my children were nursed until they were in their 5th year, so I hope I qualify to post here.

[its_me_mona]

Thank you for posting that. I appreciate the links. I have read all of the articles you posted and I must admit, I have some questions. Please don't get me wrong. I enjoy debating things, especially as they relate to Human Lactation and am always eager to learn something new. I have been known to change my mind about things even if I was a strong supporter of the "other" side of the issue That said....

Lactation, therefore, appears to be relatively robust in the face of poor nutrition.

Or in other words, lactation appears to be unaffected by poor nutrition in the mother. LOL

The concentrations of two water-soluble vitamins, riboflavin (vitamin B2) and ascorbic acid (vitamin C), show rapid, dose-related responses to maternal supplementation [4, 50]. The fat-soluble vitamins A, D, E, and K are less responsive to diet because of the buffering action of maternal stores and carrier proteins, but large supplements can result in increased breastmilk concentrations, occasionally to potentially toxic levels [51].

Riboflavin/B-12: Full-term infants of adequately nourished women are born with a total body vitamin B12 content of 30 to 40 µg (FAO, 1988). Assuming that 0.10 µg/day is required during infancy (FAO, 1988), these stores would supply an infant's needs for approximately 8 months. The 0.4 µg of vitamin B12 per day usually provided by human milk to the exclusively breastfed infant provides for ample accumulation of stores (FAO, 1988; NRC, 1989). Vitamin B12 concentrations in milk, and thus the infant's intake of this vitamin, are dependent on the mother's B12 intake and stores. http://books.nap.edu/books/0309043913/html/157.html

So, we see here that it isn't until about the 8 month mark (in a full-term baby born to a mother who was adequately nourished) that mom's intake of vit b12 isn't much of an issue.

The reference I gave above discusses all of the vitamins and minerals mentioned. It's a really long read though and I have got to get out and get groceries. Unfortunately I just don't have time to link a reference to everything. But I wish I did!

What is an "adequate" diet in a breastfeeding mother though? Who is the one to decide what she needs to eat in order to provide the highest quality breastmilk to her baby? For all we know, those of us who try to get our "10 A Day" in plus the RDA of every vitamin and mineral each and every day could be providing the same quality milk as those who eat 5 A Day (or less) and don't take the RDA of vits/minerals.

To be sure, more research is needed. However, I'm of the opinion that perhaps we should work on getting more mother's to breastfeed in the first place before we start imposing strict dietary restrictions on her

[Mirzam]

Originally Posted by its_me_mona

Or in other words, lactation appears to be unaffected by poor nutrition in the mother. LOL

The milk supply may well not be affected by poor nutrition, but the quality of milk I am of no doubt does.

What is an "adequate" diet in a breastfeeding mother though? Who is the one to decide what she needs to eat in order to provide the highest quality breastmilk to her baby? For all we know, those of us who try to get our "10 A Day" in plus the RDA of every vitamin and mineral each and every day could be providing the same quality milk as those who eat 5 A Day (or less) and don't take the RDA of vits/minerals.

Here lies the issue. To begin with the RDA for minerals and vitamins is inadequate. Combine this with processed foods, high levels of white sugar, food additives, white flour, hydrogonated oils, GM foods, environmental and chemical (ie pharmaceutical) toxins and depleted soil quality that any person on a mainstream diet is not getting an optimal nutrition. To ensure, as a lactating mother, you are getting a nutrient dense diet you have to really be aware of many issues. I think it is possible, but you are going to have to disregard any goverment dietary advisory, any medical nutritional information and start looking at sources not in the pay of agribusiness.

To be sure, more research is needed. However, I'm of the opinion that perhaps we should work on getting more mother's to breastfeed in the first place before we start imposing strict dietary restrictions on her

I personally don't trust research especially when it comes to nutrition there is too much misinformation and too much bias IMO. I do highly recommend you read the work of Weston A Price, Nutrition and Physical Degeneration to understand how important a nutrient dense diet is for everyone, especially pregnant and lactating women.

Here is a link to a great review of the book, so good you almost don't need to read actual book http://soilandhealth.org/02/0203CAT/...ppnf/PPNF.HTML (It isn't opening for me right now though).

I am not suggesting a restrictive diet at all. I am stressing a nutrient dense diet. I think you are doing a mother a diservice by not stressing the importance of diet, but this needs to include pre-conception and prenatal diet as well as lactation nutrition. Why do we have so many breastfed babies with reflux? Why to we have so many breastfed children with allergies; with asthma; with chronic diseases? Why do we have breastfed toddlers as young as 18 months with dental caries? And no it isn't the night nursing! The answer is poor maternal diet.

Obviously, babies need breastmilk and not formula, there is no comparison whatever the nutritional status of the mother. But I honestly think a case could be argued, in terms of health and nutrition, for a baby to be on raw milk formula vs the breastmilk of a mother who is seriously undernourished on an all too typical standard American diet of junk food, MSG laden processed and packaged meals, diet soda, pasteurized dairy products, genetically modified foods (in just about evey package food on the supermarket shelves today) and meats pumped full of hormones and antibiotics, if we are at all concerned about the longterm health of these children.

[JaneS]

To Carol, sorry I'm having trouble posting w/quotes

The quote I gave from Kellymom regarding a less than desirable diet isn't Kelly's opinion. Kelly's information comes from reputable scholarly journals based on actual research. So if what I quoted was her opinion then I could see how you might disagree. But it's relatively hard to dispute scientific fact if you do not have your own scientific fact(s) to call upon.

Except we both agree that there is a severe lack of scientific facts on BF'ing do we not? And Kelly Mom completely contradicts itself by my two examples.

1. Kelly Mom does say if you eat trans fats = trans fats end up in your milk.

The FDA has said there is no safe level of trans fats to consume.
Therefore a junk food diet produces unhealthy, substandard and potentially dangerous breastmilk. There is your proof.

2. Kelly Mom says if you notice a drop in your supply during AF, take calcium/magnesium. http://www.kellymom.com/herbal/natur...s.html#calcium

Therefore, we have one concrete example of a lack of minerals in your diet produces low milk supply.

And by implying that breastfeeding mother's should eat "perfectly" we reinforce the myth that breastfeeding mother's have to somehow be perfect in order to give their baby the best. A great way to turn someone off from breastfeeding

I didn't say a BF'ing mother had to eat "perfectly". If you reread my post, I was talking about research studies. It was in the context of our talking about studying a perfect diet... the problem is that what "perfect" is, is debatable. Hard to research.

My point is that diet effects your milk pure and simple. The junk you eat effects your milk quality and your supply and it should be discussed in that manner.

And, if the mother has leaky gut, and poor intestinal flora, it sets the child up for food allergies and other autoimmune reactions. (Trust me, I know, I'm living that particular scenario!)

Why do I have to encourage BF'ing by saying you can eat a junk food diet and still BF? Why can't we give mama's the education on nutrition that they deserve and say that your diet effects your child's health? IMO that fits into the whole point of BF'ing in the first place... to positively impact their health for the rest of their lives.

[JaneS]

Originally Posted by its_me_mona

What is "leaky gut"? I've never heard this term, although I have heard of "virgin gut" as well as read some information regarding "open gut". But, if mom's gut is inadequate to the point that she does not digest her food down to the cellular level then she's not going to pass those undigested foods into her blood and thus, into her breast milk. Her body is simply going to rid itself of those undigested foods, not unlike how the human body rids itself of corn kernels, lol.

Leaky gut is aka instestinal permeability.
http://www.gsdl.com/home/assessments...rmeabilty.html
http://www.healthy.net/scr/article.asp?ID=425

Unfortunately you are using your own powers of deduction here that is not based on science. Obviously a whole corn kernel is not going to make it into the bloodstream. But whole proteins and sugar molecules do, as proved by the above test for intestinal permeability and article by Dr. Leo Galland (author of the most excellent book, "SuperImmunity for Kids").

The fact that leaky gut is wide ranging is indicated by the current examples of so many mamas we have on these boards of seeing a huge range of different food allergies and intolerances in their EBF babes. These proteins are "supposed" to be broken down and non-allergenic. They are obviously not if an EBF babe is showing reactions. So we have both science and anecdotal evidence here that is pointing the way to a very large problem.

[its_me_mona]

You still haven't proven anything to me though. You are stating a lot of your own opinions and your own powers of deductive reasoning. Perhaps you are unclear as to just what proof is. It is founded on scientific research published in scholarly journals and then peer reviewed. It is not based antecdotal data gathered from a group of breastfeeding women found online.

Case in point (amongst many):

The fact that leaky gut is wide ranging is indicated by the current examples of so many mamas we have on these boards of seeing a huge range of different food allergies and intolerances in their EBF babes.

Prove this to me with some sort of scientific fact. How do you know that this huge range of different food allergies and intolerances in their EBF babies is because mom's diet is somehow lacking? I eat a wide variety of foods which I'm sure includes trans fats yet none of my EBF children have allergies or intolerances. I guess that must mean that my breast milk is perfect then? Just how a breastfeeding mother should eat? Should she eat like you? What constitutes a diet in a breastfeeding mother so that she provides 'optimal' breast milk to her child? Should she simply avoid trans fats?

If you choose to believe that we are doing our babies harm by breastfeeding them and eating a less than stellar diet then that is fine. You are obviously free to believe anything you want. But you cannot possibly try to pass it off as absolute truth given the overwhelming amount of data that tells us that breast milk remains stable and nutritious for the baby even if mom's diet is poor.


Peace,

[Gale Force]

I have always seen the arguments from the LLL (like the Kelly Mom quotes) as somewhat politically motivated: to increase breastfeeding rates. Research shows that breastmilk is better than formula even in malnourished moms (read: don't worry about your milk, you're doing the best for your baby). It's true and it's better having mom BF even if their diet isn't up-to-snuff that it would be to have all babies on formula. But I haven't seen any research that picks apart the maternal diet issue even further to look at more than a minimal definition of adequate milk. Most MDC moms are not about "adequate" when it comes to feeding their babies.

But something that is addressed even less is what is the impact on the MOM when eating a diet only marginally "adequate" where baby is first in line to get nutrients? So the milk in that case might be better than one would predict given mom's diet because baby is first in line. All the while, mom is getting depleted of important nutrients. Ask me how I know. So in my opinion, it's important to look not just at the nutritional content of the milk but at the nutrition of the nursing pair and make recommendations from there. If you want two well-nourished people to exit out of this phase of life, you'd better pay attention to what you are doing.

But why won't this issue get discussed at a LLL mtg? Let's not make people think BFing is hard. Fact is, living is hard if you are going to do it in a healthy way. So is parenting. But I am sure we would all agree that they are worth it.

[JaneS]

Originally Posted by its_me_mona

You still haven't proven anything to me though. You are stating a lot of your own opinions and your own powers of deductive reasoning. Perhaps you are unclear as to just what proof is. It is founded on scientific research published in scholarly journals and then peer reviewed. It is not based antecdotal data gathered from a group of breastfeeding women found online.

Prove this to me with some sort of scientific fact. How do you know that this huge range of different food allergies and intolerances in their EBF babies is because mom's diet is somehow lacking? I eat a wide variety of foods which I'm sure includes trans fats yet none of my EBF children have allergies or intolerances. I guess that must mean that my breast milk is perfect then? Just how a breastfeeding mother should eat? Should she eat like you? What constitutes a diet in a breastfeeding mother so that she provides 'optimal' breast milk to her child? Should she simply avoid trans fats?

If you choose to believe that we are doing our babies harm by breastfeeding them and eating a less than stellar diet then that is fine. You are obviously free to believe anything you want. But you cannot possibly try to pass it off as absolute truth given the overwhelming amount of data that tells us that breast milk remains stable and nutritious for the baby even if mom's diet is poor.

I wasn't proving leaky gut. I was describing it. Those of us who deal with allergies are trying to come to an understanding of the cause and how to fix it. Perhaps it is not the answer, however, my view has helped us and I'm merely trying to help others with the hard knowledge we have gained.

I was suppling proof, with KellyMom's own information, that eating junk food does not ensure quality milk or good supply.

I'm not here to judge perfection I am here to learn and to help with the limited information and limited time we all have access to.

I'm very sorry I seem to have hurt your feelings (your previous, unedited post came through in my email notification). I never accused you or anyone else of harming their children. That is not my style on these boards, in every single one of my many posts, and never has been.

[its_me_mona]

Jane,

I'm very sorry I seem to have hurt your feelings (your previous, unedited post came through in my email notification). I never accused you or anyone else of harming their children. That is not my style on these boards, in every single one of my many posts, and never has been.

I edited my post because I had included a comment about what I perceived as defensivness and snarkiness in your replies to me. But then I thought that maybe, just perhaps, I was misreading your tone. So I thought better of including that remark and that is why I edited my post.

However, I never said that you hurt my feelings nor did I mean to imply it. From what I have gathered in your posts, you seem to be saying that if one eats junk food or trans fats (or perhaps other things that you have not mentioned) that you feel that those women are either doing harm to their nurslings or they are not giving them the best by breastfeeding them. This does not hurt my feelings one bit. I do not believe what you believe. I've asked you several times to give me something to work with but you have not. And that is fine. But again, you cannot expect to sell someone on something based on speculation or antedoctes or even opinion. Has this conversation given me something to think about? Sure it has. And I will look into the issue further on my own and I will call upon scientific research to make my final determination, if I'm so able to do that. Sometimes I just do not know about something because I have not been compelled adequately in either direction.

Also, you asked "Why do I have to encourage BF'ing by saying you can eat a junk food diet and still BF?" Well, what are you going to do? Are you going to tell women that if they can't eat some ideal diet that they shouldn't breastfeed at all then? FWIW, since socioeconomic status has a lot to do with whether a mother breastfeeds or not, I would be socioeconomic status probably is a factor in a woman's diet as well. The more educated and financially stable she is may just influence how well she eats

To Gale Force ~ it is still my contention, in the face of inadequate research, that first we should compell women to breastfeed in the first place. I see nothing political about a mother breastfeeding her child. We all know that it is best. As for MDC mom's not being about "adequate"...well, neither am I. However, our choices are to either breastfeed or not and if women feel that they need to eat really well in order to provide high quality breastmilk to their babies then that will be another reason they'll decide to formula feed. In fact, many women choose formula over breast for this very reason alone. They have been told that if they're going to nurse that they have to maintain some sort of diet that they don't feel they'll be able to do. So, what is worse? Poor or low quality breastmilk (if such a thing even exists in someone with an "adequate" diet) or formula?

[Gale Force]

Originally Posted by its_me_mona

So, what is worse? Poor or low quality breastmilk (if such a thing even exists in someone with an "adequate" diet) or formula?

Clearly, formula is worse. But in a community such as MDC where we can easily agree on that conclusion, I see no harm in analyzing this strategy to improve breastfeeding rates. I know why the strategy exists and I don't disagree with it. But here, among you all, we can be even more radical and examine the factors that might affect the quality of mother's milk. And my view is that you can't get blood out of a stone. If it ain't in your body and it ain't in your diet, it ain't in your milk. If we can agree on that, it is a small leap of faith to agree that if I have extreme deficiencies in something, my milk will as well.

For example, in my tests from 2003, I have extremely low levels of lithium and the amino acid taurine. I was quite low in other aminos as well. If I had continued on my diet that was low in lithium and in taurine and if my digestion had continued to be poor and reduced my ability to absorb these nutrients from my food, just how would it have ended up in my breastmilk in anything other than deficient quantities? Sure, my breastmilk would have still been better than formula for a whole lot of reasons, but it would not have been all that it could have been.

[Nora'sMama]

OK, pardon the quick post and lack of using the quote function, 'cause I'm furiously getting my MDC posting in before DD wakes to BF (any time now!).

This has been a really interesting discussion. I briefly looked at some of the websites you posted, JaneS, and I can't say I'm convinced. However, I need to look further - I'm not at all discarding the ideas, they seem very sensible - of course we will thrive on a nutrient-rich diet, although it is clear studying populations all over the world that what constitutes such a diet is variable.

However it also seems to me that the phrase "lactation is robust" does not just refer to milk SUPPLY, but also to QUALITY.

Just some thoughts. OK, gotta go! Much food for thought, and although for me the jury is still out on the importance of a great diet while BF, I will *definitely* be improving my diet, just out of the guilt factor. Stopping the sugar is SO HARD, though.

~Elizabeth

[Nora'sMama]

Oh, JaneS, I was also hoping you could elaborate on your opinion that many babies would be better off on a raw-milk formula than breastfeeding. This really surprised me. It reminded me of something I read a while back about Scientology...apparently at one point Scientologists were cautioned not to BF and instead to use this very special formula that the head Scientology guy cooked up...anyway, it sounded like a very dangerous idea and so I was shocked when a clearly intelligent person said something similar. I also subscribe to Dr. Mercola's newsletter and I know he has a baby formula recipe (perhaps the one you are thinking of?) but it was always my understanding that it was to be used for babies whose mothers were UTBF...not as a "superior" replacement for breastmilk.

~E