There is no evidence that routine glucose testing of a clinically normal
infant who is simply not hungry, provides any benefit.  My own subjective
impression is that testing increases the risk that the baby will be
supplemented and most of that supplementation is inappropriate.  The more
babies who are tested, the more normal babies who will be treated as though
they are abnormal.  I am convinced that BF suffers most in this scenario.

If the baby is showing signs of low blood sugar, it should be offered food,
i.e. breast.  If that doesn't help, whether because the baby is
neurologically disorganized and can't feed, or because feeding doesn't
relieve the signs, testing should be considered.  Certainly, supplements
should never be given without clear evidence that blood sugar is dangerously
low.

We really don't want to know exactly how low the glucose levels of normal
infants get.  We should be keeping babies close to their food source and
doing all we can to ensure that they are as free of hindrances as possible,
chemical as well as physical, in order to start taking in nutrients in the
normal way when they are ready for it.  Babies who are affected by maternal
medication or other obstetric intervention should be getting even more
pro-active BF support, not heel sticks and/or separation from mother for
observation of a problem that would arise less often if they stayed where
they belonged.

MIDIRS published a review article in the last year or so on hypoglycemia in
newborns, less dogmatic than my post.  Check their website, www.midirs.org .
It is a great resource.

Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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