I hate the AAP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s really, really weird that AAP continues to say solids not until 6 months, when 4 months is now perfectly well supported by the evidence. Almost as if … their true agenda is to push breastfeeding for 6 months, not actual research-based communication to help women weigh the costs and benefits for themselves.

if you actually read the paper they include the fact that it's complementary foods so foods that reduce allergy risk like peanuts and eggs should be introduced at 4 months if you have a history of allergy or eczema in the family and they actually talk about this so maybe you should read the actual paper.

maybe they should just stop trying to control women based on flimsy research that utterly disregards women’s autonomy. women are not breastfeeding engines.

Breast is best but if you can't or won't formula is available. That isn't a lie. Choices are made every day. It is best for baby. Infant mortality is lower in breastfed babies. That doesn't mean that it's the only item that goes into the calculus of what's best for a mother. If what's best for the mothers at odds of what's best of the baby having a mother who's healthy is ideal since the baby is dependent on a mother.
When you don't have those problems there is no reason to not be able to say I chose formula that was the best choice for me and the best choice therefore for our family and also be able to recognize that breast milk is best for infants. It has lots of things that formula does not have.

Yes it is, you are just too dumb to understand why

Okay. Feel free to come back to this post in 5-10 years when more research is out. It is the best of all available options but it may not be ideal for circumstances. Just like 6 months of paid leave for every parent to bond with their child would be the best situation but it is not ideal for all parents.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This statement from the AAP's press release is ridiculous:

"Exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months. There is no need to introduce infant formula or other sources of nutrition for most infants. Beyond 6 months, breastfeeding should be maintained along with nutritious complementary foods."

Yes, there is a need to introduce formula for any number of reasons:
- The birthing parent is not interested in breastfeeding
- The child is adopted
- The birthing parent cannot produce enough milk WHICH IS COMMON AND NORMAL AND NOTHING TO BE ASHAMED OF

Was always curious if the ‘can’t produce enough milk’ means there’s something unusual about the breast, or is it an emotional situation that’s preventing the ‘let down’.

Or maybe many women just can't produce enough milk, and those that insist that they can if they just tried hard enough have a baby starving fetish.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

It says much more than that. It is not “supporting the choices of women” when a professional organization uses bad evidence to make a recommendation about what wome do with their bodies. It is not supporting women to fail to include consideration of their effort and time and personal preferences in the recommendations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This statement from the AAP's press release is ridiculous:

"Exclusive breastfeeding for the first 6 months. There is no need to introduce infant formula or other sources of nutrition for most infants. Beyond 6 months, breastfeeding should be maintained along with nutritious complementary foods."

Yes, there is a need to introduce formula for any number of reasons:
- The birthing parent is not interested in breastfeeding
- The child is adopted
- The birthing parent cannot produce enough milk WHICH IS COMMON AND NORMAL AND NOTHING TO BE ASHAMED OF

Was always curious if the ‘can’t produce enough milk’ means there’s something unusual about the breast, or is it an emotional situation that’s preventing the ‘let down’.

As someone who does actually do the things AAP is recommending (EBF for 6 months, continuing breastfeeding until 2 years, etc) but finds pumping a trial and always produces only just enough milk, please kindly shut the f up. If I didn’t have the kind of job where I could have extremely extended maternity leaves and WFH with privacy to pump ~4 hours every day, of course my kid would be on formula so they didn’t starve. Some people just don’t produce excessive amounts of milk.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

It says much more than that. It is not “supporting the choices of women” when a professional organization uses bad evidence to make a recommendation about what wome do with their bodies. It is not supporting women to fail to include consideration of their effort and time and personal preferences in the recommendations.

DP. You seem strangely personally offended about this. Just move along. Personally, although I never had an issue taking pumping breaks at my job, in retrospect there was a subconscious part telling me to start wrapping it up once my babies turned 1. Once I stopped pumping, my supply dropped off and they lost interest in morning/evening nursing sessions. Which was fine, but had I wanted to keep nursing longer I would have had to keep pumping at work to maintain my supply. There's no reason to not support working moms who want to keep going longer than 1 year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

It says much more than that. It is not “supporting the choices of women” when a professional organization uses bad evidence to make a recommendation about what wome do with their bodies. It is not supporting women to fail to include consideration of their effort and time and personal preferences in the recommendations.

As someone whose personal preference was to nurse, I feel that my effort and time are better considered by this recommendation than they were without it.

The government literally buys formula for low-income women through WIC. A statement of support for people who make the choice for breastfeeding isn’t taking anything away from you. Please do not begrudge support to someone else for something that you aren’t doing, they also deserve support.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.

Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

It says much more than that. It is not “supporting the choices of women” when a professional organization uses bad evidence to make a recommendation about what wome do with their bodies. It is not supporting women to fail to include consideration of their effort and time and personal preferences in the recommendations.

As someone whose personal preference was to nurse, I feel that my effort and time are better considered by this recommendation than they were without it.

The government literally buys formula for low-income women through WIC. A statement of support for people who make the choice for breastfeeding isn’t taking anything away from you. Please do not begrudge support to someone else for something that you aren’t doing, they also deserve support.

It’s not a “statement of support”. It’s a message that women should be breastfeeding for 2 years. for all the talk about “breastfeeding goals” it’s clear that AAP thinks all women should have the goal of BF for TWO YEARS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The AAP supports continued breastfeeding, along with appropriate complementary foods introduced at about 6 months, as long as mutually desired for 2 years or beyond. Studies and meta-analyses have also confirmed the impact of breastfeeding longer than 12 months on maternal health in decreasing maternal type 2 diabetes mellitus, hypertension, breast cancer, and ovarian cancer rates (Table 2). Mothers who decide to breastfeed beyond the first year need support. They often report feeling ridiculed or alienated in their choice and conceal their breastfeeding behavior to minimize unsolicited judgment and comments.20,21 There is evidence that only one-half of mothers who breastfeed past 1 year discuss their decision with their pediatric primary care provider and that 38% of women who reported that their provider was unsupportive of breastfeeding past the first year elected to change their pediatric primary care provider.22

Breastfeeding exclusively for about 6 months is an evidence-based recommendation. In an individual counseling situation, pediatricians and families can discuss the desires of the family and cultural variations. Pediatricians can review the importance of exclusive breastfeeding and ensure mothers and families are fully informed about their decisions, while at the same time engaging in nonjudgmental conversations about the family’s personal goals for breastfeeding. Exclusive or any breastfeeding is not always possible, despite the best of intentions, and these mothers and families need special support to overcome the disappointment that may accompany breastfeeding difficulties.




Outcomes
Extensive data confirm that many acute and chronic pediatric disorders, such as otitis media, acute diarrheal disease, lower respiratory illnesses, sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS), inflammatory bowel disease, childhood leukemia, diabetes mellitus, obesity, asthma, and atopic dermatitis, occur less frequently among children who were breastfed as infants.18 Some of these outcomes may be secondary to the unique biologic composition of human milk. Mothers who breastfeed experience lower risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; breast, ovarian, and endometrial cancer; and hypertension12 (Tables 2 and 3).


Don't just read the announcement. Read the accompanying paper and technical review.
They have had more and more studies on breast milk and this reflect it.

yeah I know what it says, same as always with these people. vastly overstate the benefits of breastfeeding based on bad research with confounders; ignore the solid research that shows no benefit; completely discount women’s preferences about their bodies; do not value women’s labor at all; and conclude with absolutely disgusting paternalism at this particular juncture that women who don’t breastfeed must be “disappointed” and need “special support.”

Emily Oster is that you?

She’s hardly the only one making these points. But really it’s the end of Roe that makes this sh*t truly indefensible now. Women’s bodies are not proxies for anyone’s crusades and policy preferences.

The AAP statement says that doctors should support women who choose to breastfeed and that nursing to 2 is only advised when there is mutual desire to continue. In other words the complete opposite of the Roe decision.

It’s weird that this has to be said, but it is actually not harmful for professional associations to support the choices of women. If you do not choose (or cannot choose) to make the choices that are being supported, that does not make that support a personal attack: the statement is simply not about you.

It says much more than that. It is not “supporting the choices of women” when a professional organization uses bad evidence to make a recommendation about what wome do with their bodies. It is not supporting women to fail to include consideration of their effort and time and personal preferences in the recommendations.

As someone whose personal preference was to nurse, I feel that my effort and time are better considered by this recommendation than they were without it.

The government literally buys formula for low-income women through WIC. A statement of support for people who make the choice for breastfeeding isn’t taking anything away from you. Please do not begrudge support to someone else for something that you aren’t doing, they also deserve support.

It’s not a “statement of support”. It’s a message that women should be breastfeeding for 2 years. for all the talk about “breastfeeding goals” it’s clear that AAP thinks all women should have the goal of BF for TWO YEARS.

“If mutually desired by mother and child”. Did you miss the part where it says they only “think you should do this” insofar as you want it yourself?

Do you take all of their recommendations this personally? Because I, for one, have totally let my 14MO watch Elmo while I shower without ever thinking their screen time recommendations did not take into account MY need for hygiene. Particularly if it’s a recommendation about something you yourself are not doing, this seems like a really extreme reaction.

[Anonymous]

I am not sure what the AAP is trying to achieve with this. Most women do not want to breastfeed past 12 months. Many of us worked really hard to get to the 12 month point because that is what was recommended, not because we love breastfeeding so much. Those that do nurse past 12 months are going to continue to face people who don't want them to do so, just as I got the side eye from my MIL for nursing my infant. If you do something most people don't want to do, you're going to get some people being d$cks about it. Welcome to parenthood.

This statement really strikes me as a doubling down on "breast is best" and I think it's ridiculous. The tell is the idea that we should give more parental leave so women can breastfeed. That's absurd, there are so many more important reasons we we need paid parental leave for everyone, and it should not matter whether they are breastfeeding or not. The statement about how most babies should be EBF through 6 months is just...really? Like, a lot of babies do need formula, and solids are recommended at 4 months. This is lactivism, it is not medical advice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what the AAP is trying to achieve with this. Most women do not want to breastfeed past 12 months. Many of us worked really hard to get to the 12 month point because that is what was recommended, not because we love breastfeeding so much. Those that do nurse past 12 months are going to continue to face people who don't want them to do so, just as I got the side eye from my MIL for nursing my infant. If you do something most people don't want to do, you're going to get some people being d$cks about it. Welcome to parenthood.

This statement really strikes me as a doubling down on "breast is best" and I think it's ridiculous. The tell is the idea that we should give more parental leave so women can breastfeed. That's absurd, there are so many more important reasons we we need paid parental leave for everyone, and it should not matter whether they are breastfeeding or not. The statement about how most babies should be EBF through 6 months is just...really? Like, a lot of babies do need formula, and solids are recommended at 4 months. This is lactivism, it is not medical advice.

Where are the stats on the bolded? Everyone I know who made it to one without issues kept going (though not as far as two).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what the AAP is trying to achieve with this. Most women do not want to breastfeed past 12 months. Many of us worked really hard to get to the 12 month point because that is what was recommended, not because we love breastfeeding so much. Those that do nurse past 12 months are going to continue to face people who don't want them to do so, just as I got the side eye from my MIL for nursing my infant. If you do something most people don't want to do, you're going to get some people being d$cks about it. Welcome to parenthood.

This statement really strikes me as a doubling down on "breast is best" and I think it's ridiculous. The tell is the idea that we should give more parental leave so women can breastfeed. That's absurd, there are so many more important reasons we we need paid parental leave for everyone, and it should not matter whether they are breastfeeding or not. The statement about how most babies should be EBF through 6 months is just...really? Like, a lot of babies do need formula, and solids are recommended at 4 months. This is lactivism, it is not medical advice.

Where are the stats on the bolded? Everyone I know who made it to one without issues kept going (though not as far as two).

NP then you should get out more because you obviously have a very self selecting group of acquaintances.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what the AAP is trying to achieve with this. Most women do not want to breastfeed past 12 months. Many of us worked really hard to get to the 12 month point because that is what was recommended, not because we love breastfeeding so much. Those that do nurse past 12 months are going to continue to face people who don't want them to do so, just as I got the side eye from my MIL for nursing my infant. If you do something most people don't want to do, you're going to get some people being d$cks about it. Welcome to parenthood.

This statement really strikes me as a doubling down on "breast is best" and I think it's ridiculous. The tell is the idea that we should give more parental leave so women can breastfeed. That's absurd, there are so many more important reasons we we need paid parental leave for everyone, and it should not matter whether they are breastfeeding or not. The statement about how most babies should be EBF through 6 months is just...really? Like, a lot of babies do need formula, and solids are recommended at 4 months. This is lactivism, it is not medical advice.

Where are the stats on the bolded? Everyone I know who made it to one without issues kept going (though not as far as two).

See the link in the Twitter post above with stats from Sweden where support parents is not an issue