I must not have been paying attention.  Chris says,

<< When I heard the theory that a woman's milk production stabilises in the
early weeks and then does not increase very much after it is set, I looked
for ways that a baby can go on gaining weight if its intake doesn't
increase.>>

I hadn't heard this theory.  What she goes on to say about a baby's poops
decreasing as it makes more efficient use of the food it gets (presuming it
is more or less the same amount as baby has been getting but now the baby's
calorie needs have increased) makes a certain amount of sense.  I
certainly hadn't thought of that as an explanation.  However, I'm wondering
about the original theory.  Where did this come from?  Is there research?  I
still use Riordan and Auerbach's information about the milk a baby gets,
which states that, on average, babies get  ~37 ml in first 24 hours, ~500
ml/day by day 5, ~750 ml/day by 3-5 months.  This is useful in getting
staff -and moms- to understand that baby doesn't get, or need, large amounts
of milk in the first day or so which moms are incapable of making.  Is there
a serious challenge to this info?  It really doesn't make a lot of sense to
me that a mother's milk supply remains the same after the first few weeks.
It seems to me that babies would have to routinely nurse more often, as
opposed to just for a few days, when they experience what we fondly refer to
as growth spurts.  (Those aren't out of vogue now, too, are they?)  Some of
the new things coming out just make sense to me.  However, some don't and
this one doesn't, unless someone has a reasonable explanation or possibly
I've misunderstood.

 I've always been cautious about jumping on bandwagons, and sometimes when I
have been reluctant to do that, I've eventually found it was a good thing I
didn't.  Case in point: the scissor hold (I much prefer this terminology to
"cigarette hold".  Yeccchhh!).  I teach the "C" hold like a good LC,
but I've always wondered why, if this is such a bad hold, so verrrry many of
the pics of women from around the world (check out the UNICEF slides from
third world countries that come with the 18 hour course) show moms using
this hold.  It seems to me to be something women have used since time
immemorial.  How can it be that it has survived if it's so problematic?
(Kathy, I'm arguing from an anthropological standpoint.  I'm sure you'll
enlighten me if my ignorance is showing! ;-))   Truth is, there are
situations when I have had moms use it, probably some that you are using the
"teacup"
hold for (what a cute name!).  And sometimes moms are unable to easily use
the "c" hold because it is physically uncomfortable.  Now, please don't
flame me for challenging a "hard and fast" rule.  Truthfully, I don't use it
often at all, but sometimes it's the best way in this imperfect world.  I
never liked "hard and fast" rules anyway!

Marsha, who is preparing to dodge bullets!  <sheepish grin>

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Marsha Glass RN, BSN, IBCLC
Mothers have as powerful an influence over the welfare of future generations
as all other earthly causes combined.
John S. C. Abbot
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

             ***********************************************
The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html