Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
7bit |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Mon, 5 Mar 2001 14:15:45 EST |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" |
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Valerie writes:
<< It is interesting to note that Cuba which is a resource-poor country has an
infant mortality rate of 6.4 per 1000 and in some districts it is lower than
5 per 1000. Poverty does not seem to be affecting their infant mortality
rate. Although, I do believe that breastfeeding is more prevalent there. >>
I am sure that increased bf is partly responsible for this.
However, I have a question about the accounting. In the US, 24 weekers and
similar very early premies are routinely delivered alive, count as live
births and presumably the many of them that sadly do not make it are counted
in our infant mortality statistics.
Is this also true in poorer countries? I honestly don't know, but I would
bet that many of these babies don't survive their births at all, and so
perhaps are not counted as death??? Anybody know whether this is true, and
what proportional part if any it play in the (otherwise discraceful) highness
of our infant mortalty statistics?
Elisheva Urbas, nyc
***********************************************
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
|
|
|