LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Date:
Fri, 4 Jan 2013 17:03:08 -0800
Reply-To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Message-ID:
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
From:
Eva Hoebee <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (94 lines)
It is timely that Laura raised these issues about this questionable, 
non-evidence-based practice.  It is reminiscent of the past practice of 
adding cereal to the contents of feeding bottles, which health 
authorities in Australia criticized. As well as the issues of potential 
contamination from adding PIF and an increased solute load, there is 
another issue here, too.  That is the implied message that breastmilk is 
okay - provided the mother adds something to it. In other words, it 
sends the message that breastmilk is "insufficient" in composition (when 
it seems that it is the quantity that needs increasing).  Most of us are 
a long way from our rural roots, or people would be aware that cow's 
milk, on which these PIFs are based, isn't sufficient to the needs of 
the young for which it is the species-specific food.  Calves need to 
start eating grass very early (around three weeks) to add to the 
nutrients from the milk of the cow. Human milk is a much more complete 
food for human babies than cow's milk is for calves.

The advice to add calories (and push up the solute load) seems to me to 
have the "quick fix" mentality, ignoring the need to do more, i.e. 
referring the mother for more time-consuming advice about stimulating 
the maternal milk supply.

One question I have, perhaps to Susan Burger, is whether there is any 
down-regulating effect of the PIF (or any non-human milk) on the 
anti-infective properties of the human milk, other than by dilution? 
This was the reason behind the recommendation to avoid mixing artificial 
milk with mother's milk in a bottle, and to give it separately - a 
recommendation which I came across when researching advice from the 
early 20th century. This was a period when other recommendations lacked 
an evidence basis.  So - wise ones - is there evidence for this?  I 
still recommend that the good stuff, mother's milk, be given first and 
separately, if only to make sure none is wasted.  It also gives it the 
chance to start being digested before the lesser, more slowly digested 
product is administered.

A happy New Year to you all, and to your loved ones.

Virginia

Dr Virginia Thorley, OAM, PhD, IBCLC, FILCA
Private Practice lactation consultant
Cultural Historian of the History of Medicine
Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Laura Spitzfaden wrote:

I am feeling frustrated that I keep meeting moms who have been advised 
to mix powdered formula directly into their breastmilk in order to 
increase calories.  Some of them have babies who are failure to thrive 
and some have babies who are gaining slowly.  I was under the impression 
that this practice puts a baby at risk for kidney stress and dehydration 
but I am finding the advice to be very commonplace.  The usual 
suggestion is to put a teaspoon of PIF into 3 or 4 ounces of expressed 
breastmilk and feed this to the baby by bottle.

I checked the archives and found this post.

http://community.lsoft.com/scripts/wa-LSOFTDONATIONS.exe?A2=ind1012A&L=LACTNET&P=R583&1=LACTNET&9=A&J=on&d=No+Match%3BMatch%3BMatches&z=4

Does anyone else have any evidence (other than common sense) that 
demonstrates that this is not a good practice?  Why is this practice 
recommended and is there any evidence to show it is beneficial?  What 
about for premature babies?  Also, shouldn't off label use of PIF be 
evidence based?  I am very frustrated that I need to show it is unsafe. 
  Isn't the burden of proof on those who are using this product 
off-label?  How can a pediatrician or nutritionist advise this without 
proof that it is safe?

Now that the AAP is advising a decontamination step (recommended by WHO) 
for PIF, how does that affect this practice?

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: 
set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome

ATOM RSS1 RSS2