Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How would this be related to purchasing formula through WIC? After the first year babies drink whole milk not formula.

They're trying to get low income women breastfeeding early and to continue after six months. Ignoring the very real barriers to that.

The evidence that breast milk is any better is NEGLIGIBLE at best. The AAP is a joke.

Agreed on this! Speaking as someone who's struggling to pump enough for my six month old baby who's started solids while working a cushy WFH office job, the idea that just telling someone trying to manage a stressful minimum wage job with a two month old they should breastfeed and thinking that that's in ANY WAY helpful is annoying. An AAP statement won't change US culture around parenting (and how it's something you're not supposed to take to work); all it will do is make people feel more stressed and guilty for trying to get by.

Anonymous wrote:How would this be related to purchasing formula through WIC? After the first year babies drink whole milk not formula.

They're trying to get low income women breastfeeding early and to continue after six months. Ignoring the very real barriers to that.

The evidence that breast milk is any better is NEGLIGIBLE at best. The AAP is a joke.

Anonymous wrote:How would this be related to purchasing formula through WIC? After the first year babies drink whole milk not formula.

The statement is not exclusively about breastfeeding in the second year.

"White, Hispanic or Latino and Asian families initiate breastfeeding at higher rates than the Black population in the United States, according to the 2018 National Immunization Survey (NIS) of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Similar disparities are also seen among mothers with low income (participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]); younger women ( younger than 20 years); and those with a high school education or less. The policy statement calls for addressing implicit bias, structural bias, and structural racism to eliminate disparities in breastfeeding and improve the health and well-being of all children and families."
https://www.aap.org/en/news-room/news-releases/aap/2022/american-academy-of-pediatrics-calls-for-more-support-for-breastfeeding-mothers-within-updated-policy-recommendations/

I wish they would put all the energy they are putting into breastfeeding and redirect it to maternal and infant mortality.

How would this be related to purchasing formula through WIC? After the first year babies drink whole milk not formula.

Anonymous wrote:The AAP was paid off by the CDC so that the government doesn't have to spend so much on WIC formula.

+1 it would be nice if they're going to cite racial disparities as a reason to push breastfeeding on WIC recipients, that they actually consult communities of color on whether this is something that they want. But this is not about centering communities of color, this is about using communities of color to push the AAP's agenda.

Anonymous wrote:It's garbage. I stopped listening to them when they insisted babies should sleep in the same room as their parents the first year.

+1 Yep, one among so many ridiculous pieces of guidance

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.

+1 right?

Anonymous wrote:It’s absolutely laughable and absurd that after being a driving force in the biggest harm to kids in recent memory (school
closures) their next move is to push a useless, pointless public health measure based on faulty science and a steadfast refusal to respect women’s bodies, labor, and autonomy. Coming on the heels of the repeal of Roe, it’s becoming downright offensive.

+1 hear hear

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.

It’s absolutely laughable and absurd that after being a driving force in the biggest harm to kids in recent memory (school
closures) their next move is to push a useless, pointless public health measure based on faulty science and a steadfast refusal to respect women’s bodies, labor, and autonomy. Coming on the heels of the repeal of Roe, it’s becoming downright offensive.

It's garbage. I stopped listening to them when they insisted babies should sleep in the same room as their parents the first year.

Anonymous wrote:I was thrilled with the AAP statement! Maybe you do not realize how much pressure and judgement women who choose
To breastfeed for more than 1 year encounter but yes women who make this cbice should be supported. I’m glad I can now cite the AAP as well as the WHO. AAP is not saying women sbould breastfeed for two years just that there are benefits and people who make this choice should be supported by their doctors and protected from workplace barriers.

Not clear why you are so threatened by this and invested in saying women shouldn’t br supported. As someone who is still breastfeeding my 13 month old I’m thrilled that breastfeeding beyond a year is being normalized because there is a lot of societal pressure and judgement to stop.

+1

I agree. Enough with the pressure to breastfeed. It usually comes from the same people who are pro-choice. Pro choice but if you have the baby, you must sacrifice your body and your mental health for your baby or be forever shamed as someone who doesn’t want what’s “best” for their baby.

Just say breastfeeding is good and women should have all the societal support if they want to do so. But also, if woman isn’t able to or just plain doesn’t want to, then she should also be supported too. And the inconsequential benefits of breastfeeding shouldn’t be overstated.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I was thrilled with the AAP statement! Maybe you do not realize how much pressure and judgement women who choose
To breastfeed for more than 1 year encounter but yes women who make this cbice should be supported. I’m glad I can now cite the AAP as well as the WHO. AAP is not saying women sbould breastfeed for two years just that there are benefits and people who make this choice should be supported by their doctors and protected from workplace barriers.

Not clear why you are so threatened by this and invested in saying women shouldn’t br supported. As someone who is still breastfeeding my 13 month old I’m thrilled that breastfeeding beyond a year is being normalized because there is a lot of societal pressure and judgement to stop.

Same. There is a lot of judgement around breastfeeding; there is little to no support. If you don't want to breastfeed, then don't!

I would love it if I trusted that pediatricians would echo this message, but that is not what they do. They say breast is best, and for a new mother, that is absolutely pressure.

Agree! Fed is best!

Thank being said, I would also love it if pediatricians would support breastfeeding 12-24 months -- I've been consistently encouraged to wean ASAP starting around 10/11 months, which is a less emotionally unstable time but is still annoying especially for a working parent.

I’m still mad at them over peanuts. And for recommending that 2yos wear masks.