LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 20 Jan 2001 13:49:37 -0600
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (61 lines)
There are a number of problems that I have with this issue, the main one's
being the eagerness with which U.S. Peds declare breastmilk inadequate
nutrition.  With all of the recent press about the superiority of
breastmilk and the reluctance of U.S. Peds to embrace this research, there
is almost glee as they hastily order Vit D for all *breastfed* infants.  It
is not that they can't see the over-use in this case, they just like the
implication.

Where was their haste in acknowledging the inadquacies and hazards of
artificial baby milk? Where was their haste in promoting the one superior
food for human infants?

And there *won't* be just vitamin D for all infants.  There is no vitamin D
supplement for infants now.  There is only Tri Vi Sol, which is D,C,and A.
Soon it will be forgotten that it is only vitamin D that was needed in a
small sample of infants who never see the light of day. Soon it will be
assumed, as it was in the 70s and 80s (and before) that "breastmilk just
doesn't have everything in it that formula does." (As one of our Peds
declares as he orders TriViSol for breastfed infants.) Mothers who do trust
their bodies to make perfect milk for their infants will have lost some
voice in their assertion.  They will hear,"If breastmilk is deficient in
Vit D, one can wonder what else if doesn't have.  Better safe than sorry."

The feigned concern for the health of infants quickly receedes when these
authorities look at the high incidence of serious health problem in
artificially fed infants. We all know what these illnesses are, but the
Peds just consider them normal for infants and children.

The AAP recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months loses much
of its strength with this latest assault on the intregity of breastmilk.
And, as I wrote a few months ago, the introduction of this foreign
substance into the infant's gut will not be without negative health
consequences. It will change the intestinal flora. That much we know.  What
else it will affect we don't know...yet.

There is so much of pharmaceutical medicine that operates in this manner.
If a few patients need a given medication or medical procedure, just treat
everyone the same.  Saves brain work in seeing what one patient really
needs.

This vit D recommendation has a more far-reaching effect than meets the
eye.  It is about much more than Vit D in the absence of adequate sunshine.
And, again, it is the babies who pay for the ignorance of those in
positions of authority.

Parents forget that these are the same authorities who promoted the abm of
20-30 years ago as superior nutrition (and as new ingredients are added,
proclaim, "Now we know.") and who recommended that all children in the 40s
have their tonsils removed at age 5 or so because some children has
tonlilitis.

Pat Gima, IBCLC
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Mailto:[log in to unmask]

             ***********************************************
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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2