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]For the Emily Oster haters, here is her blog post on the new breastfeeding (and other) AAP guidelines and why they are not evidence-based and potentially harmful (https://emilyoster.substack.com/p/new-aap-guidelines-on-breastfeeding ). If you have an actual rebuttal, feel free to share it. If you want to bash her credentials, of course you are free to do so, but know that that will just show you don't actually have a real argument.

[quote]I find some of these changes frustrating (obviously). This is true for two reasons.

First: in many cases, these guidelines (new and old) fail to acknowledge other family considerations. Breastfeeding for two years has practical costs and may have mental health costs, or physical downsides. Sharing a room with a child may have negative impacts on both child and adult sleep. There is little, if any, help given to families in navigating these trade-offs. Even when there is acknowledgment of the existence of a trade-off, the framing is often set up to imply that there is a “best” choice, and then some other worse choices if you cannot do that.

This is especially problematic when the benefits are so tentatively supported in the data. People are being told to make choices that may be very costly to them because of some theoretical risk, or some risk demonstrated only in very biased samples. It’s hard to see how this is a good trade.

A second issue is that as more and more restrictions on behavior are added, it becomes less and less easy to prioritize. There are some behaviors that are important for safe sleep — putting a child down on their back, for example. And then there are some, like not giving your kid a hat, that do not matter. When these are all presented together as a package, it can be challenging for parents to identify which things are important (I’ve written more about that here). And as the list gets longer and longer and starts to include things that seem ridiculous (like hats), it makes the good recommendations seem less important.

I believe it is possible to create a more coherent, more data-based set of guidelines that would help parents prioritize better. For now, what we have is flawed.[/quote]

[/quote]

I am confused by your post. Are you suggesting someone who doesn’t agree with Emily Oster is incapable of a real argument? Because she herself has said otherwise, which is one of the reasons I like her…
[/quote]

I'm referring to the fact that lots of posters here like to bash her without offering any arguments as to why or how her conclusions are wrong.[/quote]

Why is Oster, a trained economist, better source than the two people who wrote the AAP technical report and paper (Joan Younger Meek, MD, MS, RD, FAAP, FABM, IBCLC; Lawrence Noble, MD, FAAP, FABM, IBCLC) ? Literally the announcement objective for the AAP statement is : AAP identifies stigma, lack of support and workplace barriers as obstacles that[b] hinder continued breastfeeding.  [/b] Does Oster negate this statement? No, but then she goes on to undermine the AAP.

In the article you linked she references a paper on HTN risk and only talks about the 2011 but the technical report lists two papers in 2018 and 2019.

I think she likes to be controversial and whatever gives her the most clicks.

[/quote]

Ahhh. A person who is capable of nuanced thought. I said this earlier in the thread, and it is clearly lost on the anti-breastfeeding poster, but the AAP did not recommend extended breastfeeding as the best option. They SUPPORT it, note studies showing health benefits, especially to the mother, and advocate for the elimination of barriers for those who choose to breastfeed beyond six months. That's it. Nowhere in the paper does it say that they recommend extended breastfeeding for everyone.[/quote]

Yes, of course you think only people who agree with you are capable of nuanced thought. That is the definition of not being capable of nuanced thought, ironically.

Neither of you are paying any attention at all to the concerns expressed in this thread about the AAP's statement/technical paper, or what Oster is actually arguing in her blog post. So whatever, keep think you are smart and everyone else is dumb. That will take you far in life.[/quote]

What is Oster actually arguing? [/quote]

I don't know why you are asking me, since you don't believe I am capable of nuanced thought.[/quote]

I am not the nuanced thought poster but glad to know you can back up your arguments![/quote]

Why would I continue to talk in circles with people who ignore what I've already written? [/quote]

You are correct about one thing - you are talking in circles. You fail to address any reasonable point about extended breast feeding, which by the way, isn't being recommended as stated repeatedly, by returning to the recommendation for exclusive breastfeeding in the first six months.

Seriously. Are you away that some women don't hate every minute of breastfeeding like you apparently did? And the AAP is trying to support those who opt to breastfeed beyond the first year. They aren't saying to do it. They are saying that those who opt to do it should be supported. 
[/quote]

They are literally telling doctors not to give newborns formula. That is what the guidance says. The mother's needs and interests do not factor at all into that.[/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