LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Sarah Vaughan <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sat, 1 Jun 2013 06:26:12 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (38 lines)
Sue Jacoby wrote:
<So how can this excuse so blithely be accepted as appropriate- "the babies were losing a lot of weight."  No, they were not.>

(sigh) I wasn't claiming the babies *in the study* were losing a lot of weight. I was talking about the researchers' *previous experience* with babies on their unit who'd had problems and with how their mothers reacted to this.



Sue Jacoby wrote:
<  I want to know why that belief is allowed to sit out there so unchallenged.>

What do you mean, 'so unchallenged'? I'd only made the statement six and a half hours earlier, and time zone differences mean that most Lactnetters would still have been in bed for much of that time. How much chance did you think anyone had had to challenge it? I might also point out that multiple people on Lactnet and elsewhere have been protesting the researchers' criteria in weight loss since the study appeared.

Sue wrote:
<  Or, was that part of the purpose of the "study" in the first place?  Define the terms and win the war? >

I'm concerned over this attitude, and even more concerned that another IBCLC on here would describe those comments as 'so profound and so well said'. 

If you've been following the debate on here, you'll know that one of the listmothers has already vouched for the main researcher's genuine commitment to promoting breastfeeding, even while disagreeing with her methods of doing so. When we all share the main goals of wanting to help mothers and babies and support breastfeeding, is it really appropriate to refer to differences of opinion on how best to achieve these goals as a 'war'? Or to jump on comments made by a person totally unconnected with the study and use them as an excuse for pejorative insinuations about the researchers' intentions? What's profound or well said about that? 

Regardless of what criticisms you may have of the study itself - and, yes, I fully understand there are many and agree with several of them - I cannot see how this sort of attitude is constructive. It seems to me to be deeply divisive on an issue where mutual discussion could get us so much further.


Best wishes,

Dr Sarah Vaughan
MBChB MRCGP

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

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