Breastfed babies are healthier

[2boyzmama]

This is kind of a spin off from the thread "Is he satisfied?" where the mom was EPing for a preemie and had taken him to an immunologist due to repeated illnesses. The immunologist kept questioning whether she was supplementing.

The spin-off is the belief that breastfed babies are healthier. While that is certainly nearly always the case, some of us (myself included) have breastfed babies that are very sick.

Now of course I firmly believe that if it weren't for me breastfeeding, my son would be dead now (and that is not an exaggeration...he aspirates, he has a dairy and soy allergy, he has a physical malformation in his airway, he has severe reflux...if he was on formula, he would have aspirated that formula, his body would have attacked it as a foreign agent and he would have had a terrible pneumonia...then because of his airway malformation--laryngotracheobronchomalacia--he would not have been able to cough, etc) He also has a cleft palate and a small recessed jaw with an upper lip tie, so breastfeeding has been IMMENSELY difficult.

So while breastfeeding is still making HIM healthier, he is MUCH more sick than the average breastfed baby. I have had some comments before from people, things like "I thought breastmilk was supposed to stop him from getting sick?" or "why don't you just supplement, you work so hard to breastfeed him and he's sick anyway, you're not really gaining anything."

So I guess my point is to be careful when you say or do things that makes breastfeeding seem like this cure-all/prevent-all for babies. Because to an outsider (non lactivist) my son (and many others) would appear to debunk that. I think we should make an effort to say it more along the lines of "breastfeeding will increase your baby's chances of being less sick less often than if you were to formula feed"

Does this make sense? I'm a huge supporter of breastfeeding, a big lactivist, my heart breaks whenever I see a baby getting a bottle of formula, I will proudly nurse my special needs baby in public and tell anyone who asks that I worked my tail off to keep him breastfeeding. But I do feel "jipped" sometimes that my breastmilk isn't protecting my baby as much as it protects most babies. Then I have to remind myself that the only reason he's here today is because he's breastfed.

[PatioGardener]

You sound really frustrated. I can't imagine what you have been through - you are such a strong mom and your baby is so lucky to have you - and to be breastfed.

I understand your concern about the terminology. When you look at a population, formula fed babies are at higher risk of certain illnesses. So when you look at a population, breastfed babies are healthier. But when you look at an individual baby, that baby will either get sick on a certain occasion, or not.

Originally Posted by 2boyzmama

I think we should make an effort to say it more along the lines of "breastfeeding will increase your baby's chances of being less sick less often than if you were to formula feed"

Rather than the way you phrased it above, I think it may be clearer to say that "not breastfeeding increases the risk of illness", or "formula fed babies are more at risk of getting certain illnesses than breastfed babies." Breastfeeding definitely is not a guarantee that your baby won't be sick - hopefully moms aren't told that!

[jeanine123]

I agree with PatioGardener. I would phrase it along the lines of "imagine how much sicker he/she would be if it wasn't for BFing" or "FFing increases their risks for many illnesses and diseases, BFing keeps their risk level where it was meant to be". I know some think of breastmilk/BFing as this magical cure all/protector and are highly disappointed and angry when their child comes down with a sniffle. I think that in some cases those are the ones who will always believe that, no matter how it is phrased or worded. We can not control what someone wants to hear, only what is actually said to them.

[Momtwice]

[Beckula]

http://www.mothering.com/discussions...d.php?t=808252

This is a great thread showcasing an article that really (I think) showcases the loaded language in our current Breastfeeding awareness campaign. The language itself could be one reason why BFing rates are so low. I have personally stopped talking about the benefits of BFing because BFing is the biological standard. I completely understand what you are going through as my DS is turning out to be highly allergic to dairy and we do not feel soy formula is an adequate substitute. It is hard to make people understand why if they sell it on the shelf and put a bunny on the packaging why Soy just really isn't good infant nutrition. People in general need to wake up and get a little nutritional knowlege soon.

[songbh]

Thanks for this thread; it highlights the "unintended consequences" of some of the language commonly used to promote (or defend!) breastfeeding.

Personally, I try to avoid the phrasing "Your breastfed baby will ..." -- precisely b/c of the many exceptions to the rule. It is more truthful to talk about statistical risk, breastfed babies as a group, etc.

Of course, this language makes for less vivid and compelling anecdotes, and that is another problem. But in general, my working assumption is that if I'm talking to a mother about breastfeeding, she already knows why she wants to breastfeed; what she needs from me is the "how" stuff. I save the reasons to breastfeed for public discourse stuff, and that is where it makes more sense to talk about statistics and group tendences than about any particular individual baby.

And for people who are callous enough to ask why a breastfed baby still has chronic health problems "since breastfeeding is supposed to make them healthier" -- I would reply, "Breastfeeding lowers the risk of many illnesses. It does not lower the risk to ZERO."

[Da WIC Lady]

Originally Posted by songbh

Thanks for this thread; it highlights the "unintended consequences" of some of the language commonly used to promote (or defend!) breastfeeding.

Personally, I try to avoid the phrasing "Your breastfed baby will ..." -- precisely b/c of the many exceptions to the rule. It is more truthful to talk about statistical risk, breastfed babies as a group, etc.

Of course, this language makes for less vivid and compelling anecdotes, and that is another problem. But in general, my working assumption is that if I'm talking to a mother about breastfeeding, she already knows why she wants to breastfeed; what she needs from me is the "how" stuff. I save the reasons to breastfeed for public discourse stuff, and that is where it makes more sense to talk about statistics and group tendences than about any particular individual baby.

And for people who are callous enough to ask why a breastfed baby still has chronic health problems "since breastfeeding is supposed to make them healthier" -- I would reply, "Breastfeeding lowers the risk of many illnesses. It does not lower the risk to ZERO."

:

That is precisely what I was trying to say in the other thread.

Though sometimes with the approach I am supposed to take at work I feel like a used car salesman because I'm not supposed to say anything about the negatives of either breastfeeding or formula unless asked. Though I often do slide formula risks into the conversation. That is a wonderful comeback about sick breastfed babies too!

Anna

[sillymommaX2]

In my case...My 2 older kids who were primarily FF are MUCH MUCH healthier than my youngest who was ONLY EBF. My youngest has allergies, asthma and always has a runny nose. My oldest who is 9.5 had her first round of antibiotics at age 7. The older 2 have never had an ear infection but my youngest has had 3 already.

GO FIGURE!!

[Ellien C]

Originally Posted by PatioGardener

Rather than the way you phrased it above, I think it may be clearer to say that "not breastfeeding increases the risk of illness", or "formula fed babies are more at risk of getting certain illnesses than breastfed babies." Breastfeeding definitely is not a guarantee that your baby won't be sick - hopefully moms aren't told that!

This is a good point. My BF baby had 3 months of repeated ear infections. It's not a cure all.

There's a whole issue here with normalizing breastfeeding using language. It isn't that BF reduces risk, it's that artificial baby milk INCREASES risk.

[siobhang]

dh was chatting with his former boss about another colleague who's infant son was ill a lot, and the boss (childless at the time) was confused about how a kid could be so sick all the time.

DH said " well, the baby has three strikes against him. He was significantly premature, he goes to a center-based daycare where he is exposed to more sickness, and he isn't breastfed.* "

The boss said, "Breastfeeding? What has that got to do with it? "

Dh said, "Well, since breastmilk has antibodies that babies expect and rely on, if he were breastfed, he'd probably still get sick, but perhaps not so badly or for as long."

I thought it was a great way to address the "breastfed babies are healthier" meme.

* note: the mom tried but was unable to nurse to his extended time in the NICU/her own health problems.