http://www.slate.com/id/2150354/
I am quoting the relevant part:
"In June, the New York Times ran an article headlined, "Breast-Feed
or Else." It suggested that experts believe that "breast-fed babies
are at lower risk for sudden infant death syndrome and serious
chronic diseases later in life, including asthma, diabetes, leukemia
and some forms of lymphoma." Yet, the article never mentions the NNT
for breast-feeding to prevent these scary diseases. Neither does any
general-interest press article in LexisNexis, a database. There's a
reason for this omission: The NNTs are astronomically high.
Reasonable women might think that breast-feeding isn't worth the
trouble—a conclusion that you don't want drawn if you're promoting
breast-feeding at any cost."
Fascinating article, but they lost me when they got to
breastfeeding. Why is breastfeeding being lumped in with expensive
medical treatments that have risky side effects? However, I'm not
sure how best to argue the issue of NNT being very high for diseases
that BF reduces the risk of. The best I can come up with, which is
kind of nebulous, is that breastfeeding is a whole system designed to
provide perfect nutrition, immunities, growth factors, and other
health and psychological benefits to babies and mothers. It benefits
all babies and mothers in ways we don't fully understand, not just
the small number of babies who avoid lymphoma by ingesting breastmilk.
I would love to hear what other Lactnetters think of this.
Warmly,
Lynnette Hafken, MA, LLLL, IBCLC
***********************************************
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [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(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html
|