In a message 2 posters write:

> The article refered to British research which had linked dummy (pacifiers)
>> use with lower intellectual capabilities.  It suggested that dummies
>make
>> babies less interested in their surroundings.  "If everytime a baby cries
>> you shove a dummy in it's mouth then there is less encouragement for
>baby
>> to challenge his environment."
>>
>
>I have read (sometime, somewhere) that this sub optimal intellectual
>development might be due to a disturbed language/speaking development,
>because a child who has his mouth full all day does not talk, talking is
>a
>important factor in intellectual development.

I have read with interest the MANY postings regarding pacifier use and its
ties to "nipple choices" and I have a couple of VERY anecdotal observations
to add.
1. During my time as a hospital LC (big hospital,many calls), I received many
calls from frustrated parents (often medical residents returning to work)
seeking advice regarding their baby who was refusing a bottle.
Most often this involved a baby who had initiated bottle fdng at the
*appropriate* time but for some reason had a period (days) where no bottles
were given and then when the parents tried to resume bottles-refusal.
Over time I began to notice a common thread with many of these babies  and it
often was that they wouldn't take/didn't use a pacifier.  I wonder if it has
somethig to do with the familiarity of the *plactic* in their mouths that
makes them more willing and I have often contemplated mentioning this to
parents as a *potential advantage* of pacifier use. I haven't yet.....so no
flames please (I would require alot more science behind my teachings!) BUT
I'm wondering if anyone else has noticed this????
2.  I have noticed (as a previous poster mentioned) that LLL leaders are
often/sometimes in the *extreme* in terms of bottle use. For example, I
referred a former consultee to LLL meetings in my area and she called back to
tell me that 1 of the leaders discouraged her vehemently from using bottles
upon her return to work instructing her to use another alternative fdng
method(science?). Needless to say, Mom was turned off and this concerns me in
terms of it's effect on the potential appeal of LLL support.
3. I have seen many babies who manage to speak quite precociously(my own
daughter included) despite heavy (she sais sheepishly...) pacifier use. My
daughter had a vocabulary of 6 words at 6 months and spoke in complete
sentences (I don't want juice, I want milk) at 15 months and "lived" (she
sais sheepishly, again...) with a "binky" in her mouth- she would simply
reach up take it out, speak then replace it!  She also nursed well and
exclusively well into toddlerhood.

One more thing in reference to the second of the above posts, Is speech
development a factor *of* intellectual development or a factor *in*
itellectual development?

Lynn Shea Rn,Bsn,Ibclc
Franklin,Massachusetts

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