How do you increase the number of moms who breastfeed? According to a new controversial study, you start with baby formula.

A new study published in the  journal Pediatrics suggests that giving newborns a small amount of formula actually boosts breastfeeding rates.

Researchers say the addition of formula at birth gives moms the assurance they need to continue their pursuit of breastfeeding.

As expected, many experts in the field have taken issue with the study, noting that it undermines the accepted position that there is never a good substitute for breast milk.

The study was conducted at the  University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and focused on just 40 newborn babies. The babies studied had lost an average of five percent of their birth weight by the time they reached 36 hours old. Researchers focused on babies who lost weight because other data suggests that infants who lose five percent of their body weight directly after birth are likely to lose more weight.

During the trial, researchers assigned half of the babies to receive two teaspoons of baby formula after each breastfeeding via a syringe to help avoid “nipple confusion.” Once a mother’s milk supply appeared, the women were encouraged to stop the formula feeding practice. The practice of formula feeding was observed on average from two to five days. The other group of mothers exclusively breastfed.

According to the study results, 10 percent of the formula fed group continued to use formula in some way compared to 47 percent of the group that was assigned to breastfeed while adding formula. After three months, 79 percent of the formula group was exclusively breastfeeding. Only 42 percent of the exclusive breastfeeding moms were using formula after the same time period.

Researchers believe that, by introducing formula early on and then withdrawing it, some moms feel more secure that their babies are not hungry. Moms who feel more confident with breastfeeding are therefore more likely to continue with the practice.

Mothers in the US have a large drop off in breastfeeding ratings. While most mothers will attempt to breastfeed their children, only 40 percent continue the practice after six months and only 20 percent make it to the one year point. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) suggests that all mothers breastfeed their children until they are at least one years old.

The study is openly being attached by experts including Dr. Kathleen Marinelli, an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Connecticut School of Medicine and the chair-elect of the USBreastfeeding Committee. Marinelli tells TIME:

“This study goes against everything that’s been published for several years now from very reliable clinicians and researchers about the potential hazards of supplementing exclusively breast-feeding babies with formula … They’re flying in the face of years of research here and doing so rather glibly, stating that this is the new way to look at things.”

In the meantime, lactation support groups and other experts continue to warn mothers that the best approach is a breast milk only approach.

Where do you stand when it comes to breastfeeding versus formula and formula supplementing?

[Image via ShutterStock]

Supplemental Formula Use With Breastfeeding Offers Assistance, New Study Claims is a post from: The Inquisitr

Latch On NYC, a breastfeeding initiative in New York City, is seeking a breastfeeding promoter — a position with a competitive salary of $73,000.

Sure, a breastfeeding coaching position at 73 Gs sounds like a lot, but, in New York City dollars, that’s pretty solidly middle class.

The initiative is seeking someone to promote breastfeeding in areas of Brooklyn including Bed-Stuy, and the ideal breastfeeding coach will have at least five years experience working in related fields as well as a masters’ degree in a discipline such as public health or public policy.

Over on Idealist, a listing for the breastfeeding promotion job reads:

“The ideal candidate will have at least 3 years of experience working on male involvement and/or fatherhood programs, preferably in Brooklyn; have the ability to effectively network with both high-level institutional leadership as well as engage with core local organizations and community groups; have direct experience with health issues, media campaigns, overseeing work plans and resources; have knowledge of maternal and infant child health issues; ability to manage strategies, communication and administrative activities; have experience conducting program evaluations and quality assurance actitivities; experience working on grant funded programs; and have excellent communication skills.”

Latch On NYC plans to focus breastfeeding support efforts in Brooklyn, creating a “Breast-Feeding Empowerment Zone.”

The initiative’s name was briefly in the news not too long ago for another controversial plan to offer more present breastfeeding support in city hospitals.

Initially decried as “shaming” women who do not breastfeed, it was revealed on second glance that the idea was to ensure all women were offered equal support to either breastfeed or formula feed had they not been able to access breastfeeding education and information during pregnancy.

Do you think a breastfeeding coach is something more areas should offer to drive home that “breast is best?”

NYC Breastfeeding Coach Job Opening Offers $73K is a post from: The Inquisitr

Olympia, WA — Democrats at the Washington state capitol tried to stage a quick vote while a Republican lawmaker briefly left the chamber to breastfeed her four-month-old son.

Although Washington is considered a blue state, along with two disaffected Democrats, Republicans control the state senate by one seat as the so-called Majority Coalition Caucus.

During a debate on a routine series of bills, Republican Senator Janea Holmquist Newbry temporarily went to the women’s lounge to nurse her son. With her absence, the Democrats and Republicans both had 24 votes present (plus the Lt. Governor, a Democrat, who could vote to break a tie as the Vice President is empowered to do in the US Senate).

Democrats suddenly jumped at the opportunity to advance  a bill that wasn’t yet on the senate calendar. They demanded an immediate a roll call procedural vote, and nearly passed it but Sen. Holmquist Newbry came back just in time to provide the 25th vote that defeated the motion.

Sen. Holmquist Newbry has not yet commented on the rushed vote, but her colleague Sen. Ann Rivers had this to say about the incident: “I think it is shameful for them to make her choose between being on the floor and voting and nursing her child. This caucus, which presents itself as being the caucus of families, would willingly drive a wedge between a mother and her infant? I think that is shameful. Just shameful. And deeply disappointing.”

Apparently this rushed vote was a departure from the collegiality that often prevails in the Washington state senate. Democrats claimed they didn’t know why Holmquist Newbry left the room even though it is reportedly common knowledge that she is nursing from time to time.

According to media reports, the not-particularly-controversial bill in question already had strong bipartisan support and would likely have passed eventually once it came up on the official calendar.

Janea Holmquist Newbry was first elected to the state senate in 2006, after serving three terms as the 13th District’s state representative. At 31, she became the youngest female state senator elected in Washington history. She currently chairs the Senate Labor and Commerce Committee.

Do you think that the Democrats in the Washington state senate were engaging in a war on women by rushing this vote in the senator’s absence?

[Top image credit: Cacophony]

State Legislature Rushes Vote While Senator Is Outside Breastfeeding Her Son is a post from: The Inquisitr

Texas Democratic State Representative Jessica Farrar re-introduced a bill last month that has since stirred up proponents on both sides of the issue. HB 1706 introduces a number of provisions that would make it a crime to harass women who choose to breastfeed in public.

“These provisions would ensure that a mother’s right to be in a location may not be revoked solely because she begins to breastfeed,” Farrar said in a press release. “Further, it would generally prevent a person from interfering with a woman’s right to breastfeed.”

Texas Republican State Representative Debbie Riddle is one of the bill’s more outspoken critics. She has stated that she will not vote in favor of the bill. Riddle is 64 years old and is married but has never had children.

“Now, I am all in favor of breast feeding – however it is important for women to be modest while feeding their baby – and most women are modest and respectful,” Riddle wrote on her Facebook page last week. “But, a bill that would allow for law suits if one ‘interfered’ with a woman breast feeding is really going a bit far.”

Riddle contended that any business owner who objects to a woman breastfeeding would then be fearful of a lawsuit. She was met with sharp criticism and has since deleted the post from her page. Despite being deleted, the post, which attracted over 1,000 comments, can still be read.

“Let me get this straight,” wrote a commenter in Arlington, Texas. “Some people may object to a breastfeeder, but instead of just NOT LOOKING, they can’t control themselves and may be offended, you won’t support the bill because they have the right to be offended for something that doesn’t affect them in any way? Say what?”

Farrar told the Texas Tribune that Riddle’s post illustrates the problem she hopes to address.

“Lingerie commercials reveal more than women actually trying to do good for their children and their families,” she said. “… Some people think that breastfeeding is somehow obscene.”

Texas law already allows mothers to breastfeed in any location in which they are authorized to be in, but many do not know about this right. Some have still faced persecution. A Houston mom made national news last year when a US district judge ruled that her employer had not discriminated against her by firing her when she requested a space to breastfeed at work.

HB 1706 offers mothers a number of protections. The bill aims to:

• Ensure that the mother’s right to breastfeed is known and protected
• Provide the public with notice of the right to breastfeed and prohibit interference with that right
• Provide redress to a person whose right has been infringed upon through a private civil cause of action
• Require state agencies, to the extent practicable, to develop a “Mother-Friendly” worksite policy supporting the practice of worksite breastfeeding.

Farrar’s breastfeeding bill is currently pending in committee.

Images: ShutterStock, ShutterStock

Texas Breastfeeding Bill Protects Mothers Who Breastfeed In Public is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding among moms isn’t getting the support we should be giving it.

Last year’s Time magazine cover for “Are You Mom Enough?” stirred up controversy over the support of breastfeeding among moms. The real scandal is not about late breastfeeding. The real scandal is that breastfeeding itself isn’t getting the support it needs, and as a result, new moms aren’t breastfeeding early enough, or long enough.

In a new report, Save the Children says that over 800,000 babies could be saved every year if they were breastfed in the first hour of life. The first milk provides powerful antibodies to fight deadly disease. Immediate breastfeeding tends to lead to exclusive breastfeeding for six months, which can save even more lives.

According to the Huffington Post, four factors contribute the the lack of support breastfeeding receives.

First, community and cultural pressure make women feel ashamed of the act, making the experience awkward from the get-go.

Second, health worker shortages prevent new mothers from getting the opportunity to breastfeed early. The first milking is frowned upon in favor of most likely polluted water, and health workers aren’t able to explain the benefits if they aren’t there.

Third, lack of maternity legislation means that we aren’t legally able to give women the freedom to breastfeed in public or the workplace. Plus, there don’t seem to be any laws protecting them.

Fourth, inappropriate marketing of breastfeeding substitutes makes the options something you have to look into rather than understand right off. The most beneficial practices are made cost-prohibitive and actually frowned-upon.

What can you do to support breastfeeding? Raise your voice for moms everywhere by signing a petition asking the United States to renew the 1,000 Days Call to Action at savethechildren.org.

How do you feel about breastfeeding not getting the support it should?

Breastfeeding in the crucial #firsthour could save 95 babies every hour. ow.ly/i/1xyHgWe need your support > bit.ly/VYS2D6

— Save the Children (@savechildrenuk) February 18, 2013

Breastfeeding Doesn’t Get Enough Support is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding doesn’t just benefit baby; it could help mommy avoid ovarian cancer. A new study being published in next month’s American Journal of Clinical Nutrition has discovered a 91 percent reduction in ovarian cancer for breastfeeding moms.

The study’s results are promising given that ovarian cancer is the ninth most common type of cancer among women in the United States. Ovarian cancer is also the fifth leading cause of death among women in the US.

The new breastfeeding study was conducted by Curtin University in Australia and included 493 patients who had been diagnosed with ovarian cancer. Researchers compared their participants to 472 controls who were hospitalized for non-related reasons. The average age of participants in the study was 59 years old.

Researchers asked women how many children they had and whether or not they breastfed. Mothers were also asked how long they breastfed for all of their children combined.

The study found that women who breastfed for more than 13 months were 63 percent less likely to develop ovarian cancer than women who breastfed for less than seven months. Women who breastfed for 31 months were 91 percent less likely to develop ovarian cancer.

Researchers believe that breastfeeding helps fight ovarian cancer by delaying ovulation. As more ovulation cycles occur, the risk of cell mutations leads to a greater chance of ovarian cancer.

The study is good for the 76.9 percent of new mothers who chose to breastfeed in 2009. However, the  Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) notes that only 47.2 percent of women continue to breastfeed their children at six months old and only 25.5 percent breastfeed past 12 months.

[Image via ShutterStock]

Breastfeeding Reduces Ovarian Cancer Risk By 91 Percent [Study] is a post from: The Inquisitr

Awkward! Hugh Grant poses with Natalie McMullan and son, Sebastian, who nursed through the whole experience of meeting the star. Apparently, Grant, who is acquainted with Natalie’s husband, approached the mom for a handshake, and only too late realized the baby was breastfeeding. Not to miss out on a photo op, the new mom popped up for a quick picture. Sebastian was just along for the ride.

Breast Friends: Hugh Grant Poses With Nursing Fan is a post from: The Inquisitr

Commentary | While public breastfeeding is legal in most states, mothers who try to do it are often harassed. But when babies get hungry, what’s a nursing mother to do other than pop it out and feed her kid? Not long ago, my family and I were enjoying a pleasant evening on the patio of our favorite fro-yo shop. When my 8-month-old got hungry, I complied. Not three minutes into my little one’s snack-time did I hear sneers from the table near us.

“Oh my gosh, that woman is breastfeeding!” “No way!” “In public? I’m trying to eat!” “That’s disgusting.” Surprisingly, the snickers came from a table or women. To be honest, I kind of wish I was still nursing my near-three-year-old. That really would have freaked them out.

If only I lived in Pittsburgh. If I lived in Pittsburgh, I could have called on The Milk Truck to come and save the day. I would love to see the look on the faces of those rudely staring women when the pink and blue truck pulled up, complete with gigantic boob affixed to the top, to offer my baby and me a judgement-free zone in which to breastfeed.

Apparently I’m not the only mother who has been judged for — gasp! — feeding her baby in public. Artist and mom Jill Miller had heard so many stories of women being asked to cover up, nurse in the restroom, or leave public places that she decided that enough was enough. Someone had to teach the public a lesson.

Enter the Milk Truck.

Here’s how it works. When a nursing mother finds herself being harassed for breastfeeding, she tweets her location. The Milk Truck, armed with angry Mamas out for justice, pulls up in front of the offending establishment. The back of the truck opens, and The Milk Truck staff set up a street-side nursing room, complete with area rug and papasan chairs. The harassed mother is free to breastfeed, surrounded by other supportive moms while staff of the establishment look on in embarrassment.

In the words of founder Jill Miller, she’s out for vengeance.

“When a woman finds herself in a situation where she is discouraged, harassed, or unwelcome to breastfeed her baby in public, she summons The Milk Truck. The truck arrives to the location of the woman in need and provides her with a shelter for feeding her baby. The woman feeds her child, the shopkeeper who harassed her feels like a dweeb, and the truck does what it does best – creates a spectacle. (Which is, incidentally, the very thing that the shopkeeper thought he was trying to avoid. Alas, some people have to learn the hard way.)”

While the medical profession touts breastfeeding as the best possible means of infant nutrition, moms are still often made to feel unwelcome when they need to feed their babies. But babies get hungry. Even in public. And nursing in a public restroom is disgusting. Personally, I don’t want to nurse my baby anywhere that I wouldn’t want to eat.

Miller, an artist and faculty member in the School of Art at Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh, created The Milk Truck last year “as a way to help hungry babies eat by providing a supportive environment for women to nurse their babies.” Her hope is that her truck will inspire more like it in other cities.

Not everyone finds the idea appealing.

After the Milk Truck made its debut last year, she got an email from a man who thought the whole idea was ridiculous. “What an insane cause you chose to rally behind. … Pointless!” he wrote, according to NBC News.

What do you think of Miller’s idea for a public breastfeeding space?

‘The Milk Truck’ Provides Safe Haven For Nursing Mothers [Video] is a post from: The Inquisitr

A new product from a realistic doll-making company in Spain is struggling in the US market.

“Breast Milk Baby,” the latest doll from Berjuan Toys, has earned some criticism since its American release. The doll comes with a halter top that has sensors sewn into the nipples. When the doll comes in contact with the sensors, which are covered by petal appliques, it begins to make suckling sounds. The doll burps and cries as well, but it doesn’t have to be in contact with the breast to make those sounds.

On an episode of The O’Reilly Factor last year, Bill O’Reilly said, “I just want the kids to be kids. And this kind of stuff. We don’t need this.”

Berjaun Toys’ US representative Dennis Lewis doesn’t understand why the doll is failing to get placed on mainstream shelves more than a year after its release. Lewis said:

“We’ve had a lot of support from lots of breastfeeding organizations, lots of mothers, lots of educators. There also has been a lot of blowback from people who maybe haven’t thought to think about really why the doll is there and what its purpose is. Usually they are people that either have problems with breastfeeding in general, or they see it as something sexual.”

The six dolls, which come with different facial features and skin tones, originally cost $89 each. But after having difficulty selling them to retailers, Lewis has cut the price in half on their website in time for the holidays.

The Breast Milk Baby website explains the benefits of breastfeeding for both the mother and the infant and says the doll will teach girls “the nurturing skills they’ll need to raise their own health babies.”

Lewis said, “With retailers it’s been hard, to be perfectly honest, but not so much because they’ve been against the products. It’s more they’ve been very wary of the controversy. It’s a product that you either love it or you hate it.”

Child development expert Stevanne Auerbach said the toy “had merit in dealing with new babies for the older child, and for the curiosity that children have in this area.” She also noted that breastfeeding is acceptable in Europe and that the doll has been successful there.

Author of The Complete Book of Breastfeeding Sally Wendkos Olds said, “I think it’s a very cute toy. I think it’s just crazy what Bill O’Reilly was saying that it’s sexualizing little girls. The whole point is that so many people in our society persist in sexualizing breastfeeding, where in so many other countries around the world they don’t think anything of it.”

Lewis said the doll is much less sexualized than a Barbie or Bratz doll and blamed the lack of US sales on a phobia of breastfeeding.

Do you think Lewis is correct in saying there is a “breastfeeding phobia”? Or is “Breast Milk Baby” inappropriate for children?

Is This Breastfeeding Doll Inappropriate For Children? is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding is a controversial topic in this day and age, and now Sweden is taking the controversy to a whole new level.

Sweden has now proposed a new law banning images of babies from packages of formula. The law would also require that formula products carry a warning label “stating that parents should not give their children formula milk unless they have been recommended to do so by a professional with appropriate training.” In addition, formula packaging would have to notify the consumer that breastfeeding is a better alternative to formula.

The Local states that, under the new law, formula companies would not be allowed to advertise their products anywhere other than medical journals. In addition, companies will not be able to promote their products with coupons or free samples.

According to a report in the journal Riksdag och Department, the Swedish Consumer Agency and the baby food industry have already agreed “not to actively market infant formula for 30 years.”

If the new law passes, it will come into effect on August 1, 2013.

The Ministry for Rural Affairs states that the new directive is purposed to ensure that parents receive accurate information before choosing whether or not to give their children formula. In other words, the ministry is concerned that parents will fall victim to advertising, grabbing that can of formula with the sweet little blue-eyed baby on the label, instead of researching other options.

Dianne Cox is a midwife with New Zealand’s South Canterbury Independent Midwives. She says things have changed in the last 30-plus years she’s been a midwife, and more women are becoming aware of the benefits of breastfeeding. Still, women often choose to formula feed, many claiming that it is not physically possible for them to breastfeed. 

Cox, however, states that a mere 3 percent of women physically cannot breastfeed their babies. For many other mothers, the choice between formula and breastfeeding is just that — a choice.

The new Swedish law would mean that no more mothers would leave the hospital with their new baby in one arm and a goody bag filled with formula samples and coupons in the other.

Mother and writer Mary Fischer feels Sweden’s new law will just serve to make mothers feel guilty about not breastfeeding. She writes,

“Banning a baby’s image from a formula ad or package isn’t going to deter moms from making sure their child gets fed. If they want to promote breastfeeding and get more moms on board with it, they’re really going about it the wrong way. Making moms feel like bad parents if they don’t feed their babies the way the government wants them to isn’t going to accomplish a d*** thing.”

While Fischer believes that Sweden’s proposed law won’t make a difference in persuading mothers to breastfeed, experts assert that having formula on hand encourages breastfeeding mothers to switch to formula “when they’re exhausted or discouraged.”

The World Health Organization suggests that formula samples “turn hospitals into formula sales agents and imply that hospitals think formula is as healthy as breast-feeding.”

Megan Caron, 27, a nurse in Massachusetts, felt a formula sample influence her decision to stop nursing her daughter. “If it wasn’t there,” Caron notes, “I think I would have tried a little bit more to get breast-feeding down. And once they get formula, it’s hard to get them back.”

Some health experts claim that Sweden’s new law isn’t about whether or not breastfeeding is better than formula. Even formula companies know that breast milk is the best for babies. Christopher Perille, spokesman for Mead Johnson, which produces Enfamil formula, calls breast milk “the gold standard,” adding that it is “best for babies.” Sweden’s proposed law is not about which is best, but about helping parents make informed decisions, without the additional pressure of advertising.

Breastfeeding decreases babies’ risk of ear infections, diarrhea, asthma, and a a host of other diseases. It also may reduce the risk of obesity later in life, and some studies show that breastfed babies have higher IQs.

While breastfeeding can be a challenge, some experts believe that more women “could nurse longer with greater support, and that formula samples can weaken that support system.”

What do you think of Sweden’s proposed law?

No More Baby Pictures: Sweden Proposes Law To Ban Formula Advertising, Coupons is a post from: The Inquisitr

Got milk? Alicia Richman does, and she’s got more than enough to share. The 28-year-old Texas mother began pumping breastmilk shortly after her son, Drake, was born in 2011. In less than a year, she had produced enough milk to satisfy her growing son, and pump over 10,000 ounces extra.

Richman told Fox News that when her son Drake was born 19 months ago, she had no idea she’d “literally become a milk maid.”

“It was pretty much right out of the gate. I had plenty,” she said.

Richman said she would nurse her son until he was replete, then pump. And pump, and pump. She says she “didn’t do anything special.” She just happened to be in an elite group of women who can produce a lot of milk.

“The funniest part would be you’d have two containers, I would always have to have more on the side and be yelling across the bed at my husband, ‘Bring me another.’ Trying to unhook, I felt like I had milk everywhere,” she said.

She pumped constantly, keeping up her supply. Richman jokes that she pumped everywhere, “at home, at work, in the car and on vacation.”

“I joked I was a dairy cow. That’s how I felt,” she said.

Once she’d filled three freezers with pumped milk, she decided that she had more than enough to share. Richman contacted the Mothers’ Milk Bank of North Texas, an nonprofit that collects breast milk donations for critically ill and premature infants in need. Her donations have helped babies across the country, feeding “hundreds, and more likely, thousands of premature babies,” states executive director Amy Vickers.

“I’m so thankful that I’m able to help not only my own baby, Drake, but all of the little babies who need it and are sick,” Richman says. ”It really feels amazing and I’m so thankful that I’m able to do it.”

Alicia Richman now holds the Guinness World Record for “Most Breastmilk Donated.” Richman says she went for the title to raise awareness for breast milk donation.

Between June 2011 and March 2012, Richman donated 11,115 ounces of pumped milk to charity. That’s enough milk to fill 87 one gallon jugs.

Mom Donates 87 Gallons Of Breastmilk, Earns Guinness World Record Title is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding has been a big deal lately. Debates on public breastfeeding have hit every social media outlet possible, and even celebrities are putting their two cents in. Even with all the encouragement from moms like Pink to pop it out in public, however, there is still apparently a group of women who aren’t so comfortable with nursing in front of others. More specifically, in front of men. A midwifery student from the UK’s Bournemouth University was recently denied access to a breastfeeding class because he is, well, a “he.”

Chris Butt, 30, is a second-year student in the university’s midwife training course and tried to attend breastfeeding classes run by the National Childbirth Trust (NCT). The classes near his university would not admit Butt to the classes, stating that some women are “sensitive” to men being present in the class. Upon completion of his training, Butt will be one of the 20,000 midwives in the UK, only 132 of which are male. Breastfeeding education is crucial, since the Department of Health encourages women to breastfeed, and midwives are often the catalyst to helping women become comfortable and effective at breastfeeding their babies. Britain, however, has “one of the lowest breastfeeding rates in the world.”

Although Butt has been invited by the NCT to attend more open classes where male partners also attend, the NCT objects to Butt’s presence at the “women-only classes despite the fact that he is a health professional – but said they would have no problem with a female midwife.” In an article for midwives in the magazine of the Royal College of Midwives, Butt criticizes the exclusion:

“I didn’t believe for one minute that I would be turned away from breastfeeding groups. Do the facilitators of such clinics think I practice midwifery in some magical way where I don’t see intimate parts of women’s bodies? Do they think I stand behind a screen as a baby’s head is crowning, shouting out advice on when to breathe?”

Butt is backed by his professors and the head of midwifery at the Royal Hampshire County Hospital in Winchester where he has delivered five babies on his own as part of his hands-on training.

A spokesman for the NCT said, “He wanted to attend a women-only session, where there were no break-out rooms available if the women attending felt uncomfortable with a male presence.” A breastfeeding counselor in Southampton commented, “Chris has to understand that some women are sensitive to a man’s presence.”

Midwife Student Banned From Breastfeeding Class Because He’s Male is a post from: The Inquisitr

Babies with very low birth weight benefit greatly from the nutrients provided by breast milk, but a new study shows that small amounts of fortification improve growth rates in under-weight babies without sacrificing the benefits gained from breastfeeding.

Though human milk provides all babies with the exact nutrients needed to improve growth and protect against infections and disease, babies born with very low birth weight might still need a little bit of help, according to a new study published in BioMed Central’s open access journal BMC Pediatrics. Breastfed babies are much less likely to experience diarrhea or vomiting and have fewer chest and ear infections. Long term, babies who are breastfed are less likely to become obese or develop the skin condition eczema. Despite this, breast milk is also associated with slower growth in the first few months compared to babies fed by formula, reports Medical News Today.

Researchers probed into this discrepancy, reviewing birth records between 2003 and 2005 to compare birth weights, diet, and weight after hospital discharge. A clear majority of babies with very low birth weight were a good size for their age despite being small. Babies were either fed with their mother’s breast milk, donor milk, or formula, all of which were supplemented to encourage growth and nutrition.

The results? Though all baby growth was within the normal limits, babies who were fed more than 75 percent human milk actually grew more slowly than babies fed with less than 75 percent human milk. The difference was more dramatic for babies fed with donor milk.

The study’s lead researcher, Dr. Tarah Colaizy, explains:

“Human milk offers many benefits for VLBW (very low birth weight) infants, and should of course be the default diet for all such infants. However our babies on average became smaller for gestational age between birth and discharge from hospital. We recommend that special attention is given to ensure that the amount protein and calories consumed is necessary to provide the benefits of a human milk diet without sacrificing growth.”

While breast milk emerges as the clearest and best option to encourage growth and nutrition in babies born with very low birth weight, some of these babies may need that extra push.

Feeding Advice For Very Low Birth Weight Babies [Study] is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding is probably the most touchy issue of new-motherhood with the debate of breast versus formula constantly raging on corners of the internet. And the battle even made the news this summer with the announcement that New York City’s mayor Mike Bloomberg was pushing breastfeeding through an initiative called Latch On NYC, designed to better promote breastfeeding in hospitals.

To be sure, breastfeeding and breastfeeding advocacy are feminist issues of the highest order. Women who breastfeed are often illegally discriminated against, booted from public spaces where in most cases they legally have a right to be. And most workplaces in the US have scant if any protections for pregnant or postpartum mothers, not to mind women who hope to exclusively breastfeed a child for at least the first year of life.

Access to breastfeeding education, protection, and tools is minimal for women, low-income women in particular, and, yet, breastfeeding advocacy and education is far too often slandered in the media and on blogs as bullying with amazing and helpful organizations like La Leche League branded “nipple nazis” for the crime of trying to create a support network for breastfeeding mothers who may not find assistance or understanding at home or in the workplace.

It seems to me at least that nowadays, feminist blogs — and Jezebel in particular — are furthering this nasty and untrue urban legend that breastfeeding support and advocacy exists for one reason and one reason only, to shame women who choose bottle over breast and make them feel less than for making the choice that best suits their family and motherhood style.

And I speak here from the experience of having been a low-income, young mother at one point who viewed firsthand what women with limited access to breastfeeding support and services face. Part of the issue? This concept that breastfeeding women are roaming in packs to make women using bottles and formula feel like jerks about their baby-feeding choices.

This week, Jezebel carried a post titled “Sorry — You Can’t Guilt Trip Me About Bottle Feeding My Kids” which, right off the bat, is problematic and harmful to moms. It implies that breastfeeding advocacy is some oppressive regime cooked up solely to guilt women who for any number of reasons choose not to breastfeed and goes on to rattle off a cadre of breastfeeding fallacies, misinformation, and outright lies in a way that is incredibly frustrating as no one was ever kicked out of Macy’s for whipping out a bottle. (But I was once asked to leave for discreetly nursing in the shoe department.)

Writer Sarah Fister Gale goes on to paint a picture of breastfeeding advocacy that not only is inaccurate but proposes a touchiness that would in essence prevent women who are as I once was (21, newly married and a mother, unable to afford formula) from benefiting from services like lactation consultants — a service, I might add, that was not even available in the hospital in which my kids were born.

Within the first two paragraphs, Gale attacks breastfeeding in several ways, ways that could negatively influence a woman’s choice to breastfeed should she be on the fence. With judgments that border on body-shaming and slut-shaming, the Jez post reads:

“I didn’t like the idea of whipping out my breasts in public, or attaching a milking machine to my nipples, or being the only living source of food on the planet for my child…”

It’s comments like this — “whipping out my breasts” — that help further the idea nursing in public is somehow indiscreet or lacks decorum, a serious inhibition to women who would like the choice to nurse but may face a hostile workplace or lack of privacy in a crowded home.

The term “milking machine” hints that lactating women are sexless, like cows, and calls to mind de-personalizing terms like “fun bags” that casually bully women for not constantly being there to provide visual pleasure for men. How dare they!

It also glosses over the fact that women can easily pump and bank milk — even poor women if WIC was as willing to pay for breast pumps as it is to pay for expensive formula. Gale continues:

“I did however like the idea that my husband would be able to participate in the most intimate act of feeding our son from the day he was born. I liked that I might be able to sleep for more than four hours at a stretch. I liked knowing exactly how much my child was eating, down to the very last ounce. And (I admit it) after nine long months of total sobriety, I liked the idea of drinking the occasional glass of wine without worrying that I was getting my newborn hooked on cheap chardonnay.”

Four sentences, four fallacious comments about nursing. As a mother who breastfed each of my two kids, my husband was easily able to participate in feeding my children expressed milk. And after I learned to latch — an experience that took more than two weeks because I lacked access to a lactation consultant or knowledgeable nurse — I was able to sleep six to seven hours at a stretch since I didn’t have to get up to prepare bottles.

It may be nice to know a child consumes eight ounces of formula, but the idea that a breastfed baby isn’t getting adequate nutrition because one can’t measure a marker on the bottle is a harmful vestige of a time when women didn’t know better, and formula companies were happy to suggest that parents should fear not knowing how many ounces a child consumes. (A breastfed baby with sufficient wet or dirty diapers can be safely assumed is eating frequently enough.)

And many nursing mothers enjoy an occasional glass of wine. As long as a mother doesn’t breastfeed while drunk, drinking poses no risk to a baby. But even those misconceptions promoted to an audience comprised largely of women who have yet to face the question of breast or bottle are not sufficient; the post goes on to decry lactation consultants as shame-mongering villains who sneer, wear cheap perfume, and flounce about the hospital dispensing guilt heavy-handedly.

In actuality, a lactation consultant is a necessary service hospitals need to provide. While the post tells a tale of a bullying woman who explains that pain and suffering are par for the course, all breastfeeding professionals with which I consulted as a new mom told me exactly the opposite: that with proper help, breastfeeding isn’t supposed to hurt.

After insinuating that formula is somehow a better choice for preemies like her own child — it is not necessary nor even recommended, and a premature baby can safely be fed exclusively on breastmilk — Gale predictably attacks the Latch On NYC initiative, again speaking from a place of ignorance. She says:

“According to the ‘breast is best’ fanatics, choosing to bottle-feed my babies was akin to feeding them crack and getting them tattooed. New York is even considering locking up formula in hospitals so new mothers won’t be swayed by the evils of this alternative to the breast… But why? Of all the things society can do to protect it’s most vulnerable citizens, is hiding formula and making women feel terrible about how they choose to feed their children really the place to start?”

In our earlier coverage of NYC’s breastfeeding initiative, I pointed out that, while the critique of this program may be well-intentioned, it is fundamentally incorrect. In all other Western nations, formula is not marketed in hospitals and for good reason. It’s unethical. It’s harmful to breastfeeding relationships. And most of all, formula will not be restricted in any way except as a marketing push.

Formula is and has always been free to non-breastfeeding mothers in maternity wards. What is changing is that samples provided by companies — which can influence a woman’s decision, such as through coupons and “swag bags” — will no longer be distributed. No one is being forced or even cajoled to breastfeed. It’s just that formula companies’ access to a captive and vulnerable audience is being restricted. In one city. And, it should be noted, following guidelines laid out by the American Association of Pediatrics.

But the sad thing about this common misconception that promoting breastfeeding is shaming women who choose not to is that, for every slight aimed at breastfeeding mothers in general and the organizations that support them, the already-weak network of support for nursing mothers is eroded. The idea is planted that those who may help — places and people like La Leche League, which is free and bar none the best source of information for women who can’t afford paid help — are really out to bully, belittle, or insult women who are desperately in need of support and assistance.

To wit, while the “breast is best” message has caught on intellectually, in society today, it has not caught on in practice. A shamed formula feeding mother may feel badly for a few minutes — a shamed nursing mother may give up altogether because she lacks support or encouragement or knowledge about how to breastfeed. A judgment will never take away a formula feeding woman’s ability to formula feed, but a nursing woman can be deprived of her ability to breastfeed due to such actions.

Perhaps the “breast is best” message does make some parents feel inadequate for choosing otherwise, but, as long as formula is free in hospitals, the only choices being taken away are those from women who cannot afford or access the very basic breastfeeding services which are only beginning to catch on as a standard in this country, and it is doing women everywhere an extreme disservice.

Why Does ‘Feminist’ Site Jezebel Have Such A Weirdly Anti-Breastfeeding Slant? is a post from: The Inquisitr

In children, loud snoring tends to spike between 2- and-3-years of age. For most school-age children, traditional understanding has associated loud snoring with behavioral problems, but a new study has shown that there are environmental and socioeconomic factors as well.

Roughly 12 percent of all children (ages 1-9) worldwide experience habitual snoring, reports MedicalNewsToday. Though the condition is associated with behavioral problems ,a new study in the August issue of Pediatrics shows that higher socioeconomic status and a history of breastfeeding are also associated, albeit with lower rates of persistent snoring in young children.

For the study, 249 mother/child pairs participated. Each child was between 2- and-3-years of age and were reported to snore roughly twice each week. Children were sorted into categories: nonsnorers, transient snorers (which means they snored at age 2 or age 3, but not both years), and persistent snorers (children who snored at both ages). Researchers then compared groups based on behavioral and cognitive functioning and evaluated potential predictors of snoring like race, gender, socioeconomic status of the parent or parents, birth weight, prenatal tobacco exposure, childhood tobacco exposure, history, and even how long each child was breastfed.

They found that persistent snorers had significantly higher behavioral problems (particularly hyperactivity, depression, and inattention) than other groups. Nonsnorers showed stronger cognitive development than other groups. The strongest predictors of the presence and persistence of snoring were lower socioeconomic status and a short duration of breast milk feeding, or non-existent breast milk feeding.

In conclusion, researchers encourage the facilitation of infant breastfeeding and strengthen the link between persistent snoring and behavioral problems. As the researchers conclude, “Screening is particularly important for children from lower socioeconomic backgrounds,” continuing, “our findings support recommendations of the American Academy of Pediatrics regarding the prevention of tobacco smoke exposure and encouragement and facilitation of breastfeeding of infants.”

Persistent Snoring In Children Linked To Behavior, Socioeconomic Factors [Study] is a post from: The Inquisitr

A New Jersey mom is suing after an educational video showing her breastfeeding her baby was turned into porn. Before shooting the video, which the mother participated in in 2010, MaryAnn Sahoury did not read through the release she signed before agreeing to the video — a move that turned out to be a huge mistake.

Sahoury did not receive payment for participating in the instructional breastfeeding video and was given assurances that her name and her one-month-old daughter’s name would never be used, reports The New York Daily News. The young mother stated:

“I really had no reason to question it. We went through everything before so I just filled it out and I signed it.”

But it turns out she was very wrong. In signing the authorization she gave Meredith Video Studios, a subsidiery of the media giant Meredith Corp., the ability to share the video “across all platforms.”

Months after appearing in the video, titled “Breastfeeding Help,” MaryAnn Sahoury googled her name to see if the video had aired. Instead, she was horrified to see that her video was shared on YouTube where it was snatched by a third party that manipulated it, combining pornographic footage, the young mother recalled:

“I was sick to my stomach. I didn’t know what I was going to do. I just felt so paralyzed.”

Sahoury has claimed that she pleaded with Meredith to make YouTube remove the x-rated splicing of her educational video, but the production company refused to do so until August 2010 after the video had been viewed 15,000 times. Within 24 hours, it popped up again, drawing over 2,500 views in one week, much to the New Jersey mother’s dismay.

Care2 notes that a federal judge okayed MaryAnn Sahoury’s lawsuit against Meredith to go through, even though Meredith released the following statement:

“Meredith was appalled to learn someone misused a video meant to help new mothers. We took immediate action, hiring leading law firms and online specialists to file take-down demands, clear online caches and create positive references. We took these actions even though Ms. Sahoury signed a release authorizing use of the video across all media platforms, and holding Meredith harmless for any potential misuse of the video by a third party.”

Do you think that MaryAnn Sahoury should be suing Meredith for the breastfeeding video that was turned into porn?

New Jersey Mom Suing After Breastfeeding Video Turned Into Porn is a post from: The Inquisitr

New York City’s erstwhile Mayor, Michael Bloomberg is making news again today, August 2, 2012, as more critics are lining up to accuse him of mandating breastfeeding. The Mayor recently ordered the city’s hospitals to stop giving out infant formula beginning in September, 2012. To comply with the new rules, formula will only be available to mothers for medical reasons and it will be kept in the same locked cabinet as medication. Hospital staff will be required to sign it out, track its distribution and report usage figures to the Health Department. As of August 1, 2012, 27 of the city’s 40 hospitals have agreed to comply with the orders.

Bloomberg, who just last week suggested the nation’s cops should go on strike until private gun ownership is banned, has even managed to offended breastfeeding advocates like Rosemary Scott. The former member of La Leche League, an international breastfeeding education organization, was not pleased with Bloomberg’s tactics, as she indicated yesterday, when she said, ““I’m another former member of La Leche League who nursed all my kids. I’m all for encouraging women to breastfeed but agree that this is NOT the way to do it. Leave it to Bloomberg to be so heavy-handed as to turn off even a breastfeeding advocate like myself.”

While supporters of personal freedom call the new rules the “Formula Fatwa” and the “Mammary Mandate,” observers of New York City politics say this is really a struggle between the City and big business. The infant formula that is at the center of the debate is provided to hospitals in the form of samples and given to mothers free of charge. There is a great deal of profit at stake for the formula industry and free samples are an effective way to introduce a particular brand of formula. The formula freebies are also an inexpensive form of sales promotion that saves manufacturers a fortune every year in advertising costs.

Concerns were also raised that over worked nursing staffs in the city’s hospitals may cause unnecessary discomfort to mother’s who have just given birth and are trying to recuperate before beginning to breastfeed. In today’s Wall Sreet Journal, blogger Jacoba Urist recounted her difficulties getting her baby bottled fed so she could get a few hours sleep after an exhausting delivery. She suggested that if nurses had trouble providing formula for her child three years ago, that it will only get worse once the new regulations go into effect.

Ms. Urist explained, “I’m all for women breastfeeding if they want to (as I did). The health benefits of breast milk are pervasive.  We should support mothers who choose to breastfeed with things like greater social acceptability and public lactation rooms. But Bloomberg’s program forces women to defend a valid request for baby formula. It preys on women in the days (sometimes hours) after they deliver a baby. If I, a fairly confident, opinionated lawyer, had trouble standing up to the breast-feeding brigade at the hospital, before the Bloomberg lock-down, I can only imagine what New York moms face today. Or come September.”

Mayor Bloomberg Accused Of Mandating Breastfeeding is a post from: The Inquisitr

COMMENTARY | New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg seems to only get in the news lately for being bossy (except when he’s criticizing someone else’s bossiness) but a new initiative he’s planning in New York City has moms on both side of the breastfeeding debate all charged up.

Essentially, Mayor Bloomberg is proposing a plan that makes access to formula in hospitals somewhat more limited, in what Fox News called “the most restrictive pro-breastfeeding program in the nation.” Fox is not alone in deriding the program, which begins September 3rd, as most coverage of the “formula ban” in New York City is framing the move as a restriction of mothers’ choices by an oppressive health regime in New York City, or lack of access to formula.

The ban in New York City is not the only instance of this issue being debated — medical professionals are largely in agreement that formula swag is a bad idea, but every time the problem comes up, someone pops up to complain their freedoms are being limited. The American Association of Pediatrics, for instance, is against formula marketing in hospitals, including freebies.

Man, do the formula companies have us PR’d to death, or what? If you have personally breastfed or tried to breastfeed a baby, you’re probably aware of the battle of breast vs. formula, and the same talking points that come up on either side of the debate. And formula samples given by hospitals are a biggie, because nowhere else in the Western world are formula companies allowed to market in this manner to nursing mothers — due to the fact formula marketing in hospitals is proven to harm a breastfeeding relationship.

While the issue is being framed as formula being “locked away,” what’s really happening is that the access by makers of formula to a captive audience of post-childbirth or sometimes post-surgery moms is being shut down, the gravy train of women who will be beholden to their companies stopped in the first few crucial days of a potential nursing relationship is ending.

Bloomberg wants to lock away formula at 27 hospitals to force mothers to breastfeed? Good grief. Talk about fascism. #BreastFeedingGestapo

— Tamara Bates-Rhodes (@TamaraBatesRhod) July 29, 2012

Formula is being treated as a drug, and nurses who dole it out will be asked to track it. It doesn’t mean anyone will be forced to breastfeed, no registry of formula users is being compiled and no access to formula is being ended. It simply means the use of formula in hospitals will be treated as the use of any other nutritional supplement in lieu of other foods would be treated — that is to say, breastfeeding will be established as the norm, and not the other way around.

While it may be positioned as a loss of freedom, when a mom is offered free formula instead of an expensive lactation consultant only to be stuck with huge grocery bills after she leaves the hospital, is there really very much to find limiting about stopping that practice?

Bloomberg’s Formula Ban Is The Right Move, Here’s Why is a post from: The Inquisitr

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has resolved to advise pediatricians to stop giving formula freebies including formula company gift bags, coupons, and industry-authored handouts to new parents of newborns and infants.

Based on the stance that breastfeeding is the normal, physiologic way to feed human babies as well as on the research that concludes that not breastfeeding increases the risk of adverse health outcomes in both  mothers and babies, the AAP passed a resolution to advise pediatricians not to provide formula freebies to the parents of newborns and infants in office and clinic settings.

The AAP supports exclusive breastfeeding for about six months followed by continued breastfeeding with the addition of complementary foods. The marketing of artificial baby milk including through formula freebies undermines the ability of women to breastfeed. As the AAP states in the resolution on formula freebies:

“The distribution of formula company products by a health care provider – hospital, nurse, or doctor, is nothing more than advertising. It is not generosity on the part of manufacturers. There is no “gift” in a “gift bag” except that from the healthcare system applying a seal of approval to the formula manufacturer without compensation.”

The World Health Organization (WHO) also recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life followed by continued breastfeeding with nutritious foods for up to two years or beyond as mutually desired by the mother and the baby.

Breastfeeding advocates are heralding the recent AAP resolution on formula freebies. For example, an infographic from Daily Momtra is currently making the rounds on Facebook:

To read the entire AAP resolution, check out 2012 AAP Resolution – Divesting from Formula Marketing in Pediatric Care.

Do you agree with the AAP resolution to eliminate formula freebies to the parents of newborns and infants?

AAP Resolves To Eliminate Formula Freebies To New Babies And Parents is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding mothers around the world are preparing to participate in The Big Latch On 2012 next week. The Big Latch On, an event that coincides with World Breastfeeding Week, involves mothers and their babies all breastfeeding at a set time. This year, The Big Latch On is scheduled for August 3 and 4.

The aims of The Big Latch On include garnering support for communities to identify and grow opportunities to provide ongoing breastfeeding support and promotion, increasing support for women who breastfeeding, and helping communities positively support breastfeeding in public places. The World Health Organization (WHO) recommends exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life and then continued breastfeeding for up to two years or beyond.

Last year, 5,687 breastfeeding mothers participating in The Big Latch On, a number that included 412 locations in five countries. This year, 477 locations in 20 countries have signed up to take part in the event.

Each year between August 1 and 7, the World Alliance for Breastfeeding Action organizes World Breastfeeding Week. According to (WHO), events including The Big Latch On are planned in more than 170 countries to encourage breastfeeding and improve the health of babies around the world for World Breastfeeding Week 2012.

The Big Latch On originated in New Zealand  by Women’s Health Action in 2005 as part of World Breastfeeding Week. 2012 marks the eighth year for the event. Organizers are hoping to beat previous Big Latch On records and maybe even set the world record.

For more information about The Big Latch On 2012 event or to find a location to participate in, check out The Big Latch On website.

Will you be participating in The Big Latch On?

The Big Latch On 2012 Breastfeeding Event Scheduled For August 3, 4 is a post from: The Inquisitr

Bittylab, the maker of a line of baby bottles touted as mimicking a mother’s breast and breastfeeding, is currently dealing with the backlash from a failed Twitter advertising campaign.

Bittylab produces bottles geared especially towards breastfeeding babies. According to the company website, the “Perfe-latch™ nipple extends upon suction to emulate the mechanics of breastfeeding and reduce nipple confusion.” Not surprisingly, Bittylab markets its line of baby bottle at breastfeeding mothers.

However, in a recent ad campaign that sounds like something Don Draper would write, Bittylab failed miserably to attract positive attention from the fathers of breastfed babies.

On July 22, Bittylab tweeted the a message urging fathers to reclaim their wives twelve times. The tweet stated:

“New baby? Reclaim your wife. Meet BARE™ #air-free #babybottles bittylab.com #bfing”

In case consumers were unclear, Bittylab also tweeted a second message implying that fathers are competing with their newborns for the mother’s attention. The tweet read:

“Feeling like you’re competing with your newborn for mommy’s attention? Meet BARE™ #air-free #babybottles bittylab.com #breastfeeding”

After some serious backlash from a number of prominent bloggers within the parenting community, Bittylab removed the offending tweets from Twitter and posted the following apology on Facebook:

“Ladies, We’re really sorry about the twitter campaign run last week. It was a huge miss understood and resulted in offensive messages. It was taken down yesterday. The messages had nothing to do with putting a husband needs before the baby’s needs, it was more about having a little extra time for the rest of the family. Obviously the whole campaign was poorly executed. We apologize deeply for this miss understanding and assure you, from now on the campaigns will be closely monitored before they go out. Thank you for a second chance.”

Bittylab also posted a number of apologies, including one directing readers to the company Facebook page, on Twitter.

However, not everyone is buying the apology or that the campaign was a misunderstanding. Here are some of the Tweets to Bittylab in response to the apology:

“.@bittylab The same tweet was repeated constantly. There’s no misunderstanding.”

“It seems @bittylab is basing its campaign around helping needy insecure men ‘reclaim’ their wives from breastfeeding newborns. Unbelievable.”

“Dear @bittylab: I had no urge to ‘reclaim’ my wife from my child, because a) I am a grown up and b) I did not ‘claim’ her in the first place”

“@simply_hayley @bittylab Just seen an apology on their FB page. Too late after the campaign had gone live but respect them for responding.”

“@bittylab the word “reclaim” is a huge issue. Even if you didn’t mean sexually, it’s still treating women & their time like man’s property”

“How about supporting mom #breastfeeding instead? “@bittylab: Feeling like you’re competing with your newborn for mommy’s attention?”

Whether Bittylab meant to be sexist or really was attempting to give new parents a little more family time remains controversial. Some potential customers have also stated that, although they might have considered trying Bittylab products in the past, this failed Twitter campaign has made them decide otherwise.

Baby bottle makers can take a valuable lesson away from Bittylab’s Twitter ad mistake: Do not imply that women belong to their husbands or that husband must compete with their babies. If your aim is to sell more baby bottles, you will fail.

What do you think about the “reclaim your wife” Twitter campaign from Bittylab?

Bittylab Baby Bottle Sexist “Reclaim Your Wife” Advertising Campaign Fails is a post from: The Inquisitr

How exactly are breastfeeding and nut allergies related? Does breastfeeding cause nut allergies? Or do babies with a family history of nut allergies breastfeed for longer? These are the questions that food allergy experts are currently asking.

In terms of recommendations for breastfeeding and nut allergies, groups such as the World Health Organisation (WHO) and the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) urge women to exclusively breastfeed for the first six months of life. Babies who are exclusively breastfed for the first six months are less likely to suffer from infections and other health problems such as obesity. However, the link between breastfeeding and nut allergies is still unclear.

Some research says that breastfeeding reduces the risk of nut allergies. However, other research indicates that the link between breastfeeding and nut allergies is causal.

For example, a recent study from the Australian National University caused a serious controversy when the researchers concluded that babies who were exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life had an increased risk of developing potentially fatal peanut allergies.

As Marjan Kljakovic, the lead author of the study and a Professor of General Practice, says about the supposed link between breastfeeding and nut allergies:

“Despite breastfeeding being recommended as the sole source of nutrition in the first six months of life, an increasing number of studies have implicated breastfeeding as a cause of the increasing trend in nut allergy.”

However, other food allergies experts warn that the study might not be telling the whole story about the link between breastfeeding and nut allergies.

As Professor Katie Allen, pediatric gastroenterologist and food allergy researcher with Murdoch Children’s Research Institute, argues:

“That is just not true. We believe that breastfeeding neither causes nor prevents food allergy.

It is true that it appears that people who have [a family history of] nut allergies are breastfeeding longer, but we strongly believe that is due to the fact that these people have been reading previous guidelines that recommend that breastfeeding prevents allergy.”

In other words, the link between breastfeeding and nut allergies that appears to be causal is just correlational. Babies with a family history of nut allergies are more likely to be breastfed longer, which makes breastfeeding appear to be the cause of later allergies. In reality, though, the child was predisposed for a nut allergy; breastfeeding had nothing to do with the development of the allergy.

Additionally, the study from Australian National University failed to take into account the mothers’ diets during pregnancy and breastfeeding. However, Kljakovic still recommended that women avoid nuts and peanuts while pregnant or breastfeeding.

As Allen comments:

“The report only asked if they were breastfeeding or not, not about maternal dietary practices. Therefore the authors cannot conclude, in any way whatsoever, about maternal dietary practices including exposure to nuts and its risk of peanut allergy.”

In other words, the study linking breastfeeding and nut allergies as having a causal relationship is too flawed to draw any legitimate conclusions. More likely, the link between breastfeeding and nut allergies is a result of mothers with a family history of food allergies delaying the introduction of solid foods.

Both WHO and NHMRC recommend delaying solid foods until six months of age to prevent health problems including food allergies.

What do you think about the study that links breastfeeding and nut allergies?

Link Between Breastfeeding And Nut Allergies Questioned is a post from: The Inquisitr

That breast milk is best for babies is a widely known fact. Many infant formula manufacturers claim to be able to closely replicate the components of breast milk in their artificial baby milk. However, researchers have recently uncovered 100 components in breast milk that cannot be duplicated in the ingredients in formula.

Levels of nutrients such as carbohydrates, protein, vitamins, and minerals often significantly differ between breast milk and infant formula.

As Dr. Hessa Khalfan Al Ghazal, the Director of the Executive Committee for the Sharjah Baby Friendly Emirate Campaign, explains:

“When it comes to carbohydrate content, breast milk triumphs over formula. It also comes out on top when comparing lactose levels. This lactose superiority is a double-sided advantage, because research has conclusively proved that lactose contributes to the development of a larger brain. This makes breast milk a “smarter” choice – both literally and figuratively.”

Proponents of infant formula have previously tried to argue that formula contains more of both protein and iron than breast milk. However, although true, the protein and iron found in breast milk is more easily digested by babies. In other words, the higher contents of protein and iron is necessary to make up for the fact that much of both nutrients will not be absorbed by the baby.

Additionally, the higher contents of some vitamins and minerals in formula compared to breast milk may actually be detrimental to babies. Getting too many vitamins and minerals can change the balance in the gut, leading to health problems.

Breast milk also contains living antibodies passed from mother to baby that can never be replicated in an unliving formula.

This news about the 100 components in breast milk that cannot be duplicated in formula comes amid a renewed push by the Sharjah Baby Friendly Emirate Campaign to promote the benefits of breast milk compared to formula. Currently in Sharjah, 40 percent of mothers resort to formula upon returning to work. The Sharjah Baby Friendly Emirate Campaign hopes that this recent research will inspire mothers to think twice about using formula instead of feeding their babies breast milk.

As Dr. Al Ghazal comments:

“Our role is not to criticize artificial milk for the sake of being negative, but to constructively point out what is best for the baby. The undisputed facts show beyond a doubt that breast milk is vastly superior in virtually every vital area.”

Are you surprised that breast milk contains so many ingredients that cannot be duplicated in formula?

Breast Milk Contains Over 100 Ingredients Not Possible In Formula is a post from: The Inquisitr

Mitt Romney may disagree with a ban on formula freebies in hospitals, but breastfeeding advocates in Massachusetts can rejoice over a new decision on giving away free formula packs to new mothers. As of the beginning of July, all 49 maternity hospitals in the state had voluntarily eliminated the infant formula giveaways, reports CBS News.

Massachusetts first tried to instill a ban on formula freebies to new mothers in hospitals back in December 2005. However, as reported by Time, then governor Mitt Romney disagreed with such as ban. As Mitt Romney stated in February 2006, the decision to accept formula freebies should be up to each individual mother:

“We’re not disputing the health benefits of breast-feeding, but we think that new mothers should make that choice. If they choose to bottle-feed, they should be supported in that decision.”

Unfortunately for Mitt Romney’s uninformed logic, offering free formula to new mothers is associated with a decreased breastfeeding rate. As Anne Merewood, the director of The Breastfeeding Center at Boston Medical Center, explains:

“Someone might go home from the hospital determined to breast-feed, but if there’s formula sitting right there, they are more likely to use it. If it’s being endorsed by hospitals, people think there can’t be anything wrong with it.”

Mitt Romney might think that the decision to accept and use formula freebies is up to each individual mother, but reality indicates that mothers who are offered free infant formula as less likely to meet their breastfeeding goals. With the benefits of breastfeeding well-documented, formula freebies most definitely negatively impact women and babies.

Peggy O’Mara, the editor-in-chief of Mothering magazine, criticizes the practice of offering formula freebies to new mothers that Mitt Romney supports:

“It is naïve to believe that the formula industry’s distribution of formula to you is an innocent gift. A “gift” of formula is like a “gift” of a pack of cigarettes when you’re trying to quit smoking; it will undermine your resolve. The formula company has bought your name and address from the hospital, without your knowledge, and will now solicit you for sales. Do you really want this commercial intrusion into your life?”

When Massachusetts first tried to instill the ban on formula freebies in birthing hospitals, the ban passed. However, Mitt Romney quickly replaced council members who were in favor of the ban, and the decision was overturned several months later.

Dr. Lauren Smith, the medical director of the Massachusetts Department of Public Health, is excited that the state has finally repassed the decision on the ban on formula freebies that Mitt Romney originally helped overturn. As The Boston Globe reports:

“We applaud the effort of all of the hospitals to make this explicit statement of their support of breast-feeding here in the Commonwealth.”

According to a 2011 study, just 25 percent of hospitals ban formula freebies to new mothers, a figure that is up from the mere 14 percent in 2007.

Do you agree with Mitt Romney that the decision to accept free infant formula should be up to each individual woman? Or do you agree that formula freebies hurt attempts at breastfeeding?

Mitt Romney Hates Breastfeeding, Disagrees With Ban On Infant Formula Freebies In Massachusetts Hospitals is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding is best for babies, offering nutritional and immunological benefits unmatched by formula. Breastfeeding is also beneficial to women, protecting a mother against breast cancer as well as helping her lose her pregnancy weight faster. A new study  published in the International Journal of Obesity also indicates that women who breastfed continue to keep the weight off better even decades later.

In the study conducted by researchers in England, the researchers looked at  data from nearly 750,000 participants in the Million Women Study, which is a broad ongoing national study of women’s health involving mostly women aged 50 to 64 in the United Kingdom. The researchers discovered that women with children tended to have higher body mass indexes (BMI) later in life than women without children. Calculated from weight and height, BMI is one screening tool for overweight and obesity.

Although women who had children were heavier in general, women who had breastfed their babies tended to have lower BMI than non-breastfeeding women. In other words, breastfeeding continues to offer benefits in terms of weight long after the breastfeeding has ceased.

For every six months of breastfeeding, BMI decreased by about 1 percent on average.

As The Huffington Post reports,  Dr. Kirsty Bobrow, a researcher at the University of Oxford and one of the authors of the study, comments:

“These are long-term effects. For women in this study, childbearing and breastfeeding occurred on average 30 years before women’s weights and heights were recorded.”

As Dr. Bobrow further explains on MSNBC:

“We already know breastfeeding is best for babies, and this study adds to a growing body of evidence that the benefits extend to the mother as well, even 30 years after she’s given birth.”

Even the modest 1 percent decrease in BMI associated with breastfeeding is significant because overweight and obesity are linked to myriad health problems including diabetes and cardiovascular disease. Encouraging women to breastfeed could be a way to fight obesity in the long term.

Breastfeeding burns about 500 calories a day. One explanation for the long-term weight reduction associated with breastfeeding is the “reset hypothesis.” During pregnancy, certain fats accumulate, and insulin resistance as well as lipid and triglyceride levels increase. Breastfeeding may play a key role in reversing the changes by “resetting” maternal metabolism.

However, further research needs to be conducted to establish the mechanisms behind breastfeeding and lower BMI later in life.

The researchers also caution that the relationship between breastfeeding and thinness has not yet been determined to be causal. Women who breastfed their babies just tend to have lower body mass indexes decades after breastfeeding stops. The message, however, seems to be clear: Breastfeeding is beneficial to mothers in the short term and the long term.

Did you breastfeed your children?

Breastfeeding Linked To Thinness, Even Decades Later is a post from: The Inquisitr

Coming soon: breastfeeding reality show, centered on people who practice breastfeeding beyond infancy. The show, called Extreme Parenting, will feature a closeup investigation of breastfeeding beyond infancy, as well as a range of America’s weirdest parenting rituals.

The Daily Mail reports that the show is being created by the team behind shows Bridezillas and Dance Moms, and will pick up the debate for and against weaning children after they turn one.

The argument has made the rounds recently, ever since Jamie Lynn Grumet showed her four-year-old son breastfeeding on the cover of Time magazine, sparking a debate about when the best age to wean children is, as well as whether breastfeeding in public is okay.

Soda Head notes that the World Health Organization encourages moms to nurse their children until at least age 2, and most doctors recommend exclusively breastfeeding for the first six months, and then supplementing with food for at least the second months. Still, the idea of a woman breastfeeding a while who is older than two tends to creep people out, despite conflicting medical advice about when you are supposed to stop.

According to Soda Head, lactation consultant Karen McGratty, who still nurses her 3-year-old son, stated:

“Experienced pediatricians realize that the benefits of breastfeeding don’t just magically disappear after one year.”

Jessica Pielko with Care 2 notes that breastfeeding has fantastic health benefits for both mom and baby, but at the same time, she writes:

“But can the company responsible for the exploitative and maternally manipulative “Dance Moms” really present the idea of breast feeding beyond infancy in any way other than as some moralistically confused and sexually problematic trope? I doubt it.”

Would you be interested in watching a breastfeeding reality show?

Breastfeeding Reality Show In The Works is a post from: The Inquisitr

Over 250 breastfeeding mothers descended upon The Park Street Café in Bristol after another breastfeeding mother claims that she was verbally abused by a waitress for attempting to breastfeeding her daughter.

As reported by The Sun, Kelly Schaecher, 28, from Clifton, Bristol, had been preparing to breastfeed her five-month-old daughter, Sasha, while eating at the cafe. After the breastfeeding mother sat down, a waitress told her that she would have to sit in the corner to breastfeed her daughter. In tears, the mother left the cafe.

In a bizarre twist, Schaecher then claims that the waitress followed her out of the cafe and shouted at her, ”Don’t you ever come back to my cafe with your t*** out again!”

Terrified and shocked, the breastfeeding mother says she turned to the waitress who was berating her and said, “You don’t know what’s coming.” Breastfeeding mothers are known to come together in breastfeeding flashmobs and organized nurse-ins to help support other women who have been shamed for breastfeeding in public.

After sharing her horrible experience at the cafe on Twitter and Facebook, more than 250 breastfeeding mothers rallied together outside of the cafe. Participants in the breastfeeding flashmob lined up outside for their chance to enter and breastfeed their babies inside.

Many of the women participating in the flashmob donned signs that read ”Lactavists” and “Mother Suckers.”

The breastfeeding mothers were given free coffee and cakes by apologetic cafe owner Davide Pontini.

Pontini, an Italian entrepreneur, states on The Huffington Post that he supports breastfeeding rights and breastfeeding within his cafe:

“I want to reassure you all that breastfeeding is totally OK in my cafe.

It’s not within my character to hang my head in shame and that’s why I’m here today to speak to you all and apologise.

This whole thing started from a misunderstanding but now things have changed for the better and I hope that women will feel comfortable breastfeeding here.”

Schaefer believes that the breastfeeding flashmob went well. She comments, “What we did was a peaceful gathering, not a protest, and we had a really good reaction from the police and the public.”

The breastfeeding mother also added, “It is exactly what I wanted, we’ve all had free coffee and cakes and now Davide has put the ‘we welcome breastfeeding’ sign in the window.”

Are you surprised by the positive reactions to this breastfeeding flashmob?

Breastfeeding Flashmob Protest Bristol Cafe After Verbal Abuse By Waitress is a post from: The Inquisitr

Actor Ben Affleck and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton crossed paths earlier in June at the Child Survival Call to Action conference where both the superstar and the diplomat sought to lower child death rates around the world by promoting breastfeeding and vaccination.

Both Affleck and Clinton want all child to live past their fifth birthdays. As The Huffington Post reports, Ben Affleck believes that the high death rates throughout the world for children under five years old are ”abhorrent” and “unacceptable.” Affleck further comments, “We wouldn’t abide it in this country…and we must not abide it in the world globally with our brothers and sisters.”

During her speech at Child Survival Call to Action, which is a conference hosted by the government in collaboration with Ethiopia, India, and UNICEF to recognize and promote efforts to reduce child mortality rates, Hillary Clinton announced that 60 faith-based organizations from 40 countries were working together to lower child death rates by promoting breastfeeding, vaccination, and healthcare for all children.

Ben Affleck spoke about his organization, the Eastern Congo Initiative, and its initiatives to lower child death rates in the Democratic Republic of Congo. He says that his organization believes that people must help themselves help lower child mortality rates.

“The Congolese must lead in this effort,” Ben Affleck proclaimed.

Ben Affleck furthermore praised the countries of Kenya, Senegal, and Rwanda for their success at lowering their child death rates. As 570 News reports, the mortality rates for child under five years old dropped in Kenya by 14 percent, in Senegal by 46 percent, and in Rwanda by 44 percent between 1990 and 2010.

Eighty other governmental, civil society, and business leaders in addition to Ben Affleck and Hillary Clinton spoke at the conference in support of lowering child death rates through initiatives such as promoting breastfeeding and vaccination.

What do you think about Ben Affleck and his support of breastfeeding and vaccination for all children?

Ben Affleck, Hillary Clinton Want Lower Child Death Rates, Promote Breastfeeding And Vaccines is a post from: The Inquisitr

Human milk banks are currently struggling to provide needy babies with enough donated breast milk. A new documentary from PRNewswire via COMTEX/Medela, Inc. in a partnership with King West Pictures and the Northwest Mothers Milk Bank (NWMMB) highlights the importance of breast milk and breast milk donation, especially for premature babies, announces a press release on Market Watch.

According to the World Health Organization (WHO), children should be exclusively breastfed or fed only breast milk for the first six months of life. Breastfeeding or breast milk feeding should then continue for the first two years of life or beyond as mutually desired by the mother and the baby. Human breast milk is a nutritionally perfect for for human infants, providing all the nutrients necessary for healthy growth and development.

Although all babies benefit from breastfeeding, consuming human breast milk as opposed to formula is especially important for premature babies. According to the La Leche League International, human breast milk provides invaluable nutrients and immunities that cannot be duplicated in artificial milk. Premature babies who are breastfed are less likely to develop infections, many of which can be deadly for a preterm baby, than babies who are fed formula.

The new film from PRNewswire via COMTEX/Medela, which is entitled Donor Milk: The Documentary, highlights the benefits of donor breast milk for both premature babies as well as the pumping mothers who are donating the milk.

The benefits of human breast milk for preterm babies are widely established. However, donating breast milk can also be beneficial for the donating mothers. Screenwriter and filmmaker Kevin West and his wife, for example, were able to better cope with the loss of their baby by donating her pumped breast milk to sick and premature babies in need.

The creators of Donor Milk: The Documentary hope to spread the awareness about the importance of breast milk donation. Currently in the United States, only 11 human milk banks are designed to provide a baby with donated breast milk when a mother is unable to provide her own breast milk.

As Carolin Archibald, president of Medela, Inc., comments:

“Current milk banks cannot keep up with the demand for donor human milk for infants with compromised health. We applaud and support the efforts of the NWMMB to provide human milk for medical needs.”

The film will be shown on Wednesday, August 8, 2012, in Portland, OR, at the Hollywood Theatre at 7:00 p.m. and on Thursday, August 9, 2012, in Seattle, WA, at the Landmark Varsity Theatre at 7:00 p.m. For a $25 donation, interested individuals can view the film and attend a one-hour Q&A session featuring Kevin West and Jarred King, the directors of the film; June Winfield from the NWMMB; and a donor of breast milk and recipient of donor milk.

Do you think that this new documentary will raise awareness for the importance of human breast milk donation?

Liquid Gold: New Breast Milk Documentary Promotes Human Milk Donation is a post from: The Inquisitr

Fifteen breastfeeding mothers with their babies protested a “no breastfeeding” policy at a family water park in Salt Lake City, Utah on Saturday.

Katie Buhler, who was visiting the Seven Peaks Water Park in Salt Lake City and is the mother of three children, was discreetly breastfeeding her seven month old son under a blanket when she was approached by female lifeguard. She was told to stop breastfeeding her baby by the Seven Peaks Water Park employee.

At the time, Buhler says that she was caught so off guard that she did not know how to respond to the lifeguard. She ultimately decided to remain at Seven Peaks Water Park but later called and spoke to a water park manager. She was dissatisfied with the reply that she received from the manager. As Buhler told ABC4 in Salt Lake City:

“She told me that it’s their policy and I said why, and she said this is a family friendly environment and we want to keep it that way.”

Buhler states that the manager told her either to leave the Seven Peaks Water Park or to breastfeed her one in one of the bathrooms. She replied: ”Water is all over the floor, there’s no nursing room, nothing…so if they want me to go the bathroom, then they need to fix that.”

Unfortunately, the “no breastfeeding” policy that the manager referred to is in violation of both Utah state and federal breastfeeding laws. Utah is one of forty-five states with laws that specifically allow women to breastfeed in any public or private location as well as one of twenty-eight states with laws that exempt breastfeeding from public indecency laws.

In response to the “no breastfeeding” policy at Seven Peaks Water Park, Buhler and her husband moved their fight against the park online to Facebook. After receiving hundreds of supportive responses, they organized a group to protest the issue, gathering outside the water park on Saturday.

Says Carol Buffi, a licensed clinical social worker and Buhler family friend:

“If they don’t want nursing mothers exposed to the public, then they need to provide a quiet place for mothers to nurse.”

However, even if Seven Peaks Water Park were to provide nursing rooms for mothers who wished to feed their babies in a more private local, any policy that prohibits or limits public breastfeeding is against the law.

What do you think about the protest against the “no breastfeeding” policy at the Seven Peaks Water Park in Salt Lake City, Utah?

Moms Protest “No Breastfeeding” Policy At Seven Peaks Water Park is a post from: The Inquisitr

Exclusive breastfeeding may prevent the oral transmission of HIV to babies when aided by the systemic administration of antiretrovirals, says a new study on breastfeeding and HIV published in the June 14, 2012 issue of PLoS Pathogens.

Children currently account for 15 percent of new HIV infections. Without treatment, 35 percent of babies with HIV will not live past their first birthday. Surprisingly, however, of the 15 percent of children infected with the virus, only 44 percent of babies born to HIV-positive mothers acquire the disease through breastfeeding, that is, breastfeeding and HIV account for only 6.6 percent of all new HIV infections. Despite frequent and prolonged exposure to the virus, very few infants become infected with HIV through breast milk.

To explore the paradox between a low rate of oral transmission through breastfeeding and HIV infection in children, researchers at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill used humanized mice to study the effects of breast milk on HIV and to study the effects of antiretroviral medications on the oral transmission of HIV.

When the mice were exposed to the virus through the breast milk from HIV-negative mothers. None of the mice acquired the disease, meaning that breast milk exhibits a complete inhibitory effect on virus infectivity. In other words, in terms of breastfeeding and HIV, breast milk destroys the HIV virus, thus preventing the oral transmission of the disease.

As Angela Wahl, PhD, a post-doctoral researcher and the lead author of the study, comments in a press release for the University of North Carolina Health Care:

“These results are highly significant because they show that breast milk can completely block oral transmission of both forms of HIV that are found in the breast milk of HIV-infected mothers: virus particles and virus-infected cells. This refutes the ‘Trojan horse’ hypothesis which says that HIV in cells is more stubborn against the body’s own innate defenses than HIV in virus particles.”

However, because breastfeeding and HIV exposure still results in 6.6 percent of new child infections, researchers also studied the inhibitory effects of antiretrovirals on the oral transmission of the virus. The mice were given antiretroviral medications for three days before and four days after exposure to the virus for a total of seven days of medication. The systemic administration of antiretrovirals provided 100 percent protection against oral HIV transmission.

The results of this study on breastfeeding and HIV are important for two reasons. First, because breast milk does destroy the virus, HIV-positive mothers should be encouraged to breastfeed, especially those mothers living in areas such as Africa were alternatives to breast milk such as infant formula prepared with contaminated water are more immediately dangerous than the possibility of HIV. Second, the oral transmission of HIV can be further prevented through the systemic use of antiretroviral medications in children of HIV-positive mothers.

As J. Victor Garcia, PhD, senior author on the study and professor of medicine in the UNC Center for Infectious Diseases and the UNC Center for AIDS Research, concludes:

“No child should ever be infected with HIV because it is breastfed. Breastfeeding provides critical nutrition and protection from other infections, especially where clean water for infant formula is scarce. Understanding how HIV is transmitted to infants and children despite the protective effects of milk will help us close this important door to the spread of AIDS.”

Do you think that this research on breastfeeding and HIV will help prevent more children from becoming infected with the virus?

Breastfeeding And HIV: Breast Milk Destroys HIV, Prevents Oral Transmission [Study] is a post from: The Inquisitr

Despite their economically impoverished living conditions, Amerindian mothers produce breast milk that is significantly higher in omega-3 fatty acids than their American counterparts, says a new study by anthropologists at the University of California Santa Barbara (UCSB).

The study, which was published in the May 2012 issue of Maternal & Child Nutrition, compared the composition of fatty acids in milk samples from indigenous Tsimane women residing in lowland Bolivia with milk samples from American women in Midwestern urban populations.

Fatty acids, in particular the omega-3 fatty acid docosahexaenoic acid or DHA, are important for the proper growth and development of babies. DHA is especially important for proper brain and eye development. Omega-6 fatty acids, another type of fatty acids, has been linked to increased risks of obesity, inflammation, and cardiovascular disease. The ratio between omega-3s and omega-6s is most important; early humans likely had ratios that were equal.

Breast milk is the only source of fatty acids for infants who are exclusively breastfed. However, the fatty acid composition of breast milk varies considerably from woman to woman depending on her diet. Mothers who eat diets high in omega-3-rich foods produce breast milk that is higher in fatty acids.

Upon comparing the milk samples from the Amerindian and the American mothers, the researchers discovered that the Amerindian mothers produced milk with omega-6 to omega-3 ratios that were four to one. In the United States, however, the women were producing milk with rations varying between as low as ten to one and as high as twenty to one. Furthermore, the average percentages of linoleic and trans fatty acids were 84 percent and 260 percent lower in Amerindian mothers compared to American mothers.

In other words, the breast milk produced by the mothers in the more impoverished area is significantly more balanced than the milk produced by mothers in the more affluent United States. The reason is likely because, although poorer, Amerindian women tend to eat diets of locally grown staple crops, wild game, and freshwater fish compared to the highly-processed, nutritionally-poor diets of American women.

As Melanie Martin, a doctoral student in UCSB’s Department of Anthropology and the study’s lead researcher, says on Medical News Today:

“The study suggests that standards of fatty acid composition for infant formulas should be derived from populations such as the Tsimane. And nutritional recommendations for infants should account for the prolonged requirements of fatty acids that breast milk naturally provides.”

American mothers can improve their breast milk by eating fewer processed foods and more foods naturally high in omega-3 fatty acids such as cold water fish and certain plant oils.

How do you ensure that you get enough healthy omega-3s in your diet?

Breast Milk Higher In Omega-3 Fatty Acids In Amerindian Mothers Than American Mothers is a post from: The Inquisitr

In a surprise twist to the “breast is best” debate, bottle feeding, and not just formula feeding, increases the risk of rapid weight gain in infants, leading to an increased risk of obesity later in life, says a recent study published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine.

In a study spearheaded by the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), researchers aimed to better understand the association between breastfeeding and a decreased risk of obesity by assessing the association of weight gain in infants with the mode of milk delivery aside from the type of milk (breast milk versus formula).

Participants in the study included 1,899 infants whose mothers were recruited via a consumer mail panel throughout the United States between May 2005 and June 2007. The infants’ weights were recorded at  3-, 5-, 7-, and 12-months.

To determine a relationship, if any, between mode of milk delivery and rapid weight gain, the babies participating in the study were classified into one of six mutually exclusive feeding categories:

(1) Breastfed only
(2) Breastfed and human milk by bottle
(3) Breastfed and nonhuman milk by bottle
(4) Human milk by bottle only
(5) Human and nonhuman milk by bottle
(6) Nonhuman milk by bottle only

Researchers also controlled for other potentially confounding factors including maternal age; race and ethnicity; maternal education; percentage of poverty; marital status; parity; postpartum participation in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children program; pre-pregnancy body mass index; infant sex; gestational age; age at solid food introduction; average number of sweet drinks consumed per day during the first half year; and birth weight.

The results of the study indicate that breastfeeding, and not just breast milk, is best for babies. Infants who were exclusively formula fed by bottle gained only between 71 and 89 grams more per month than infants who were exclusively fed human milk by bottle. Furthermore, weight gain was negatively associated with the proportion of breast milk feedings but positively associated with proportion of bottle feedings among the infants who received mostly human milk.

As the researchers concluded:

“Infant weight gain might be associated not only with type of milk consumed but also with mode of milk delivery.”

In other words, bottle feeding, and not just formula feeding, puts children at an increased risk for rapid weight gain during infancy and for obesity later in life. Breastfeeding, and not just breast milk, is best in terms of maintaining a healthy weight.

Do you think that the recent research that links bottle feeding to obesity will influence the way that parents feed their babies?

Bottle Feeding Linked To Rapid Weight Gain In Infants, Possible Obesity Risk [Study] is a post from: The Inquisitr

You may not know Jamie Lynne Grumet but you’ve probably seen her picture. She’s the mom on the cover of Time Magazine breastfeeding her 3-year-old child.

The photo has stirred up a lot of controversy, which according to Grumet, was exactly the point.

Grumet said:

“I do understand why Time chose this picture because…it did create such a media craze to get the dialogue talking. We knew exactly what we were going to get in to.”

Grumet did say, however, that the photo doesn’t depict how she actually breastfeeds her son. The 26-year-old said that when she breastfeeds at home her 3-year-old son Aram is sitting on her lap, not standing on a stool. Grumet said that most people aren’t taking issue with the fact that Aram is too old. Instead, breastfeeding advocates argue that the picture shows a shocking example of breastfeeding and not a natural one.

Grumet said:

“I understand some of the breastfeeding advocates are actually upset about this… This isn’t how we breastfeed at home. It’s more of a cradling, nurturing situation.”

Time Magazine editor-in-chief Rick Stengel said that several photos taken during the shoot were less shocking. The photo of Grumet and her son was chosen for the cover because he knew that it would get people talking. Grumet said:

“It’s certainly an arresting image. It’s an image to get people’s attention about a serious subject. Judging by the reaction on Twitter this morning, some people think it’s great, and some people are revolted by it. That’s what you want. You want people talking…”

What did you think about Jamie Lynne Grumet’s photo on Time Magazine?

Jamie Lynne Grumet Defends Time Magazine Cover Photo is a post from: The Inquisitr

A South Korean advert that sells Oreo biscuits with a picture of a baby breastfeeding has leaked to the public, provoking an outcry.

The ad shows a mother’s breast (the nipple is partially exposed), and Oreo’s slogan – ‘Milk’s Favorite Cookie’ – at the bottom. I’m guessing the pun is fully intended.

Food giant Kraft, owner of Nabisco (the firm which produces Oreos), has swiftly moved into damage limitation mode, with a representative assuring ABC News that Kraft had no part in creating the advert.

The spokesperson also denied that the ad had run in South Korea or any other country. The ad has been attributed to Cheil Worldwide, an independent advertising agency.

Our man at Kraft told ABC:

“Our understanding is that they created it for use at an isolated advertising awards forum in Korea,” the official said. “It was never intended for consumer advertising or public distribution.”

The full ad is below, so let us know what you make of it – Funny? Nothing to be fussed about? Outrageously shocking?

Oreo Breast Milk Ad Should Never Have Gone Public, Says Kraft is a post from: The Inquisitr

Hillary Duff, former “Lizzie Maguire” star recently told People how rewarding it was to be a new mom. The 24 year old recently gave birth to son, Luca, and is proud that she is able to provide for her son by feeding him with her own milk.

Duff, who splits baby duty with husband Mike Comrie, says that her hubby is very “hands-on” with Luca during the day, but that she takes baby duty at night. She says this is because, “I wasn’t going to make him suffer just because I was having to get up [to feed the baby].”

While the actress does leave pre-pumped breastmilk for Comrie and others to give Luca when she is away, she says that she enjoys the bonding time with her son while he feeds. Duff elaborated, saying:

“Just to have your baby thrive and knowing that you’re doing that and you’re responsible — it’s such a rewarding feeling.”

Hillary Duff, who recently took a sponsorship for Johnson’s Baby Cares Initiative, is thrilled at every new milestone she has with Luca.

Johnson’s Baby Cares Initiative is huge for Duff, who feels responsible to help other mothers in the United States who are unable to provide for their babies after natural disasters. The campaign, titled “Save the Children,” is partnering to assemble, donate, and distribute over 5,000 care kits to needy families, which include baby care essentials.

Duff also added:

“You know what was a big milestone? The belly button falling off. That was a huge one. And then I wanted to keep it but my husband was like, ‘No, that’s gross, you can’t keep it!’ I’m like, ‘I’m totally keeping it,’ and I secretly kept it.”

Of course, following the interview, Duff’s secret is not so secret anymore. She adds that the belly button stub is, ”in a Ziploc bag in the back of my makeup drawer. Luca’s going to think I’m a freak!”

Best wishes to Hillary Duff and husband Mike Comrie as they continue to care for their newborn son.

Check out the video, where Luca’s birth announcement was made:

Hillary Duff: Baby Luca Living Off Breastmilk ‘Rewarding’ is a post from: The Inquisitr

Singer and new mother Beyonce has once again made headlines because of her daughter, Blue Ivy. However, this time, she is not being criticized for what may or may not have happened in a Lenox Hill maternity ward. Beyonce has now joined the ranks of women who are proudly nursing their babies in public.

While dining with husband Jay Z at the Sant Ambroeus restaurant in New York last weekend, Beyonce was spotted breastfeeding her seven-week-old daughter.

Breastfeeding advocates are singing Beyonce’s praises for nursing her baby in public.

Although the American Academy of Pediatrics and the World Health Organization both recommend that mothers exclusively breastfeed their children for the first six months of life and continue to provide breast milk for two years or beyond, public breastfeeding remains a controversial topic in America.

Just last December, a mother who was breastfeeding in public in a Target was harassed by store employees. That a megastar like Beyonce feels confident enough to breastfeed her baby in public despite the potential controversy may be the boost that public breastfeeding needs to gain more widespread acceptance.

As Emma Kwasnica, a childbirth and breastfeeding educator, believes:

I think Beyonce has a huge impact on being able to re-normalize breastfeeding and give women confidence to do the same. Images of pop stars and celebrities giving their babies nourishment will never harm our cause.

What do you think about Beyonce breastfeeding daughter Blue Ivy in a public restaurant while out to dinner with her husband? Will stars who nurse openly help to normalize breastfeeding?

Beyonce Nurses Daughter Blue Ivy In Public. Another Breastfeeding Controversy? is a post from: The Inquisitr

A county councilor in Brazeau County, Alberta, Canada was recently attacked by a fellow councillor in a weekly newspaper for bringing her newborn baby to work with her.

Kara Sunderland, 28, began bringing her child, Taylor, to work with her when the child was only a week old so that she could breastfeed the baby. As Sunderland states when defending her decision to bring her baby with her to her job:

It wasn’t an easy decision to go back to work after a week, but I was elected to do a job and didn’t want to let the residents down. Not only did they elect a woman, but they elected a young woman, and I feel a very strong sense of responsibility about it.

When the rest of the county board learned that Sutherland was expecting her second child, only one councilor objected to her bringing her infant with her when she returned to work: Pat Monteith.

Bob Kitching, another councilor, reveals:

She [Monteith] was agitating a long time before Kara even had the baby, but we took a vote and the consensus was that it was not an issue with us.. Kara even breastfeeds sometimes at the council table, but she handles it very discreetly.

Despite support for Sutherland from the rest of the council, Monteith still felt the need to speak out against her colleague bringing her baby to work. In a move that griped the rest of the council, Monteith attacked Sutherland in the weekly Breton Booster, complaining that the council chambers were being turned into a nursery. Furthermore, she wrote, ”More importantly, how do you feel about your tax dollars going to pay someone to care for her own child?”

In response, Kara Pelech, a Catholic school trustee in Edmonton who previously brought her baby with her to district meetings, defended Sutherland, stating:

I don’t think taxpayers felt they were paying for my child care. When I hear that, it sends up a red flag. What, because I have the great gift to bear children, that means I have to stay home?

Sutherland defends her decision to bring Taylor to work with her. She also states that, once her child finishes breastfeeding, she will leave the baby with her husband.

In the meanwhile, the rest of the Brazeau County council, Monteith aside, support Sutherland’s bringing her child with her to her job.

Do you think Monteith acted appropriately by voicing her concerns in a newspaper, or do you think working mothers should be allowed to bring their breastfeeding babies to work with them?

County Councilor Attacks Colleague In Newspaper For Breastfeeding is a post from: The Inquisitr

The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) has a bit of a reputation for going HAM on silly things like bottles full of milk or cupcakes, and yet another embarrassing incident has come to light in which the agency forced a humiliated woman to express breast milk before allowing her to board a flight.

This isn’t the first time the TSA has gotten into a breast milk flap, and in the past, a woman was forced to drink her own breast milk to prove it was not an explosive liquid. Then in 2010, the woman in the clip below was threatened with arrest for asking her breast milk not be passed through x-ray scanners, a provision that is allowed under law, as breast milk is classified as a “medical liquid.”

The latest TSA breast milk scandal is truly perplexing though, involving a Hawaiian mother of four and the agency’s bizarre demand she express milk so as not to board a plane with empty bottles. If you’ve ever owned a breast pump, you know that the pieces are not easily replaceable and don’t come cheap- basic long-term models start at $200 and parts are special order. But none of that mattered to the TSA, who traveler Amy Strand says forced her to stand over a public restroom sink and use the breast pump in full view of other travelers. Strand explains:

“He said I couldn’t go through because there was no milk in the bottles… But I was not going to leave a part of the breast pump behind- it cost over $200. He told me… my option was to leave it behind or to put milk into it.”

Strand continues:

“There was a TSA agent in there using the restroom and I asked her if there was a private place to pump, and she said no… I had to stand at the sink in my heels and dress pumping as travelers came and went. I was humiliated and fighting back tears. It confuses me why an ice pack and breast pump were a threat to national security.”

TSA spokeswoman Lorie Dankers addressed the incident in a written statement, confirming that the agency acted in error handling Strand as she attempted to board:

“Our officer mistakenly told her that she could only bring the (pump) pack if it was medically necessary, (and) she informed him that she planned to use it later for the storage of breast milk. The passenger was escorted from the checkpoint and later returned with previously empty containers filled with breast milk. She was screened and allowed to proceed with all of her carry-on items. The passenger has contacted us with her concerns and we accept responsibility for the apparent misunderstanding and any inconvenience or embarrassment this incident may have caused her.”

Do you think breastfeeding moms are more likely to be denied basic rights in their attempts to simply feed their babies? Should the TSA do a better job in training security agents in the handling of breast milk?

Breast Milk Causes Another TSA Kerfuffle, Agency Apologizes to ‘Humiliated’ Mom is a post from: The Inquisitr

Perhaps the most heated parenting debate involves whether to feed an infant breastmilk or formula, with the former being the preferred method by medical professionals and the World Health Organization due to its unparalleled health benefits for mother and baby and of course, its low cost.

Still, the debate rages on- with nursing still a somewhat marginalized activity, and frequent nursing-related protests cropping up in shopping malls and on Facebook. While everyone is in agreement that “breast is best,” many attempts to promote the practice are somehow seen as judgmental to mothers who opt to rely on formula for a multitude of reasons. But a new study illustrates why the conversation to promote breastfeeding (breastmilk has no moneyed corporation to promote itself via free samples in a hospital, for instance) should be more aggressive, highlighting the risks of formula use.

It seems that an ingredient in several versions of formula, organic brown rice syrup, has been found to sometimes contain levels of arsenic that could be dangerous- “could be,” because there is little oversight or regulation regarding “safe” levels of arsenic in food. But a study published today in the peer-reviewed medical journal Environmental Health Perspectives indicates that two of 17 formulas included in research listed organic brown rice syrup as their primary ingredient, and ”one [contains] a total arsenic concentration level up to six times the U.S. federal limit of 10 parts per billion for drinking water.” The drinking water standard is used due to the lack of standards for arsenic in food.

Earlier this month, legislation was introduced in the House calling on the Food and Drug Administration to take a better look at arsenic content in juice and food, and to establish safe levels so concerns can be more properly weighed. In the meantime, lead author of the study Brian Jackson says:

“In the absence of regulations for levels of arsenic in food, I would certainly advise parents who are concerned about their children’s exposure to arsenic not to feed them formula where brown rice syrup is the main ingredient.”

Do you think formula needs more stringent oversight to prevent ingredients like arsenic from entering the infant food supply?

Arsenic Levels in Formula Ingredient ‘Worrisome,’ Study Finds is a post from: The Inquisitr

Breastfeeding is associated with a great many benefits to mother and child and relatively few drawbacks, and more research has been added to the mounting pile of evidence that breast is best.

In the past, there had been some indication in research that moms who breastfeed and are asthmatic might have been placing their babies at increased risk of asthma by picking breastmilk over formula. However, two new research reports suggest that- unsurprisingly- breastfeeding leads to better cardiovascular outcomes in infants overall.

The new data suggests that breastfed babies seem to get the same benefits- if not more- from nursing relationships with asthmatic moms. Dr. Wilfried Karmaus specializes in asthma, and commented on the findings to Reuters. Karmaus- who was not involved in the research- said that breastfeeding should be encouraged among moms who suffer from asthma:

“I think the evidence is that breastfeeding increases lung volume, independent of if the mother is asthmatic or not. If the lung volume is increased, then you are less susceptible to get asthma. It’s important even to tell asthmatic mothers to breastfeed their children.”

The data came from two studies- a large one out of the UK, and a smaller study that took place in New Zealand. And while some docs say that the research comes down on the side of breastfeeding unequivocally, others believe that the question is still up for debate. Dr. Theresa Guilbert is a pediatric pulmonologist from the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health in Madison, Wisconsin. Guilbert says that the question as to whether moms with asthma pass it on through breastfeeding is still “controversial,” and she commented:

“There’s a lot of things that breastfeeding is very, very good for… I think the jury’s still out on the risk of breastfeeding from mothers that are asthmatic. I don’t think any of that (evidence) is now strong enough to tell moms they should stop breastfeeding… because of all the other important benefits that breastfeeding conveys to the child.”

It was noted that any direct link between breastfeeding and asthma risk is difficult to prove given the vast number of factors- like diet, air quality and demographic data- that can influence outcomes.

Breastfeeding Increases Lung Function, Combats Asthma, Study Says is a post from: The Inquisitr

Lego officials have publicly apologized for an incident that happened at their Legoland Winter Haven, Florida location between a breastfeeding mother and a park employee.

According to Kelly Sabourin, 39, she was watching two of her children play while nursing her 2-year-old daughter Keigin when she was approached by a Legoland employee who told her she had to move.

According to Sabourin the Legoland employees walked up to her and her friend Susan Williams and said they had to relocate because she couldn’t breastfeed in front of other guests. Kelly held her ground and the employee stood by her side, blocking the breastfeeding mother from the rest of the room and her own children until she finished feeding her child.

Susan told WTSP:

“I was shocked. I’ve never experienced first-hand someone being asked to stop nursing at a family-friendly place like Legoland.”

Kelly added:

“She was blocking me from the rest of the room.  It’s something I celebrate, I love doing with my child, and all of a sudden I’m being led to believe what I’m doing is shameful that I need to hide it in some room instead of making it a normal everyday thing especially when they’re are using the phrase ‘family-friendly place’”.

The strangest part of the incident is that it happened in the Legoland Baby Care Center which features a changing area, a bottle warming center and a kid-friendly bathroom.

Speaking of the incident Legoland publicist Jacquelyn Wallace noted:

“We allow breastfeeding moms to nurse anywhere throughout the park but we’ve created these nursing bays.” She adds, “Each bay has a white rocking chair for mom, a foot stool, a small rocking chair for another child and an electrical outlet for charging phones or any other need.”

Wallace went on to admit that when sharing news of the new Baby Center with park employees and the company’s “moms can nurse anywhere” policy there was “a lapse in communication” between management and Legoland employees.

She adds:

“We were actively promoting this facility to our employees to share with our guests. We failed to remind our employees our policy is to allow mothers to feed their children anywhere and however they choose.”

In fact the company didn’t really have a choice, according to Florida law 383.015 on Maternal and Infant Health Care:

A mother may breastfeed her baby in any location, public or private, where the mother is otherwise authorized to be, irrespective of whether or not the nipple of the mother’s breast is covered during or incidental to the breastfeeding.

For its part Legoland has taken full responsibility for the incident and has promised to make breastfeeding mothers feel comfortable in their facilities.

Do you believe that Legoland acted correctly in quickly taking responsibility for its employees actions and then remedying the situation publicly?

Legoland Apologizes Over Employees Attempt To Relocate Breastfeeding Mom is a post from: The Inquisitr

Have you noticed a serious lack of breastfeeding on Sesame Street? More than 4,500 people have noticed and have signed “Bring Breastfeeding Back to Sesame Street Petition.”

The group says that Sesame Street used to tastefully show breastfeeding on its show. But nowadays babies on Sesame Street are only fed by bottles.

The petition reads:

“Back in the 70′s and 80′s nursing was tastefully shown on the show but now they have replaced their nursing videos with bottles…. If we normalize breastfeeding in our community, especially with our children, we can help raise a generation of breastfeeders which will support our economy, make for healthier children and lessen the risk of breast cancer for many nursing mamas!”

And in case you don’t believe the breastfeeders group, here’s a video of Buffy explaining breastfeeding to Big Bird.

The Huffington Post notes that the “You’re My Baby” video included breast feeding when it was released in the 1980s. The video was later edited to only include bottles.

“You’re My Baby” original video.

“You’re My Baby” edited video.

Do you think society has a problem with breastfeeding? Maybe it’s just Sesame Street that has a problem with breasts…

Last year, the children’s show banned a video of Katy Perry and Elmo singing “Hot N Cold” because Perry’s outfit showed a little too much cleavage.

Should Sesame Street bring back breastfeeding?

Bring Breastfeeding Back to Sesame Street! 4,500 Sign Petition [Video] is a post from: The Inquisitr

Earlier this week, NASCAR driver Kasey Kahne drew a bit of ire from the lactivist community when he made a series of body-shaming comments through his Twitter account after seeing a woman nursing in a grocery store.

Kahne’s comments were the type you’re well familiar with if you’ve been a nursing mother at any point- the standard “that’s nasty, I lost my appetite” kind of thing. Kahne’s attitude in the posts (quoted below) were- not surprisingly- offensive to many who have been in  the position of having to nurse in or near public, and outcry was swift and angry. Kahne originally said:

Just walking through supermarket. See a mom breast feeding little kid. Took second look because I was obviously seeing things. I wasn’t! …One boob put away and one boob hanging!!! #nasty …I don’t feel like shopping anymore or eating…

Initially, Kahne’s response to one angry tweeter (“your [sic] a dumb bitch”) didn’t ameliorate the situation either, but it seems the NASCAR star has changed his position, and he sent a pleasant apology- it seems to indicate that not only is he sorry for the offense caused, but that Kahne also appreciates the folly in his original comments. Kahne begins:

“I understand that my comments regarding breastfeeding posted on Twitter were offensive to some people. For that, I apologize. It was in no way my intention to offend any mother who chooses to breastfeed her child, or, for that matter, anyone who supports breastfeeding children. I want to make that clear… In all honestly, I was surprised by what I saw in a grocery store. I shared that reaction with my fans on Twitter. It obviously wasn’t the correct approach, and, after reading your feedback, I now have a better understanding of why my posts upset some of you.”

Kahne continued:

“My comments were not directed at the mother’s right to breastfeed. They were just a reaction to the location of that choice, and the fashion in which it was executed on that occasion… I respect the mother’s right to feed her child whenever and wherever she pleases.”

Given his initial remarks, it’s heartening such a dramatic reversal so rapidly followed. Oddly enough, if anything, the incident seems to be a testament to the benefits of nursing in public as a way to cement a woman’s right to nurse in public.

What do you think about Kahne’s initial remarks and subsequent apology?

Kasey Kahne Apologizes For Breastfeeding Remarks is a post from: The Inquisitr

In a shocking turn of events, it appears a NASCAR driver is an uneducated, not-very-enlightened hillbilly.

Kasey Kahne, 31, is apparently active in charitable work, but it doesn’t appear to interfere with his personal misogyny or propensity to engage in perpetuating negative stereotypes about women (breastfeeding mothers, in particular.) Racing is traditionally a bit of a boys club- as a non-fan, the only think I know about the one chick that I know of from NASCAR is that she is “hot,” and Kahne seems to have internalized the “boobs are for selling beer” attitude.

The racing star took to Twitter to spew some injudicious comments about a breastfeeding woman who had the nerve to be the mother of a hungry baby in a supermarket, of all places, and though some of the offensive tweets have been removed, they’ve all been preserved because nothing really ever gets fully deleted from the internet. Kahne sent the following series of tweets Monday after being exposed to nursing in public:

Just walking through supermarket. See a mom breast feeding little kid. Took second look because I was obviously seeing things. I wasn’t!

One boob put away and one boob hanging!!! #nasty

I don’t feel like shopping anymore or eating

@KnittingRad And your a dumb b****.

It should be pointed out, in case you missed it, that breastfeeding is not only an act that literally saves the lives of babies all the time, it is also a protected activity in many states. And further, it’s stupid, reckless comments like Kahne’s that push women away from the practice, despite the palpable benefits to both mother and child.

It would be nice if Kahne retracted his comments and apologized to women who are forced to endure such puritanical, misplaced and dangerous attitudes when they have the audacity to feed their babies in public. But in the interim, the NASCAR star should take a look at the chart below, and remind himself that not ever pair of breasts he sees is in fact relevant to him.

Kasey Kahne, NASCAR Driver, Picks on Breastfeeding Moms on Twitter is a post from: The Inquisitr

Supplies of donated breast milk are running low, with the demand for breast milk higher than ever. That’s according to the eleven milk banks scattered around the U.S.

Mother’s Milk Bank in San Jose is one such venue, and its head Pauline Sakamoto says kids in need are losing out:

“In the 12 years I’ve been executive director, I’ve never been short. We’ve had to cut back on some of the hospital orders just so we can service more. We had to cut back on some outpatient kids because we didn’t have that supply. I’ve never had to do that, and I hate to do that.”

Mother’s Milk Bank works from a trailer behind Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, and gave out 420,000 ounces of breast milk to hospitals and families in need during 2010. However, that figure rises between 15 and 18 percent each year, and now supplies are getting squeezed for the first time in the bank’s 37-year history.

The likes of Mother’s Milk Bank supply a crucial service, providing milk for babies at high risk, such as those born prematurely. Such children require human milk as they struggle to digest foreign substitutes, such as formula. Says Sakamoto:

“The problem that we’re facing is that we have a lot of kids that need milk. The preterm infant rate is not going down, and doctors are prescribing it more prolifically. And the milk’s just not coming in.”

Furthermore, the banks are stretched already. Mother’s Milk Bank has to provide for for hospitals and families in Washington, Oregon, Hawaii, Maryland, Idaho and Wyoming, as no milk banks exist in those places.

Donated Breast Milk Supplies Running Low is a post from: The Inquisitr

I’ve heard jokes before about moms spraying annoying people with breastmilk, but didn’t think it was possible until I read this strange report.

A woman in Ohio has been arrested and mugshot-ed after she sprayed police officers with her milk during an altercation. Ohio mom Stephanie Robinette, 30, is accused of drunkenly using her baby’s food as a weapon against the law enforcement agents after a wedding fight:

Early Saturday, officers responded to a dispute between a married couple at a wedding in Delaware, OH.

The husband alleges his wife, Stephanie Robinette, 30, struck him several times and locked herself in the car.

When officers tried to get her out of the car, she told them she was a “breastfeeding mother and proceeded to remove her right breast from her dress and began spraying deputies and the vehicle with her breast milk,” Sheriff Walter Davis said in a statement.

The milk-spraying mom is currently in custody, and it is not known if she has yet been appointed or retained a lawyer. Robinette has been charged with domestic violence, assault, obstructing official business, resisting arrest and disorderly conduct.

Breastmilk as a Weapon: Ohio Woman Charged is a post from: The Inquisitr

Researchers have found a link in formula fed infants between starting solid foods before four months of age and obesity, according to a study published this week in the medical journal Pediatrics.

Although 75% of new mothers initially breastfeed their children, only a third are still breastfeeding at the three-month mark. Infants who were exclusively breast-fed did not exhibit the same rates of obesity, but infants who were fed formula displayed a sixfold rise in obesity when solids were introduced before the baby reached four months. An author of the study says these findings bolster the AAP’s suggestion that solids be introduced after that point:

“Our study results suggest that adhering to the current American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines of waiting till 4 months to introduce solids has the potential to reduce the risk of obesity later on,” explained study author Dr. Susanna Y. Huh, a pediatric gastroenterologist at Children’s Hospital Boston.

The study was part of a larger study of infants and their mothers called Project Viva. At the conclusion of this portion of the study, 7% of the 847 infants studied who were breastfed were found to be obese, and 13% of the formula-fed babies were over the 95th percentile for infant weight.

Study links early solid food start in formula-fed infants with obesity is a post from: The Inquisitr

A new study suggests that weight gain in infants fed cow’s milk formula may exhibit faster weight gain than those given formulas not containing cow’s milk or breastfed infants, causing researchers to speculate the type of formula infants are fed on could influence future obesity risk.

Researchers from the Monell Chemical Senses Center compared infant weight gain in babies given formulas with pre-digested proteins, known as protein hydrolysate formulas with those fed on cow’s milk formula. The protein hydrolysate formulas contain 35% more protein than the ones derived from cow’s milk, and are easier for infants to digest.

56 infants whose mothers had already decided to use formula were selected for the study. 32 of the infants received cow’s milk formula, and 24 were given the PHF varieties. Researchers haven’t pinpointed the exact reason for the result variance, but they presented one theory:

They speculate that the free amino acids in the pre-digested formula did a better job of stimulating receptors in the mouth and gut that signal to the brain that the stomach is full and it’s time to stop eating. Though babies in both groups spent about the same amount of time eating at each feeding (between 11 and 12 minutes), the babies on the PHF formula drank less during that time before pushing the bottle away.

Researchers say the findings require further investigation.

Cow’s milk formula linked to baby weight gain is a post from: The Inquisitr

If you’ve been on internet forums or any social media outlet, you’re probably aware that certain topics are almost always ground zero for a flame war- among them are circumcision, tipping waitstaff and breastfeeding.

A Tulsa coffeeshop owner managing a Twitter account for his business learned the hard way yesterday how pissing off the wrong contingent of Twitter can catapult a business to undesirable infamy when he tweeted that his shop was a no-breastfeeding zone. And we all know that hell hath no fury like a mommyblogger sent to her car or a toilet stall to feed her baby.

Double Shot Coffee Company owner Brian Franklin sent the ill-advised tweet sometime yesterday:

“Notice: No breastfeeding at the DoubleShot. Thank you.”

Putting aside the fact that he’s wrong, that women have rights in his state to breastfeed wherever they are legally allowed to be present and generally breastfeeding women are not looking to have you stare at their boobs; I also wonder who spends money in his shop while much of the population is out at their day jobs? Who has more time to spend in a coffeeshop during daylight hours- the workforce, or a woman spending the majority of her time with a breastfeeding infant? I mean, doesn’t this have “bad marketing strategy” written all over it? Multiplied by social media, it’s even worse.

Franklin quickly began backpedaling, but the sad thing is that he doesn’t seem to have ever grasped why his tweet was so inflammatory. He seems to be placating what he views as an angry set of “nipple nazis,” not ever realizing that if you’ve ever been asked to feed your infant in a filthy restroom stall, merely reading a tweet like that from hundreds of miles away still can make you apoplectic with rage. He sent some confusing and inconsistent tweets after he deleted his first:

Settle down, folks. We just don’t like walking across the room and seeing your breast. Maybe you could do it in private.

Ok ok, breastfeeding allowed again at the DoubleShot. Hey! Breastfeeding all around.

I was just kidding anyway. Didn’t expect that blow up. Sorry to get you guys riled up.

So women shouldn’t expose their “breast,” but it’s okay anyway and he was just kidding in the first place. Franklin clarifies further to the local news:

“Some of the people angry about this were concerned for their individual rights and the right of their baby to eat.  It is as if I had tried to pass a law banning the practice of breastfeeding universally.  The fact is, these people aren’t concerned with individual rights.  They are concerned with THEIR rights.  They would not fight for my right to ban breastfeeding in my establishment if I chose to do so. I don’t mind if people breastfeed in the DoubleShot, but it’s funny to me that people don’t consider the rights of others; only their own.  If one really believes in the American dream of individual rights, they must believe in the rights of others to do or think or say things they don’t agree with.  My capitalist ideals tell me that business owners should be able to make their own rules and individuals should then decide if they want to support that business or not.  As it is, the over-regulation of our government seems to step in and tell us everything that we can and can’t do.  I agree with the rights of people to boycott businesses they dislike, though in this case, people are mislead.  We allow breastfeeding and women do breastfeed when they want,” says Brian Franklin.

No, Brian- the problem is not that individual businesses are having their rights assailed. It’s that if people with your level of ignorance were allowed to routinely ban breastfeeding in public places, many would, and women would be forced to use formula or breastfeed a child in a hot car or dirty restroom.

Laws are needed precisely to protect women from businesses that may behave as yours does- who exactly do you need protection from that requires a law? How is a woman nursing harming your business? And if an upset customer complained to you that a black person was sitting at the table next to them, would you ban black people from your establishment to retain business? Should there be laws protecting classes of people from discrimination, particularly in areas where there is known to be tendencies to discriminate? And if so, why should breastfeeding women be excluded from the same protection afforded other classes who tend to be discriminated against?

This all goes back the the fact that if this argument hadn’t made it to social media in the first place, Franklin a) probably would still have the offensive policy in place and b) wouldn’t have gotten all the attention from the Twitter scandal. The effects of incidents like this in social media on a small business are difficult to measure, but hopefully as angry tweets from lactivists roll in hour by hour, he’ll at least begin to understand why saying polarizing things on Twitter isn’t necessarily clever business practice.

[via Consumerist]

Tulsa’s Double Shot coffee shop percolates Twitter outrage over breastfeeding ban is a post from: The Inquisitr