I actually do bf my kid - ive said it 100 times, i just dobt operate unde the illusion that its going to make a huge difference.

Also- comparatively speaking, the burden of my decision on what to feed my kid is minutely related to your health care costs. Do you drive PP? I'll bet you do, putting pollutants in the atmosphere, increasing the odds that your family is heavier, less healthy than those of us that don't. You are
probably costing me way more in healthcare by driving your
suv than I am costing you should I decide to wean my
child. Oh yeah, and the pollutant in your cars emissions contribute to asthma in kids, that's a consistent proven relationship.

FWIW I have a phd in epidemiology- public health is my job, and I think my reasoning is pretty solid. It's your poor understanding of research and risk that makes arguing pointless. In any event, you get your gold stars for mothering for the day and can feel justified to continue bleating about how much better you are at your leisure.

Anonymous wrote:The ship has sailed on this thread. Some of you are so deeply cynical it's clear that you have that defense mechanism of refusing to process information that makes you feel bad about your decisions. I don't think you're the target audience of the breastmilk "industry" (LOL on that btw). Your mind was made up, so fine. Your kid, not mine (though, unfortunately, my health care costs....).

Fortunately, the message IS getting out to new and prospective moms. Breast isn't best, it's normal. Formula feeding is okay, but it has risks. If you can breastfeed, you should. Whether you do or not is up to you, but I'm so baffled by the people who think fake breastmilk is equal to real breastmilk. Insane.

Thank you! Well said, PP. Reading some of the reasoning - or lack thereof - on this thread is depressing. Similar and Enfamil marketers no doubt reading this thread and high fiving at a job well done.

Anonymous wrote:Evolution is NOT what I'm talking about here - evolution gets us to find food for ourselves, marketing makes us choose wholefoods over safeway. And by marketing -I'm talking about all the pressure women feel to breastfeed - sns, LCs, come on. You've been sold on something just like someone that chooses infamil is.

I haven't been sold on anything. My body makes milk for me to give to my baby. My body makes this milk expressly for me to feed - that's its only purpose. It's natural and it's healthy. It's not analogous in any way, shape, or form to choosing Whole Foods as opposed to Safeway. Pretty warped thinking, PP.

Anonymous wrote:http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11138667/

Also, liquid gold, not as pure as you might think.

LOL! Because cow's milk is not contaminated in any way, right? And the packaging is "pure," too. No chemical leaching from the cans or liners, right? And the processing of it is totally safe and pure, right? And there could NEVER be, say, hm....beetle parts in the formula or anything?

The ship has sailed on this thread. Some of you are so deeply cynical it's clear that you have that defense mechanism of refusing to process information that makes you feel bad about your decisions. I don't think you're the target audience of the breastmilk "industry" (LOL on that btw). Your mind was made up, so fine. Your kid, not mine (though, unfortunately, my health care costs....).

Fortunately, the message IS getting out to new and prospective moms. Breast isn't best, it's normal. Formula feeding is okay, but it has risks. If you can breastfeed, you should. Whether you do or not is up to you, but I'm so baffled by the people who think fake breastmilk is equal to real breastmilk. Insane.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/m/pubmed/11138667/

Also, liquid gold, not as pure as you might think.

Pfft... Liquid gold? Really, that's almost creepy.

Anonymous wrote:Nobody says formula is less beneficial- we simply say that breastmilk isn't the golden liquid you people make it out to be. And that "breast is best" is at best, reductive and simplistic and at worst, straight up hogwash.

Actually, it really is liquid gold. A perfect description. I can't believe this is even being debated. The formula is called "Simulac" which means "similar to lactation." Get it?

Like a PP said, formula is a valid choice. I'm sure many of us are very thankful for it. I sure was when I started supplementing and then weaning. It's a close second to breast milk. But it's not breast milk.

Anonymous wrote:Oh please. la leche league is free. Every hospital has LC's (though I admit some are better than others). WIC has breastfeeding support and peer counselers and will issue new moms a pump free of charge. I don't qualify for assistance, but probably spent about 400 out of pocket on bras, tanks, and a pump. No need for covers - learn to do it discreetly sans cover or throw a blanket over. No need for expensive nursing tops, buy a few tanks and wear your regular tops. I don't get this "nursing is expensive" crap. Yes, a good pump can be expensive. But it's cheaper than formula by a million miles.

Not the poster you're responding to, but at Fair Oaks, you could only see the LCs for 2 weeks or something similar post-partum, and you had to pay for those visits too. After that, you were on your own. I know from personal experience that an LC home consultation from the breastfeeding center was several hundred bucks.

Anonymous wrote:PP again - and I'm sorry breastfeeding *isn't* being marketed to you? You haven't seen billboards, psas, pamphlets, websites promoting it? There isn't an entire industry of medical devices devoted to it? Or consultants charging you $100 an hour about it? Please- PP, don't pretend that breast is best isn't an ad slogan!

It's called public health. Same industry that warns against smoking, tips against childhood obesity, promoting fruits and vegetables. It's not a conspiracy.

Also- I have to pump at work, 2 hours of my day. I make $40 an hour or thereabouts - so it costs me $80 a day, or two extra hours away from my baby. Sh*t ain't free.

http://www.bmj.com/content/333/7575/945.full
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/115/6/1765.2.full
http://www.ntnu.edu/news/breastfeeding

No effect studies, that last one is particularly large

The costs study is reductive- it takes the odds ratios and associates dollar amount with them, without accounting for where those odds ratios came from: studies with the same methodological flaws that I have pointed out repeatedly.

HHS call to action and the CDC documents have no citations- those aren't studies but blanket statements?

Most sibling feeding studies where one is ff and one is bf show the benefits are negligible once within family interrcorrelations are accounted for.

Oh please. la leche league is free. Every hospital has LC's (though I admit some are better than others). WIC has breastfeeding support and peer counselers and will issue new moms a pump free of charge. I don't qualify for assistance, but probably spent about 400 out of pocket on bras, tanks, and a pump. No need for covers - learn to do it discreetly sans cover or throw a blanket over. No need for expensive nursing tops, buy a few tanks and wear your regular tops. I don't get this "nursing is expensive" crap. Yes, a good pump can be expensive. But it's cheaper than formula by a million miles.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP - breastfeeding is not a magic bullet; it's not going to make your kid invincible. But there are numerous studies that it does provide your LO advantages over children who are formula fed, one advantage being a stronger immune system. Thanks to your breast milk your LO is able to gain your immunities, but it's probable that YOU haven't been exposed to all of the bugs and viruses that are circulating in daycare.

I thought the most recent studies said it does not provide advantages over other children who were FF (I.e., your BF kid would not be heathier then my FF kid) but your BF kid is healthier then if (s)he was FF.

Breastfed kids are less likely to die from SIDS, are less likely to be obese, and gain the benefit in early months of their mother's immunity. I consider those significant advantages.

WTF is the correlation there???

An annotated bibliography about the connection between breastfeeding and lower risk of SIDS. This is not new news, by the way.

http://www.sidscenter.org/TopicalBib/Breastfeeding.html

It's news to me b/c I was never one to obsess over whether I was "harming" my children with formula. So I wasn't looking for studies to validate my decisions.

Anonymous wrote:
What's oppressive is the cost of formula. What's also oppressive is the the absurdity of the line of thinking that breastfeeding women are victims of some marketing campaign. Good grief! Breastfeeding is totally normal and natural. Who do you work for? Similac?

We have to remember the insane cost of breastfeeding too. UNless BFing works out perfectly for you and you never have to go back to work, there will be some hugely significant costs. I have seen this posted before but keep in mind the crazy costs of pumps, pump parts, nursing covers, hands-free bras, (if you ever want to leave the house or go back to work), lactation consultant fees, doctor fees, fees for medicines (if you get thrush or mastitis). In my case, I had to go to a specialist doctor that cost me almost $1000. If I calculated it, I am sure I spent more breastfeeding than I ever would have giving formula. But, this is an anecdote, but I know A LOT of women who have been through the same thing. Sometiems you have to be rich to breastfeed b/c if it's not working out well, you need money to throw at it to fix the problem.