Sorry all -- I thought I had sent this both to Lactnet and Geoff.  Hopefully, the paragraphs missing when he received his transmission, while arrive in full on the net.

 
Geoff -- Actually, I'm from Wisconsin, and visit occasionally.  I grew up in Milwaukee, and graduated from UW-Madison.

You still have not answered my questions re:

What were the populations studied?  When I supposed they were predominantly bottle-feeding populations, you claimed the research said otherwise.  Again, I ask -- did the research divide the aspirators into subcategories as to how they were fed, and what they were fed?  And is it  proven that that all the silent aspiration that caused the necrosis was in the first few weeks after birth?

I am not saying that if a child has CP or severe asthma, you throw out the results.  I am asking, however, if autopsies on other children, without these problems, who died say from MVA or cancers, showed any of this necrosis.?
It is not a non-sequiter (sp) to question the variables.  My understanding is cystic fibrosis is present before the baby's first swallows.  And asthma has many prequels, not just repeated stress from aspiration.

You have not answered my questions about colonization.  Others are adamant that EBM does not colonize -- I don't know if I believe that either.  But my questions still stand:  how long does it take to colonize at 98.5.  And in the lungs, is it absorbed before it is colonized.  But all of that is a side issue, as we are not discussing EBM vs. ABM.  The point is that all is aspiration is potentially harmful.  

You ask if I'm suggesting foreign germs or GERD?  If it is stuff aspirated while going down, couldn't it only be from the milk or the outside?  And if it is GERD, then isn't bacteria from the stomach/intestines, which the baby would regurge and aspirate no matter how the feeding got down there in the first place?  And in fact could regurgitate and aspirate with no feeding at all?

Finally, my point about the kayaking was this.  The un-steered jars are the same as my unsteered rubber kayak.  They will follow the higher pressure water where they were thrown in, and continue to follow it until shoved out into quiet water.  They probably will not be broken on rocks, but rocks might divert their passage.  And given the additional variables of where they were put in, and where the house was, none of them may reach the house.  The 50-50
probabilities exist only when:  They are put into the water equidistant 
between the two banks, the water pressure is exactly equal from both 
sides, and the river forks are also exactly equal in water pressure.

Please post your replies to Lactnet as well, as many people are voicing interest in our volley.

Sincerely, Chanita    

Oh please note, I have corrected your name in the subject heading.  Also,
I am Chanita, not Glenn.  Glenn is my husband, and the owner of this site, but is a computer consultant not a lactation consultant.