Mothering Forum banner
1 - 20 of 27 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,157 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Man, I was sure someone would have beaten me to this over here -- guess I'm the only one who will admit to reading that rag :LOL . Well, my office has a sub, so I just flip through every once in a while
.

Anyway, this week's edition has an article about breastmilk over the internet. Remember the mama from www.feedmybaby.com? She's in it. I really admired her for working so hard to get the best for her baby (she had a double mastectomy but didn't want to feed her baby formula, so lots of moms donated milk to her).

It talks about that, then goes on and on to talk about how dangerous breastmilk is over the 'net, impossible to screen, yada yada.
.

At least one mom pointed out the existence of wetnurses from the beginning of time.

Anyhow, I was busy admiring her and the article was busy slamming her for taking her baby's life in her hands.
:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,261 Posts
I want to see the article...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,157 Posts
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
It's in this week's issue, with Britney Spears (you know, the only woman to ever be pregnant
) on the cover.

I'm not good at linking, but it's probably not on their website yet, either. Maybe ... ??
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
19,261 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by Smilemomma
It's in this week's issue, with Britney Spears (you know, the only woman to ever be pregnant
) on the cover.
No kidding....what is up with that???
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,119 Posts
Actually, I thought the article was more postive than I expected. It pointed out dangers in "casually trading" bm but talked about screening procedures and the unfortunate high cost. It ended with a story about a woman who was donating milk to a single dad and didn't mention them screening at all, but ended on a positve note about her doing this great thing for the man and his baby. It mentioned the importance of bm and didn't suggeset formula as an easier, "safer" solution. So, I thought, not bad.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
851 Posts
I had thought about donating my milk to a friend with breast cancer. She tried so hard to nurse with the one healthy breast. She had undergone chemo during pregnancy and then radiation treatments right after birth. The chemo had dried up her milk entirely. But I had lots of milk in the freezer and i was moving. In the end i just ended up throwing it out because i felt this was a sensitive issue. Plus i was not sure if she would accept it without medical tests.

I think a criteria to donate milk to human milk banks is that you have to get immunized for hep b (not positive about this though, it has been a few years since i looked into it). Kind of sad....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,848 Posts
If I was in that situation and heard about a friend throwing out a bunch of milk without at least offering, I'd CRY.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,976 Posts
Hep B vax is NOT necessary to donate to a milk bank.


At least at the milk bank I donated to:
1. They do an extensive pre-screen,
2. then a blood test to screen for diseases,
3. there is an extensive list of things that would preclude donation from times when you or someone in the household is sick or on meds or other issues,
4. they test the donated milk
5. and they pasteurize & homogenize it before it goes to babes.

I think my instruction packet was about 30 pages - including how to sterilize my pump, meds that I could take and still donate, time that had to elapse between taking meds and pumping, etc.

I get irritated reading articles about the dangers of donating bm - especially when they don't bother to mention all of the formula recalls that take place.
:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
Quote:
5. and they pasteurize & homogenize it before it goes to babes.
wouldn't that kill a lot of the nutrients? Better still than formula though
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,976 Posts

Part of the reason they pasteurize it is to make sure that any contamination after they get it is gone, and they homogenize it because they are combining milk from several donors.
Yes, does destroy some of the nutrients, but still far better than formula
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
Yup! Still better!


Doesn't the World Health Organization have a list of the best foods for babies, which goes something like:

1) mom's milk
2) milk from another (human!) mom
3) commercial formula

My brain is tired, or I'd track down a link.
I do believe People magazine should get some letters that refer to WHO's guidelines on the subject
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,119 Posts
Did any one else beside the OP actually read the article? It wasn't doing back flips for donated breast milk, but it wasn't overly negative,imo. It said it can be dangerous to donate between friends, but that when screening is used it's ok. It pointed out how important it is to moms who know about the health benefits and not once did it ask, why not just use formula? I think it was the most postive article on donated breastmilk that I have seen in the mainstream media. The mom was not portrayed as a nut.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,936 Posts
That's great to hear!

Thanks for clarifying.


That IS very impressive, that they didn't just do the "just buy some formula" thing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,006 Posts
I bought the magazine today after reading about it on here
I thought they portrayed her in a good way. Overall a good positive article, IMO
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,023 Posts
I read it too and was going to post about it when I saw this thread. For a mainstream mag I thought they prtrayed it in a pretty positive light, especially considering so many sources would be quick to say "Just use formula" which they never did.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,131 Posts
I'm sure I'll be corrected if I'm wrong :LOL but I think it actually goes like this:

1) mom's milk
2) milk from another (human!) mom
3) milk from another primate (i.e. a chimp or gorilla!)
4) commercial formula

Yup, formula is FOURTH best.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,119 Posts
I am glad that some others who read it thought it was postive sounding,too, that it wasn't in my head. I reread it last night at it seems even more postive now that I read it again. The negative parts are just "facts" not hte author's opinions or anything. Just says that the AAP and LLL warn against trading unscreened bm. It even ends with a cute story (which, it didn't clarify, but sounded like it was a unscreened bm story).
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,131 Posts
Quote:

Originally Posted by sntm
Close. The WHO guidelines suggest:

1) Mother's milk at the breast
2) Mother's milk expressed
3) Another mother's milk
4) Infant formula
Oh, OK. Then I would say common sense suggests that cow's milk or soy milk formula would actually be *5th* best, because clearly (if it could be got!) milk from another primate would be more closely tailored to a human baby's needs than milk meant for baby cows (or baby soys :LOL).

I think I am not the first one here to make that argument
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,056 Posts
OK, I am NOT volunteering for the job of hooking mama gorilla up to a Pump-N-Style. :LOL

I read the article a couple of days ago, and thought it was a relatively balanced piece. It went into the price of breastmilk from a bank and how, realistically, it is not affordable for Jane Schmoe. There are some risks to taking "unknown" breastmilk, that fact cannot be disputed and the article even indicates that AAP and LLL discourage "casual sharing" of breastmilk. However, I think that as a parent or caregiver, one should be able to make an informed choice to accept donor milk if one so chooses.
 
1 - 20 of 27 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top