While their numbers in this next portion of this same Chen study were 
too small for good statistics, they went on to say that when they 
compare 3 months of ANY breastfeeding to less or no breastfeeding, 
the reported reduction is 36%. That's 56% more deaths just for less 
than 3 months of any breastfeeding or no bf. Sorry, I don't know if my 
math answer posted or not so it's below again, in response to Nan. 
linda

On Sat, 30 Jun 2007 19:00:06 +0200, Nan Jolly 
<[log in to unmask]> wrote:

>And of course this study uses formula as the norm, and gives the 
advantage
>that breastfeeding gives...  From the extract below, can anyone work 
out the
>numbers if the norm were breastfeeding, and we wanted to know the 
risk of
>formula feeding?
>
>"Overall, children who were ever breastfed had 0.79 (95% confidence
>interval [CI]: 0.67-0.93) times the risk of never breastfed children for
>dying in the postneonatal period. Longer breastfeeding was 
associated with
>lower risk."

Remember this is for ANY breastmilk vs. none. If looking at exclusive 
breastfeeding for several months, the advantage would be much greater.
If 79 bm babies die for every 100 abm, then 79 is to 100 as 100 is to X. 
Solve for X. 10,000/79=127. 27% more deaths for never bf vs. ANY 
natural milk.

linda

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

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]