Reply to I hate the AAP

Forum Index » Infants, Toddlers, & Preschoolers

Reply to "I hate the AAP"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]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. [/quote]
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.
[/quote]

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

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. [/quote]

+1. Couldn’t have said it better myself. Not sure why everyone is being so defensive.

Feeding your kids a diet of all organic meats and vegetables freshly cooked each day with no processed foods is best. I am not able to fully adhere to that. Sometimes I’m tired or busy so we get Chick Fil A or pizza. It’s okay, there are trade-offs in life.[/quote]

I don't understand why people don't understand that it is a goal. Nobody is sending you to mommy hell for not crossing the finish line. My optometrist told me to get my kids outside for 2 hours a day and we rarely do. Am I going to go rage about the recommendation on the internet? [/quote]

The issue is that[b] the recommendations are not science[/b] based and they are not based on women’s revealed preferences either. Totally inappropriate for a public health recommendation. [/quote]

Of course they are. What a ridiculous thing to say. Obesity, allergies, GI bugs, bonding, lower cancer risk for mom, even less picky eating. We can sit here and debate if you want, but you can't say the other side has zero scientific merit because it is simply false.

P.S. I weaned my 2nd at 16 months because I was pregnant with #3 so I'm not an angelic follower of this advice myself. [/quote]

I’m sorry to tell you that all of those supposed benefits of breastfeeding are based on observational research with confounders. Ie, they can’t tell if the different outcomes are due to other factors. The research that comes closest to eliminating confounders shows very few benefits- basically the reduction in a few GI illnesses in the first year. For the second year, there is even less.

https://expectingscience.com/2018/03/21/why-is-the-american-academy-of-pediatrics-exaggerating-the-benefits-of-breastfeeding/amp/[/quote]

…unless you include the benefits to the mother.  Some people consider a significant reduction in the risk of cancers that impact women a positive public health outcome.  When you consider their disproportionate impact on women of color it becomes and even more significant public health benefit. But if we assume women aren’t people and their health outcomes are irrelevant compared to the child— well then we’re just republicans :)[/quote]

+1  Did people even read the policy statement? They recommend exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months and support breastfeeding up to two years or beyond as long as mutually desired by mother and child. The policy states that the benefits of exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months are supported by evidence, which should be discussed without judgment. Beyond the first six months, the policy mostly notes health benefits to the mother, which is why the AAP urges that providers and others support those who opt to breastfeed beyond the first six months.

Are people saying that pediatricians should not discuss the health benefits of breastfeeding for the first six months with families simply because some can't or don't want to do it?

[/quote]

Yes because its lactivism according to many PPs. [/quote]

Honestly the fact that that is considered “lactivism” by anyone speaks to the truly appalling amount of support provided for mothers, that they are perciceving, experiencing and internalizing so much judgment that it triggers this kind of response when other recommendations (about exercise, sceeen time, room sharing) are blissfully ignored. This is why we need to take maternal health seriously, not stop six weeks after birth. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics