Hi All
 
I have been following the threads about babies whose weight gains (or lack
thereof) are causing concern.  I am wondering when the risks associated with
slow growth begin to outweigh the risks associated with supplementation.
Has anyone done or seen any research on this? I have read a few times that
formula feeding is preferable to a hungry baby.  At the risk of sounding
like a raving lunatic, I wonder if this is always true.  There are degrees
of hungry.  A little hungry might well be preferable to NEC. (Actually I
would think that it would take quite a lot of hungry to prefer a significant
risk of NEC.)  A little hungry might be preferable to pnuemonia.
I just wonder if we are a bit too focussed on weight as *the* risk factor,
when there are so many others to consider.
 
Nina Berry BA/Bed(Hons) Dip Arts(Phil)
Breastfeeding Counsellor
PhD Candidate - "Ethical Issues in the marketing of 'Toddler Milks'" 

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
Mail all commands to [log in to unmask]
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or [log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet or ([log in to unmask])
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]