Dear Susan,
I am so happy to hear someone else speak up.  I've had a theory for some time
since the catch phrase of 'imbalance' was commonly used.
Remember back when we first learned about bfg that basic procedure was to
nurse baby thoroughly (audible suck/swallows) on first side, then switch to the
next side?  Start the next feed on the breast that was used last.  I believe it was
suggested mainly to get a depth of stimulus to the supply.
So then we are told how the breast makes milk.  We tell mothers that at first latch
baby gets milk right away just waiting for baby under the areola.  But baby's first
suck also activates the making and release of milk and the transfer begins.
If baby is still sucking effectively, he is receiving milk.  If he has stopped; the
signal has already been sent and the transfer of milk happens and sits waiting
under the areola until baby suckles again.
So if baby stops because he's had his fill; which would mean that a depth of
stimulus has also happened...weren't we always told that baby has surely gotten into the
high fat milk?  But if baby stops; doesn't it mean that the high fat milk is transfered
and waits in that small pool for baby to enjoy first at the next feed?
Using that reasoning..I just don't see how milk is much different from the beginning
of a feed to the end?  I tell moms that fat varies throughout the day..asking them if
they have ever pumped and see milk separate so they themselves can see the varied
fat contact.  This over identifying of low fat vs high fat perpetuates the thinking that
some milk is better than other milk....it's all superior.

In regards to stools...I generally refer now to Dr. Gordon's site and his extra special
feature called 'The Color of the Day"..which details the wide range of normal in stool color and consistency.

Also when I speak with Moms who are so obsessed with supply when they feel the only
'good breast' is a breast that's bulging.  They use words that apply 'container' descriptions
to the breast.  "I feel full"  "My breast empties"  "Emptying the breast" etc.  I try to
help moms understand that the breast is not a container..but rather a manufacturing site. I point
out to them that while I speak to them I am using words like "heavy breast"; 'swollen or tight breast';
'receding of engorgement"'; 'relieve the breast"; 'soft breast' etc.
There is always milk for baby.  Note I didn't say 'in' the breast.  Yes, I know about presence
of milk..but I try to stear away from mother's thinking their breast should look like a hugh
utter!  We've all received calls from mother's who are doubting supply around 2 mos just
because their breasts are softer.

I am somewhat humbled among the presence of so many learned participants on this list.  But
with almost 25 yrs as a LLL I find I am somewhat hesitate to relay my findings and personal
theories that have come from all those years.  When I finally hear someone state what I've
observed on my own...well, it's exciting...but because I am 'just a Leader' I worry about 
shaking up some many long-standing practices.

I'm very willing to hear other's comments though.
Renee'
CA



Susan wrote:
Date:    Fri, 21 Aug 2009 12:48:44 -0400
From:    Susan Burger <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: NOT TWO KINDS OF MILK

Dear all:

I am quite frustrated with the link to the article on foremilk/hindmilk. =
 It starts out with a=20
complete and total falsehood.  There are NOT two kinds of milk.  There is=
 a gradual shift=20
in the fat content during a feeding and there is no one moment that it ca=
n be labeled=20
foremilk and one moment that it can be labeled hindmilk.  There is simply=
 no criteria=20
whatsoever.  Furthermore, even if there were an established criteria for =
the fat content=20
that would enable you to declare it "foremilk" or "hindmilk" you can't gi=
ve a mother any=20
simple criteria for determining when that "hindmilk" might be attained. T=
he variation in=20
how long it takes to shift from a certain level of fat content to a highe=
r level of fat=20
content from woman to woman, breast to breast, feed to feed is far greate=
r than the=20
variation in total volume from woman to woman and feed to feed.=20=20

What I see more frequently with busy second time mothers is that the baby=
 simply=20
doesn't have enough time on the breast, period.=20=20

As as for draining the breast -- they aren't ever drained.  So why do we =
talk about=20
"draining" when the latest research suggests that a fair bit of milk is l=
eft in the breast=20
even by an efficiently feeding three month old?  It seems to me that the =
sonogram=20
studies showed that the physiologic norm is to still have a fair bit of m=
ilk in the breast=20
(the number I remember was 50% but I could be wrong on that one).  The st=
udies on the=20
pump actually showed that the particular pump that was studied drained th=
e breast even=20
more than the baby and so therefore, that is NOT the physiologic norm.  I=
f a baby is no=20
longer swallowing on the breast, they are NOT getting milk out of that br=
east. So,=20
keeping them on that breast longer is not achieving the goal of removing =
more milk or=20
feeding the infant.  It would permit bonding.  If the baby is still hungr=
y and can no longer=20
remove milk out of a breast, then that baby is not going to be able to ge=
t more milk out=20
merely by keeping the baby on that breast for a longer time.=20

Time and time again, I keep reading about the leap to one sided feeding w=
ithout sufficient=20
information to really judge whether or not it is warranted.  Sometimes it=
 IS warranted,=20
but I think you need to gather a lot more information before concluding t=
he appropriate=20
approach is one sided feedings than is usually provided in a typical Lact=
net post.

I'm sorry, but I couldn't read further when an article starts off with a =
false statement.

Best, Susan Burger

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

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