Yes, Nikki, there is that study, by Schanler and Associates showing that
slower growth is most definitely not always bad.

The reason I¹d love to see this debate continue in every single Lactnet
issue is that‹pardon the drama‹some premies will get sick and die because of
lack of donor milk.  Further, neonatalogists and others will extrapolate the
absurd findings in Schanler and declare that perhaps premature formula is
just as good as mother¹s milk.  I¹m not kidding.  You know the way this
works.

³Counterintuitive?²  How about horrible?  I would like to see full
disclosure from the statisticians involved in dealing with the raw data.  A
simple Google reveals their ties to the formula industry.

Nancy?

Jay Gordon

Date:    Thu, 25 Aug 2005 09:07:50 EDT
From:    Nikki Lee <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Schanler study

Dear Friends:
    Isn't there an international debate about growth of  premature infants?
Should they grow at the rate they would grow if nourished by  a placenta, or
should they grow at the rate a term baby does once it is  born?
    There is another study (maybe even by Schanler?)  that showed the slower
rate of growth in preterms fed fortified human milk was  offset by the
better 
general health and decreased infections.
    So why is growing slower not good? What is the norm  of 'correct' growth
in these VLBW babies?
    This study is so counterintuitive.
    warmly,
 
Nikki Lee RN, MS, Mother of 2, IBCLC, CCE

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

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html