Quote From: lunacheleIf someone here is telling women they "are guilty of causing their own cancer", I certainly missed the post. Saying something presents a higher risk is not the same as saying it is a certainty (much less that it is deserved), which is why small sample anecdotal evidence like "all the ff kids I know are smarter trhan the bf ones" couldn't possibly be scientifically any more valid than the studies you critique.
The AAP, which you seem to have at least some respect for, mentions the link between breastfeeding and a lowered risk of certain maternal cancers, as well as the IQ enhancing effects of breastmilk. That's fairly mainstream, not lunatic fringe like you are attempting to portray.
I'm sorry you are so upset over this, but you are really getting very insulting and personal about it with people. And there's a huge difference between saying a choice is inferior and saying that a person is. Why does the discussion have to degenerate to name calling? YOu made a choice which you are happy with, so why attack others for doing the same? Just because their interpretation of the evidence and assessment of the risks is doifferent, doesn't mean they are lunatic fringe or "terrorists".
The American Academy of Pediatrics Policy on Breastfeeding states:
Extensive research, especially in recent years, documents diverse and compelling advantages to infants, mothers, families, and society from breastfeeding and the use of human milk for infant feeding. These include health, nutritional, immunologic, developmental, psychological, social, economic, and environmental benefits.
Human milk is uniquely superior for infant feeding and is species-specific; all substitute feeding options differ markedly from it. The breastfed infant is the reference or normative model against which all alternative feeding methods must be measured with regard to growth, health, development, and all other short- and long-term outcomes.
Epidemiologic research shows that human milk and breastfeeding of infants provide advantages with regard to general health, growth, and development, while significantly decreasing risk for a large number of acute and chronic diseases. Research in the United States, Canada, Europe, and other developed countries, among predominantly middle-class populations, provides strong evidence that human milk feeding decreases the incidence and/or severity of diarrhea,1-5 lower respiratory infection,6-9 otitis media,3,10-14 bacteremia,15,16 bacterial meningitis,15,17 botulism,18 urinary tract infection,19 and necrotizing enterocolitis.20,21 There are a number of studies that show a possible protective effect of human milk feeding against sudden infant death syndrome,22-24 insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus,25-27 Crohn's disease,28,29 ulcerative colitis,29 lymphoma,30,31 allergic diseases,32-34 and other chronic digestive diseases.35-37 Breastfeeding has also been related to possible enhancement of cognitive development.38,39
There are also a number of studies that indicate possible health benefits for mothers. It has long been acknowledged that breastfeeding increases levels of oxytocin, resulting in less postpartum bleeding and more rapid uterine involution.40 Lactational amenorrhea causes less menstrual blood loss over the months after delivery. Recent research demonstrates that lactating women have an earlier return to prepregnant weight,41 delayed resumption of ovulation with increased child spacing,42-44 improved bone remineralization postpartum45 with reduction in hip fractures in the postmenopausal period,46 and reduced risk of ovarian cancer47 and premenopausal breast cancer.48
In addition to individual health benefits, breastfeeding provides significant social and economic benefits to the nation, including reduced health care costs and reduced employee absenteeism for care attributable to child illness. The significantly lower incidence of illness in the breastfed infant allows the parents more time for attention to siblings and other family duties and reduces parental absence from work and lost income. The direct economic benefits to the family are also significant. It has been estimated that the 1993 cost of purchasing infant formula for the first year after birth was $855. During the first 6 weeks of lactation, maternal caloric intake is no greater for the breastfeeding mother than for the nonlactating mother.49,50 After that period, food and fluid intakes are greater, but the cost of this increased caloric intake is about half the cost of purchasing formula. Thus, a saving of >$400 per child for food purchases can be expected during the first year.51,52
Despite the demonstrated benefits of breastfeeding, there are some situations in which breastfeeding is not in the best interest of the infant. These include the infant with galactosemia,53,54 the infant whose mother uses illegal drugs,55 the infant whose mother has untreated active tuberculosis, and the infant in the United States whose mother has been infected with the human immunodeficiency virus.56,57 In countries with populations at increased risk for other infectious diseases and nutritional deficiencies resulting in infant death, the mortality risks associated with not breastfeeding may outweigh the possible risks of acquiring human immunodeficiency virus infection.58 Although most prescribed and over-the-counter medications are safe for the breastfed infant, there are a few medications that mothers may need to take that may make it necessary to interrupt breastfeeding temporarily. These include radioactive isotopes, antimetabolites, cancer chemotherapy agents, and a small number of other medications. Excellent books and tables of drugs that are safe or contraindicated in breastfeeding are available to the physician for reference, including a publication from the AAP.55
http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics%3b100/6/1035
The cancer comments were in response to a very specific study cited by another poster. You'd have to go back and cut and paste the references into your tool bar in order to see what I'm referring to. One poster also claimed that not breastfeeding put women at risk for breast cancer. You can scroll back and read that, too.
So you certainly did miss those posts.
Saying something presents a risk at all when it doesn't is a lie. That's my problem with both the study and the poster's claim.
The truth was that breast feeding may (may, not definitely will, and it won't supercede other factors with certain cancers, such as carrying a gene for it) lower a woman's risk for some cancers. That doesn't mean that bottle feeding will increase your risk. It means that bottle feeding won't change your risk at all one way or another.
I also went over the IQ study. It showed correlation, not causation, and never made any definitive claims. I did not deny this. Please go back and read my posts and not posts where other people have claimed I've said things I haven't. Otherwise you're arguing a strawman and that's a huge waste of time for both of us.
People have been horribly insulting towards me, too. I give what I get.
It is very much an insult to call somone's choice inferior. Inferior means not as good as the other choice. The truth is, no one here can ever know what another woman's reasons were for her choice, so they can't make a judgment call on it, and the word "inferior" is a judgment call. Unless you know why someone chose what they did, you can't say if it was the better or worse choice, or if it was better or worse than a choice someone else made based on a completely different set of circumstances.
When you use a word like "inferior", the end result is to make the person you're talking to feel less worthy, small, stupid and, well, "inferior". I made a different choice, which was the right choice for me given what I was dealing with, and the end results were not the horror story I was told by the more vociferous members of the breastfeeding activist crowd.
If it's not your intent to make someone feel inferior, then don't use the word about their choice. It really is that simple. If you want people to respect your choice to breastfeed and to be open about your reasons for why you feel it might be better if more women breastfed, I don't think starting out by calling other women's choices "inferior" is a real smart PR move.
And always, always, always keep in mind that you don't know what she is dealing with emotionally, physically or mentally, or how other factors in her life are affecting her at the time. An aggressive come-on by a "well-meaning" (Lord spare us all from those who "mean well") breast feeding activist may be the last straw for a mother affected by post partum depression.
Dr. Phil and his guests strike up heated conversations as they debate the latest hot topics. Should women give up their right to breastfeed their babies in public so other people don't feel uncomfortable? Will passing out condoms in schools prevent unwanted pregnancies or just send the message to kids that it's OK to have sex? And, is it acceptable for others to discipline your kids if they see them acting out in public, or should they just mind their own business? Dr. Phil weighs in on these controversial subjects. Share your thoughts, join the discussion.
