-----Original Message-----
Date: Friday, January 08, 1999 5:57 AM


>>>> Posting number 35835, dated 7 Jan 1999 18:03:07
>Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:03:07 EST
>Reply-To:     Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>Sender:       Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>From:         "W4 [log in to unmask]" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Diflucan
>Comments: To: [log in to unmask]
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
>Dawn wanted info for MD's regarding diflucan.
>Diflucan and dosage for mothers with fungal infections in the breast is
noted
>in the recent edition of Ruth Lawrence's Breastfeeding (fifth edition).
page
>282.
>It gives dosages and states:" Side effects(e.g., nausea, vomiting,
diarrhea)
>in the mother are minimal "
>I was most impressed with the fact that it was included in this edition!
>Fritzi Drosten
>
>>>> Posting number 35836, dated 7 Jan 1999 18:35:52
>Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:35:52 EST
>Reply-To:     Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>Sender:       Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>From:         Nikki Lee <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject:      Infant stooling
>Mime-Version: 1.0
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
>
>Dear Folks:
>  I did an informal study on stooling during the first week of life in the
>exclusively breastfed infant. The literature search revealed that there was
no
>information, except stooling frequencies for bottle fed babies, or babies
>breastfed in the style of the 40s and 50s, where babies were routinely
given
>water, orange juice, and oleum percomorphum (a fish oil derivative).
>  I followed 20 exclusively breastfeeding women from the day of the baby's
>birth up to day 8 with a daily telephone call to ask about breastfeeding
and
>about infant stooling. I also looked to see if there was any relationship
>between stooling frequency and weight gain. There wasn't. There was no
pattern
>that emerged except that all babies had stooled by the 2nd day postpartum.
All
>babies thrived.
>        I personally don't like to take the average of all the bowel
movements and
>give that to the mother because "average" isn't really helpful. If her baby
>stools less, she worries. And if her baby stools more, she worries. It is
more
>helpful to teach a mom about what a healthy baby acts like: that it starts
>smiling in the first week of life, and wakes up to feed and also wakes up
to
>look around. Baby also pees and either stools or passes gas. Baby feeds at
>least 6 times per day (which number I have seen in NMAA literature as the
>bottom line) and probably more, and needs to be with her all the time,
almost
>like she is still pregnant.
>   There is presently another, more formal study going on in Philadelphia
>about stooling, that is finding the same things as I have reported here.
>   The baby is more than the sum of its feeding frequency and number of
>diapers. Warmly, Nikki Lee
>
>>>> Posting number 35837, dated 7 Jan 1999 18:50:24
>Date:         Thu, 7 Jan 1999 18:50:24 -0500
>Reply-To:     Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>Sender:       Lactation Information and Discussion
<[log in to unmask]>
>From:         Cindy Curtis <[log in to unmask]>
>Organization: Benefits of Breastfeeding
>Subject:      [Fwd: clinique]
>Comments: To: LACTIVIST POST <[log in to unmask]>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Here is the reply that I received from CLinique about their anti aging
>cream ad in Allure that had a baby bottle in it.
>
>Cindy
>
>--------------
>
>Dear Cindy,
>
>Thank you for contacting us.  We were surprised to receive your
>comments, and appreciate this opportunity to address your concern.
>
>Since Clinique's introduction in 1968, we have earned a reputation not
>only for consistently superior products, but for the excellence and good
>sense of our advertising and promotional materials.  We value all of our
>consumers, and we strive for sensitivity in everything we do.  It is
>therefore disheartening to learn of your disappointment.
>
>Please be assured that the ad was not intended to convey any negative
>concept or sentiment other than excitement for our products.
>Nonetheless, your correspondence has reminded us that individual
>perceptions vary.  We do regret you found the ad offensive.  Your
>comments have been forwarded to our Marketing Department, as we are sure
>they will be interested in your remarks.
>
>Once again, thank you for this opportunity to clarify our position.  We
>hope you will continue to look to Clinique for all your skin care and
>makeup needs.
>
>Sincerely,
>
>Clinique Consumer Communications
>