Letters posted here are associated with the following article:

24
Letters
Friday, June 23, 2006 12:00 AM

More on breast-feeding from the Times

Op-Ed contributor Judith Warner takes another look at the paper's breast vs. bottle reporting.

The letters thread is now closed.

View:
Tuesday, July 18, 2006 03:48 PM

re: Breastfeeding Brouhaha

If a million people believe a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing.

-Anatole France-

Monday, June 26, 2006 03:35 PM

Julianne (and others), a question:

Once your child is off breastmilk and on solid foods, will you feed your child food that contains artificial colors or flavors? What about preservatives? Fast food? High fat food? High fructose corn syrup? Excess sodium? Sugar? Trans fats? Processed convenience foods? Genetically modified foods?

I've always wondered about these mothers who push the benefits of the breast so much, no matter how hard it was to breastfeed, or how much of an inconvenience it was, but they claim to have done it anyway and made the sacrifice because their child comes first. Fast forward a few years and they take their kid through the McDonald's drive thru for a McChicken, fries and a Coke because they are late for soccer practice and it's "convenient."

Unless you plan to only feed your child organic, natural, chemical free, trans fat free, high fructose corn syrup free, preservative free wholesome "whole" foods once they are off breastmilk, then I don't see how you can preach. Does your responsibility to feed your child only the "best" stop once they are on solid foods?

Monday, June 26, 2006 12:09 PM

It's not a results-netural choice

Yes, it's a choice, and once a mother weighs all the information and the particulars of her individual situation and makes her choice, outsiders should butt out. But to say that it is a results-neutral choice is scientifically wrong. Even formula makers will tell you that.

For the mother, breastfeeding speeds recovery from childbirth in the short term, accelerates loss of pregnancy weight in the medium term and reduces breast cancer risks in the long term. Breastfeeing may be, in fact, the only activity that's been proven to reduce breast cancer risks.

For the babies, breastfeeding reduces allergies, chances of colic and certain infections and SIDS risks. There's some evidence that breastfeeding reduces the likelihood of childhood obesity, though the jury is still out on that because there may be other factors at play. Once the babies grow into adults, the differences may not be noticeable (although there's some documentation that breast milk increases IQs marginally), but believe me, there's a big difference between a colicky baby and a non-colicky baby, and there's a big difference between a toddler with lots of ear infections and a toddler with few ear infections.

In sum, I don't think it's very instructive to compare adults who were breastfed as babies (I'm one) to adults who were formula-fed as babies. More useful information might come from a statistical comparison of babies' and toddlers' health concerns, such as ear infections, and maybe the ensuing costs to the parents. At my office, which is a large pediatric practice, we notice a very marked difference between breastfed and non-breastfed babies and toddlers. The breastfed kids are far healthier, period. (That's not to be judgmental; for some parents, formula is the only option.) I realize that's not a scientifically valid comparison, because many other factors may affect the results.

Monday, June 26, 2006 08:37 AM

Breastfeeding Brouhaha

When I see the hordes of non-breast-fed-as infants people around me (I'm one of their number) appearing to be significantly more sick, stupid or cruel than anyone else, maybe I'll support the boob fanatics. When North Americans stop, on average, having such long life spans, maybe I'll reconsider. Until then, sorry--I just won't care. It's a personal choice, and a largely results-neutral one. Millions of functioning, well-educated folks simply can't be wrong on this one.

Sunday, June 25, 2006 10:09 PM

Re: Mommie than thou

Sure, lots of women cannot breastfeed, or can't do it to the extent that they want. And sure, formula is a necessary alternative in many cases, and thank God it's available when needed.

But why is it that breastfeeding rates in the US are so much lower than in other industrialized nations? To me, at least, that indicates a problem that goes beyond physical limitations. I'm not for bullying formula-feeders or anything, but I think something's wrong when so few U.S. mothers breastfeed, and of those who do, so few breastfeed for very long. I know not all people see this as a problem, but I do.

Sunday, June 25, 2006 09:15 PM

The Mommier Than I Brigade is back in town

What a bunch of humorless harpies. I guess you know what to do with your breasts. Too bad about the brains. It is hard to imagine wanting to emulate such a hyped up bunch of fanatics--or to feel that their kids are lucky to be raised by people so judgmental that the veins must be popping out on their necks. Chill out, ladies.

Sunday, June 25, 2006 02:07 PM

There is absoliutely no end to the condescension, and it must stop!!

Fat people, smokers, drunks, heroin addicts, strychnine drinkers, people who weigh 1000 pounds and can't move, WHEN WILL THE PERSECUTION END!!!

Sunday, June 25, 2006 03:54 AM

"Any other group."

This is in the vein of "the only minority it's still socially acceptable to vilify is..." Kind of a silly claim.

Nevertheless, if we're looking for another group bullied and condescended to by medical health professionals and their pseudo counterparts: how about fat people?

Saturday, June 24, 2006 02:09 PM

Human babies should drink human milk!

Listen, it is common sense that babies should drink their mothers milk. Each mammal is designed to feed it's young and that is no exception when it comes to humans. Human babies should drink human milk, end of story. It is about time that there are campaigns that are more militant in promoting breast-feeding and the risks involved with formula milk. We need to make more support, resources and information available in regards to successful breast-feeding, so that all mamas can breast-feed!

Libby

Saturday, June 24, 2006 10:46 AM

Sorry

Sorry, My letter was not showing up so I hit repost

Saturday, June 24, 2006 10:46 AM

Babies deserve to be first

Babies deserve to be breastfed, that is a fact. They do not deserve to have artificial milk poured down their throats in most circumstances.

My third daughter was a terrible pregnancy, Nothing by mouth, IV's only for 6 months, premature birth followed by major surgery for me 7 days later, 12 weeks of unpaid maternity followed by full time employment. Yet, here she is, 13 months old and not a drop of formula has crossed her lips. I breastfed whenever possible and pumped my milk for her when I couldn't be with her. It is my responsibility to her as her mother to provide this health giving, obesity protecting, intelligence raising, diabetes preventing, nourishing liquid to her. She didn't ask to be brought into this world, I made the choice to have her and with that choice came the responsibility to always put her first. If I had wanted to remain #1 priority in my life I never would have had children.

Most Active Letters Threads

348

A key British official reminds us of the forgotten anthrax attack

A vast array of establishment and expert sources do not believe this episode was really resolved.
323

Tough-guy John Bolton, hiding under his bed

As usual, right-wing pseudo-warriors are drowning in extreme cowardice.
163

Is Obama's civil liberties record understandable?

Was it unreasonable to expect him to adhere to his commitments regarding the Constitution?
154

Phil Carter's resignation from key detainee policy post

Many of the "War on Terror" policies he spent years condemning were ones expressly embraced by Obama.
99

Palin, Prejean: Beastly treatment for beauties

The governor turned author must fight what the pageant queen learned: Politics and hotness make strange bedfellows

View all »

Letters Help

Currently in Salon