Traditional Cultures Children Spacing According to WAPF - Page 2 - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#31 of 54 Old 05-03-2009, 05:38 AM
 
bella_stranger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: sweet home, Chicago!
Posts: 214
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneS View Post
\

Yes but it's being made with the same amount of nutrients available in a mother's body and diet.

It would make sense to me that it might be less concentrated in nutrition as diet has been shown to influence milk nutritive quality.
okay, that makes sense to me too, thanks
bella_stranger is offline  
#32 of 54 Old 05-03-2009, 07:02 AM
 
ursusarctos's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 2,498
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I know that there are many African cultures where having sex with a breastfeeding woman is forbidden - so nowadays the men often put pressure on the women to formula feed, or wean way too early I don't know if pressure to wean too early was historically present, but a taboo that seems to originally have been there to protect the health of the mother and baby has backfired and now results in infant malnutrition.
There were also many cultures worldwide that would kill one of a set of twins - more issues with two nurslings at the same time?
I know here in Finland and elsewhere in Europe infanticide was historically common, though more for social reasons (illegitimacy for example) than child-spacing taboos.
I'm sure the lack-of-body-fat explanation has some truth to it, but I wouldn't attribute all child spacing to that. Say there were a few good years in a row, or your family owned a whole herd of milk cows. Probably your body fat wouldn't sink so low then, even seasonally. Traditional cultures were good at sustaining themselves throughout the year, especially families with more resources. And I don't doubt their powers of observation - kwashiorkor, for example, was observed by traditional peoples to occur in young children after they were weaned. Which might have led to taboos on women becoming pregnant before a certain time?
As for lactic acid fermentation not being seen as a special healthy thing to do, yes, that's probably true, it wasn't seen as special, it was just a way to preserve food - though in traditional cultures there was no distinction between "health" food and "normal, junk" food. Obviously certain foods were recognized to be especially good in terms of being nourishing (like liver and butter for example) but food was just food. Every single food that a more-or-less self-sufficient family produced pre-industrialization would have been whole, traditionally prepared or preserved, and full of nutrients. I think that might be part of the reason why a lot of older people might not see the need for things like organic for example, because back in their day and their parents' day food was just food for the most part, no reason to suspect it was bad quality or adulterated in any way. The technology that dramatically reduced the quality of food was not yet widespread or did not yet exist.

Me treehugger.gif and DH caffix.gif and sweet baby DD heartbeat.gif born 08/2011.

ursusarctos is offline  
#33 of 54 Old 05-03-2009, 11:01 AM
 
Junegoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 894
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am really interested in this topic, as I tend to try too hard to do everything "right" now that I've learned so much about nutrition and health... maybe trying to make up for just how very WRONG I was my first 20+ years.

My diet was HORRIBLE with my firstborn. Truly awful. I had a difficult birth with her, but bounced right back up afterward, and had no trouble nursing her (although I think I must have been making skim milk, as she was a fussy, hungry, skinny little thing.) I got pregnant with my next child pretty much on her fourth birthday, so a nice big gap there. It was about 9 months after she weaned, incidentally. My diet had improved a bit in between. I had a marvelous pregnancy with ds1, but a really bad birth and he died from lack of oxygen. I recovered physically from his birth pretty fast... not quite as fast as the first time, but not bad. I had a miscarriage a few months later (not sure how much that takes out of a gal, nutritionally speaking) and then conceived ds2 9 months after ds1 was born. Not much of a gap there, but I wasn't trying to be smart, I was trying to be sane. I needed a baby.
My pregnancy with ds2 had a few more complications, but nothing bad. Very quick, easy labor. But then I hemorrhaged. My diet had been soooo good, I thought (didn't know about my food allergies yet.) Ds2 was born hungry and never got over it. I never made enough milk to keep him happy. It a 3 1/2 year struggle to nurse him. I've been pregnant twice since he was born, and lost both. The first was stillborn at 23 weeks... so once again, I don't know how that would work into the birth spacing... does half a pregnancy use half the nutrients? Does lack of breastfeeding shorten the time needed between?

I spent a lot of time going over this issue in my head, but it's currently moot... I got a little surprise this month that I'm just crossing my fingers sticks around. On the surface it looks like I have huge gaps between my kids, but really I don't. Oh... I had meant to say that dd had terrible baby teeth, cavities all over the place, has been on Zyrtec since she was three for severe allergies, and her facial structure is pretty bad. But she almost never gets sick. It's kind of weird. Ds2 has better facial structure, so far only one cavity, and a much sturdier build. I think that speaks more to my improved diet... and just how very awful my diet was with my firstborn.

With this pregnancy (OMG, I said it! ACK!) I am just assuming that I have severe deficiencies and will supplementing big. And eating as best as I possibly can. I really have no self-discipline at all (hence the surprise pregnancy, tee hee!) but I swear... this time I'm going to be good. Really, really good. I've even learned to like liverwurst.

SAHM of Kayla (11/98) Hunter (8/03) Jo (1/04) : Jared (2/05) Camelia (12/07) Hope/Chance (11/08) and Jack (12/09)
Junegoddess is offline  
#34 of 54 Old 05-03-2009, 02:08 PM
 
claddaghmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 4,074
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Junegoddess View Post
I am really interested in this topic, as I tend to try too hard to do everything "right" now that I've learned so much about nutrition and health... maybe trying to make up for just how very WRONG I was my first 20+ years.

My diet was HORRIBLE with my firstborn. Truly awful. I had a difficult birth with her, but bounced right back up afterward, and had no trouble nursing her (although I think I must have been making skim milk, as she was a fussy, hungry, skinny little thing.) I got pregnant with my next child pretty much on her fourth birthday, so a nice big gap there. It was about 9 months after she weaned, incidentally. My diet had improved a bit in between. I had a marvelous pregnancy with ds1, but a really bad birth and he died from lack of oxygen. I recovered physically from his birth pretty fast... not quite as fast as the first time, but not bad. I had a miscarriage a few months later (not sure how much that takes out of a gal, nutritionally speaking) and then conceived ds2 9 months after ds1 was born. Not much of a gap there, but I wasn't trying to be smart, I was trying to be sane. I needed a baby.
My pregnancy with ds2 had a few more complications, but nothing bad. Very quick, easy labor. But then I hemorrhaged. My diet had been soooo good, I thought (didn't know about my food allergies yet.) Ds2 was born hungry and never got over it. I never made enough milk to keep him happy. It a 3 1/2 year struggle to nurse him. I've been pregnant twice since he was born, and lost both. The first was stillborn at 23 weeks... so once again, I don't know how that would work into the birth spacing... does half a pregnancy use half the nutrients? Does lack of breastfeeding shorten the time needed between?

I spent a lot of time going over this issue in my head, but it's currently moot... I got a little surprise this month that I'm just crossing my fingers sticks around. On the surface it looks like I have huge gaps between my kids, but really I don't. Oh... I had meant to say that dd had terrible baby teeth, cavities all over the place, has been on Zyrtec since she was three for severe allergies, and her facial structure is pretty bad. But she almost never gets sick. It's kind of weird. Ds2 has better facial structure, so far only one cavity, and a much sturdier build. I think that speaks more to my improved diet... and just how very awful my diet was with my firstborn.

With this pregnancy (OMG, I said it! ACK!) I am just assuming that I have severe deficiencies and will supplementing big. And eating as best as I possibly can. I really have no self-discipline at all (hence the surprise pregnancy, tee hee!) but I swear... this time I'm going to be good. Really, really good. I've even learned to like liverwurst.



You mentioned cavities and that got me to comparing that issue in my siblings...I noticed that the lastborn has the decaying front teeth issue. Interesting as my mom probably had the best diet and exercise of all for her, and there was a bit more than a 2yr gap between her and the 2nd to the last kid. She is also the kid that got the most extended breastfeeding.

*sigh* There's just no way to get a good grasp for all the factors playing around with these issues. Genetics, environment, the kid, the mom, agh! lol

Mama to expecting Babe 2
claddaghmom is offline  
#35 of 54 Old 05-04-2009, 03:00 AM
 
JaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Junegoddess, I want to send a great big hug to you! Go liverwurst!
JaneS is offline  
#36 of 54 Old 05-04-2009, 08:57 AM
 
mamadelbosque's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Ohio, USA
Posts: 6,946
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
IDK. My brother & I are almost exactly 2 years apart (my bday is the 7th his is the 10th, which he always found highly unfair - "I was first, my bday should be first!!" , and neither of us have ever been sick much nor have we ever had cavaties.
mamadelbosque is offline  
#37 of 54 Old 05-04-2009, 11:41 AM
 
BeantownBaby9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Metrowest Boston
Posts: 470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I like the idea of giving each baby their own dedicated "baby" time where they are the only one being BF'ed, cosleeping, being worn, etc. And I honestly can't imagine my grocery bill being a tandem nursing mom. I ate 1/2 a chicken last night!

Especially is regards to the nutrient stores and health argument, I think adequate spacing is important. Its a medical disservice to get pg when your body isn't ready for it yet, and "ready" may be very different for each woman. I know, for us, having recently found allergies, midline defects, etc in both me and my son, and I ate pretty good during my pregnancy, that he is the unfortunate victim of generational nutrient deficiencies, and likely, my leaky gut. So until he weans himself, is STTN in his own bed (something he will have to ask for) AND I am on the road to healing, and able to get the best of TF with raw milk and butter, I don't want to be pg. Just not fair in my eyes to bring a LO into the world who may be even worse off that my first

Erin photosmile2.gif  treehugger.gif, DH jammin.gif ,  Mumma to Chase 7/08 superhero.gif and babyf.gif Griff 3/13

MTHFR C677T Homozygous, M/C 2/07 @ 6wks, 12/10 @8wks, 10/11@7wks, 2/12 @4wks.... 

BeantownBaby9 is offline  
#38 of 54 Old 05-05-2009, 10:38 AM
 
JaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by mamadelbosque View Post
IDK. My brother & I are almost exactly 2 years apart (my bday is the 7th his is the 10th, which he always found highly unfair - "I was first, my bday should be first!!" , and neither of us have ever been sick much nor have we ever had cavaties.
What did your mom eat when she was a child and before and during pregnancy?
JaneS is offline  
#39 of 54 Old 05-05-2009, 05:06 PM
 
hummingmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 400
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by BeantownBaby9 View Post
Its a medical disservice to get pg when your body isn't ready for it yet, and "ready" may be very different for each woman. I know, for us, having recently found allergies, midline defects, etc in both me and my son, and I ate pretty good during my pregnancy, that he is the unfortunate victim of generational nutrient deficiencies, and likely, my leaky gut. So until he weans himself, is STTN in his own bed (something he will have to ask for) AND I am on the road to healing, and able to get the best of TF with raw milk and butter, I don't want to be pg. Just not fair in my eyes to bring a LO into the world who may be even worse off that my first
The thing is, there are no guarantees with this approach. What if you wait longer, and still have a child with allergies, birth defects, autism, or whatever? I'm not saying this to sound threatening, but it's necessary to be prepared for that possibility.

For one thing, our bodies have to deal with environmental toxins that were unheard of in the 1920's. For another, the societies WAP studied had been practicing good nutrition for generations. Since our eggs were made while we were still in our mother's wombs, there's some truth to the notion that "you are what your grandmother ate," and your children are what your mother ate. Not to mention that it takes two people to make a baby. I don't know about the rest of you, but my husband doesn't necessarily eat the healthiest foods when he's out of the house, which sometimes is 2 out of 3 meals.

My third-born was conceived after her older brother had been weaned for several months. I was eating very well, including superfoods. My #1 priority was to rebuild my nutrient stores to an optimal level, so this baby wouldn't have the (relatively) minor problems that affected my other children. Still, I wasn't sure if it was a good time to conceive, particularly because DH's health wasn't the greatest. We were hemming and hawing about this, when suddenly the test came up positive.

A month in, I had some warning signs of early m/c. I knew that this was often nature's way of dealing with serious congenital disorders, but I prayed that the baby would survive anyway, drank lots of water, and went to bed for the weekend. In a primitive society, I wouldn't have had the option to rest -- nor would I even have known I was pregnant yet -- so there's a strong chance that she would have died right then. Instead, she was born very tiny, and has some structural birth defects, but she's incredibly healthy, smart, and good-natured. Apart from whatever went wrong in the very beginning, she's the image of a WAPF poster child. The geneticists haven't figured out what to make of her, but to me, she fits the profile of something called "trisomic rescue," which is when the pregnancy starts out with an extra chromosome, but somehow it fixes itself and the baby ends up being chromosomally normal.

After she was born, I felt alienated from the whole "WAPF/TF movement" for a long time, as there seems to be no room for children like mine in their philosophy. Weston Price himself refers to children with birth defects as "monsters." But I always wanted my daughter, and her problems aren't the end of the world. And she's been an incredible gift to our family in so many ways. Even if she had a full-blown chromosome disorder, I still wouldn't consider myself a failure for having given birth to her. Maybe part of this is due to my spiritual perspective. I think everyone is put on this earth for a greater purpose, and our role as parents is to do our best to facilitate that role for them.

While the hunter-gatherers might have had a more "natural" diet, I'd stop short of adopting their worldview. Just as we don't kill our children for being born at an inconvenient time, neither do we need to require (of them, or of ourselves) that they be perfect. Human perfection is a very broad concept, and something that's unattainable for most of us in this life... and diet and health aren't really that big a part of it.

Just my :...
hummingmom is offline  
#40 of 54 Old 05-05-2009, 05:09 PM
 
AngelBee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: New Brighton, MN
Posts: 20,387
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
:

Mama to 9 so far:Mother of Joey (20), Dominick (13), Abigail (11), Angelo (8), Mylee (6), Delainey (3), Colton (2) and Baby 8 and Baby 9 coming sometime in July 2013.   If evolution were true, mothers would have three arms!

AngelBee is offline  
#41 of 54 Old 05-05-2009, 06:52 PM
AJP
 
AJP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: land of the fruits and nuts
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hummingmom View Post
After she was born, I felt alienated from the whole "WAPF/TF movement" for a long time, as there seems to be no room for children like mine in their philosophy.
I felt (feel) this same thing about something that is very minor in the grand scheme, the fact that my second child, born after I'd been eating a fully TF/WAPF diet for over 4 years, turned out to have very weak enamel on his baby teeth, just like his big brother born before I ate very TF (with extensive decay for both). There is so much harping on having 'perfect' children in a lot of TF writing that it is often implied that if you just do everything 'right' your kids won't have any health or structural issues at all. It's not true, and I've come to find it rather insulting. There are too many confounding factors, and IMO it is myopic to focus only on food as the fix or cause, and it often comes across as cold and exclusionary to say that children with any kind of problem are that way because the parents didn't eat right or spaced the children too close. I've lost my patience with it, and while I continue to value all the TF concepts of nutrient density and availability, I'm not on as much of a high horse about it.

There is no secret ingredient.
AJP is offline  
#42 of 54 Old 05-05-2009, 07:05 PM
 
sisteeesmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: colo spgs, co
Posts: 951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I guess to me this just seems like the answer is almost obvious. It takes a lot out of you to make and sustain the growing of a baby inside your body. It just seems to stand to reason that your body would need significant time ie years to build back up those reserves etc.
And most women don't go into their first pregnancy with ideal levels in this day and age anyway, I know I didn't so I can only imagine what my next baby would be up against if I had one too soon!
sisteeesmama is offline  
#43 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 12:19 PM
 
JaneS's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 9,114
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Having a less than "perfect" child (who has actually been "perfect" for me, b/c it led me to the TF journey) I don't think the goal of eating TF should be having a perfect child but to do the best you can with the correct information about what humans are meant to be eating... and how food can directly effect health as well as physical structure.

These are hard concepts to get across without sounding moralistic or accusatory and thus shifting parents into defensive mode. It would be a dream of mine to get Weston Price's findings back into the high schools, showing the pictures to prospective parents like it once was done! But the exact same roadblocks would be faced as y'all just expressed here. Not sure how to overcome that. This is crucial information and the current dietary recommendations and ignorance of child spacing... together with our genetic inheritances and toxic lifestyles... are just making our children's health that much worse.

I face a lot of criticism in daily life about my choices from people who supposedly love me, so I can imagine how hard it is trying to convince strangers day in and day out as my job! I cut the TF teachers some slack when they say something I know is not true for us and try to understand where they are coming from as a whole.
JaneS is offline  
#44 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 02:26 PM
 
newcastlemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: My happy place
Posts: 3,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thank you for your post hummingmom. I have wanted to comment on this thread for a while and you wrote so wonderfully and honestly about the same feelings I was having.

I totally think TF is the way to go and has brought me much healing (even though I generally just use conventional whole foods) I am passionate about telling people because I do think that nutrition will improve lives signifigantly but I think striving for perfection through food will lead to blame, guilt, and disappointment--especially with all those factors hummingmom talked about. We just don't have total control over our lives. On top of that, some of the TF attitudes have a eugentics feel so that aspect creeps me out. I know they are not saying to kill (or sterilize) people, but it sounds like traditional people kill committ infanticide achieve their tribes' goal of physical "perfection"! Some TFers seem to fall just short of saying you should only reproduce if you are going to have an optimal human being according to the "rules" (superfoods, no toxins, spacing, all organic ect). Eeek! Plus, like hummingmom said, there are NO guarantees!

I am not going to feel like a bad mother because my kids teeth were a little crooked because I had them "too close" or I should have spent more on food ect. My children are deeply cared for to the best of my physical, financial, and emotional ability. I want to enjoy them as people that God made and not be obsessing over their facial features/dental health ect. I think that development of a person's heart and soul into a loving and compassionate human being is much more important than having a perfect face.

Jen

homebirth.jpg<>< Mama to DS, DD, and a new baby girl 4/1! homeschool.gifmdcblog5.gif

newcastlemama is offline  
#45 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 02:45 PM
 
newcastlemama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: My happy place
Posts: 3,988
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaneS View Post
I cut the TF teachers some slack when they say something I know is not true for us and try to understand where they are coming from as a whole.
I try and remember this as well (even though my post sounds kind of mean towards the TF teachers)...some people are just trying to get this wonderful information out to help as many people as they can. It rememinds me of the whole breastfeeding issue--where you try and get the word out about how great it is in every way and then if a mama can't bf they are left feeling horrible.There is definately a fine line to walk!

Jen

homebirth.jpg<>< Mama to DS, DD, and a new baby girl 4/1! homeschool.gifmdcblog5.gif

newcastlemama is offline  
#46 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 02:49 PM
 
sisteeesmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: colo spgs, co
Posts: 951
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think that if you genuinely think that TF or WAP is about having straight teeth or a "perfect face" then you are missing the larger point.

When you provide nourishment to your LO whether it is in the womb, at the breast or in the form of actual foods you are setting your child up for years of good health or hendering them from it. It makes much more of difference than just in the mouth with the teeth. It means that everything in their body will have what it needs to develop properly and that eventually they will e able to pass that on their children!
sisteeesmama is offline  
#47 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 03:03 PM
 
fruitfulmomma's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Between the Rockies and a Flat Place
Posts: 4,233
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 18 Post(s)
Haven't read all of the replies, but I will just say this is one area where we will *never* be "TF", because we are "QF". Anyway, all my kids are spaced out 2-2 1/2 years apart (by birthday, not conception) and as far as the teeth issues go, my 3rd and 4th are the healthiest... Youngest doesn't have any teeth yet.

Also, and I don't know if Price talked about this, but I've heard the wives tales of momma losing one tooth for every child and that has not been the case for me at all. I have had one tooth pulled and that was a wisdom tooth. My dentist said the rest all look great.

As far as what I've read from anthropological issues surrounding tribal/traditional cultures, many of them, like the pp's noted, had sexual morals which would not fly in our house or with regards to our Christian faith. Things like no sex for several years for the mom, while the men can go mate with other women. Sorry, ain't going to happen here! And how much healthier would it be anyway for mom to be using hormonal birth control, which has documented effects on any children conceived after that?


Quote:
I don't think the goal of eating TF should be having a perfect child but to do the best you can with the correct information about what humans are meant to be eating... and how food can directly effect health as well as physical structure.

fruitfulmomma is online now  
#48 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 03:05 PM
AJP
 
AJP's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: land of the fruits and nuts
Posts: 1,877
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newcastlemama View Post
I think that development of a person's heart and soul into a loving and compassionate human being is much more important than having a perfect face.


I know I am defensive about it, but there is such a strong implication with so much of the kind of TF writing we're talking about here that if there's anything "wrong" with a child it's a result of the parents' ignorance or failure. It turns a lot of people off, like Jen said it sometimes smacks of eugenics to me (only approved people doing approved things should reproduce), even if that's not the real intention behind it, and I think a larger measure of compassionate language would go a long way towards neutralizing the kind of defensiveness it can trigger. I do think it's possible to focus on re-educating a population about the importance of real nutrition to human health and the prevention of unnecessary suffering, while at the same time not discounting other factors that cause people to have physical issues (it's not all about the food) and acknowledging that a "perfect" diet and "perfect" child spacing are not the be-all and end-all of health.

Some TF leader types don't seem to want to acknowledge that even when parents do everything they recommend, it doesn't always result in children who never have any problems ever, and there seems to be a tendency to fall back on the idea that surely the parents did something "wrong" at some point.

Certainly we should apply our knowledge and strive to do the very best we can for the health and well-being of our kids, and be open to learning, but it is so easy to fall into the guilt-and-blame scene when the emphasis in much of the TF writing is on how beautiful and perfect they think your children will be if you only do exactly what they say.

There is no secret ingredient.
AJP is offline  
#49 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 04:16 PM
 
Zoeanne's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 501
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I heard Sally Fallon speak recently, and really wanted to ask her more about this topic, but didn't get the chance.

I am curious about mc/stillbirth/etc and the implications for child spacing.

Zoe, mama to one "rough and tough" dude (8/02/06) and one new sweet pie (4/11/10)
Zoeanne is offline  
#50 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 04:47 PM - Thread Starter
 
MyLilPwny's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: California
Posts: 816
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree that when reading through the WAPF web site, you get the idea that they are trying to say that with proper nutrition (and with proper children spacing you help create optimal nutrition), then you will create "physically perfect" children. But in reality, they ignore the fact that there are many other factors that can damage physical perfection (such as "you are what your grandmother ate").

Take for example what they say in this caption here http://www.westonaprice.org/traditio...ry_wisdom.html

"These two beautiful girls were born to mothers whose nutrition had not been optimal during their growing years. However, they were able to reverse the trend of physical degeneration by eating a rich diet during pregnancy and by feeding their daughters whole, nutrient-dense foods including animal protein, whole milk products, butter, whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, and cod liver oil. This diet allowed these girls to reach their optimum genetic potential. Both mothers had crowded teeth, while these two girls have naturally straight teeth, needing no orthodontics."

I think they are implying to everyone that its easy to reverse physical degeneration, as long as you have proper nutrition, because look at these two beautiful perfect women here and what their mothers' traditional diets did for them.

Traditional & nutrient-dense foods/Weston A. Price Foundation advocate, Reiki II practitioner, EFT practitioner, past life & life between lives Hypnotherapist practitioner. Home birth with DD 2007 = never vaccinated, breastfed 3 years

MyLilPwny is offline  
#51 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 09:30 PM
 
rockycrop's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: KC
Posts: 572
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I just finished reading "Papago Woman" by Ruth Murray Underhill-the life story of a Tohono O'odham (Papago is an outdated term) woman from the southern Arizona/Sonoran Desert area.

I meant to copy down this exact passage, but I didn't get to it and took it back to the library today. But she was talking about how she had 6 or 7 children and all died but one. She said that her husband was very strong (meaning virile) and the children just came too fast. When she would get pregnant the young toddler she was still nursing would die. It just happened over and over to her. So sad. But a very interesting book for people interested in traditional cultures, as I assume a lot of you are!
rockycrop is offline  
#52 of 54 Old 05-06-2009, 09:43 PM
 
Jimibell's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Chicago
Posts: 805
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
This is why I love talking to farmers! They often have such a down-to-earth view of food (literally I suppose). It seems they do it for love of the land and of the food. Not so much about eating a perfect diet but about having a connection with the earth. I need a dose of that because I tend to be a perfectionist and I have high expectations of the food, even though I know it is not the answer to everything. I think Ayurvedic wisdom is good too in this sense. There is a spiritual aspect to all food, so much so that your mood and intentions while you prepare food can affect their value.

It's good to get perspective.
Jimibell is offline  
#53 of 54 Old 05-07-2009, 01:34 AM
 
spughy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Posts: 5,293
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I've been hesitant to chime in on this, but I don't think my views are likely to be any more offensive than anyone else's and the discussion has stayed pretty civil, so here goes:

I think spacing kids > 3 years apart is a good idea on many levels and nutrition is definitely one of them but not, by far, the most important. There's ample anthropological and archaeological evidence for me that pre-agricultural families had far fewer children, further apart - and common sense suggests that if you're a mobile culture, having children who can walk independently before the next one comes along is just plain sensible. (Personally, I always said there was no way I'd have another child until the first one could walk to the grocery store on her own.) Back in the "good old days" longer spacing was made easier I think by lower body fat percentages due to fewer carbohydrates in the diet, which lengthened postpartum amenorrhea. I don't think it's necessary to drag cultural things like sanctioned polygamy into it until you get to agricultural times, but I also think that maybe that's more a selling point for polygamy than it is an argument for having kids closer together. Now, with a very sedentary culture and no shortage of calories especially carbohydrates, having children (even healthy ones) close together is possible, but our bodies evolved for that 3-5 year spacing. Nobody's done any research on rates of nutrient store replacement in postpartum women under different circumstances, but I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that there are biological process limits on that regardless of nutrient availability.

Also, I think it's easier on children to have a good span of time before each is displaced as the "baby". The idea that "they can play together" when they're closer together isn't holding water for me; I see far too many closely-spaced siblings "playing" by trying hard to beat the snot out of each other. A few days ago I saw my DD's little friend aim a well-placed kick at her brother's head - he is 2 years younger. I have never seen such behaviour from another friend's DD towards her brother, who is 4 years younger. IME longer spacing removes the violent aspects of sibling interactions; they no longer want the same things from parents so there is less adverse competition, and older siblings are mentors and helpers rather than competitors. I know my sisters and I fought *constantly* when we were little - we are all spaced less than 2 years apart. And it's worth noting, although it's only anecdotal evidence, that my youngest sister is by far the worst off of the lot of us healthwise. (Not that she's any worse off than the general population, but compared to me & our other sister, she has more chronic activity-related pain - to the point her relationship with ibuprofen has been damaged, softer bones and joints, and ongoing issues with depression.)

My DD is a few months past 3 and we're just now TTC. She will be a wonderful big sister and is actually looking forward to it - she is a part of the family too and we didn't want to add a whole other person to the mix without taking her interests and concerns into consideration.

Postpartum doula & certified breastfeeding educator, mama to an amazing girl (11/05) and a wee little boy (3/13).

spughy is offline  
#54 of 54 Old 05-07-2009, 08:46 AM
 
BeantownBaby9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Metrowest Boston
Posts: 470
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by hummingmom View Post
The thing is, there are no guarantees with this approach. What if you wait longer, and still have a child with allergies, birth defects, autism, or whatever? I'm not saying this to sound threatening, but it's necessary to be prepared for that possibility.... Just my :...
You are totally right and thank you for writing this. I just have lots of guilt seeing my little guy suffer, whether its his tummy pains or the change in personality when he's reacting to a bad food, thinking how some of it is my fault. I am glad for the journey and the learning that this struggle has brought for me, its how I got into TF, I just wouldn't want another baby to have months of tummy pains, skin rashes and sleepless nights, when maybe, just maybe, if I had waited longer to restore my body and let it heal, that child wouldn't have to suffer. Its not about perfect facial structure, straight teeth or anything like that in my book, I just want to know I did everything I could so they werent in pain every day. In the same way I didn't drink coffee my whole pregnancy or while BFing, so in case anything "happened", I could not have guilt that I did something, now that I know what is wrong with my body and the potential outcome, I'd can absolve myself of that future guilt by doing the absolute best in healing myself before any subsequent pregnancies. KWIM? Momma guilt sucks

Erin photosmile2.gif  treehugger.gif, DH jammin.gif ,  Mumma to Chase 7/08 superhero.gif and babyf.gif Griff 3/13

MTHFR C677T Homozygous, M/C 2/07 @ 6wks, 12/10 @8wks, 10/11@7wks, 2/12 @4wks.... 

BeantownBaby9 is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off