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:
Magda Sachs <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 9 Sep 2001 09:45:13 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (56 lines)
I think in this discussion we should be orienting ourselves to the
international definitions which have been accepted for use by the WHO and by
the IGAB.  I don't necessarily believe these are the best definitions there
couuld be, but thehave been used in recent research, e.g. Coutsoudis on HIV
transmission, Aarts on how exclusive is exclusive breastfeeding and Hornell
on bf styles.  If we don't mesh what we understand with the research we will
never know what the heck we are talking about in terms of outcomes and so
on.

WHO for exclusive breastfeeding includes breast milk, including expressed
milk or milk from a wet nurse.  Also drops, syrups.  This will be adequate
for some studies, but for, say hiv transmission research, is obviously
problematic (early reports in the literature talked about transmission form
a wet nurse).  The IGAB definitions differentiate breastfeeding from
breast-milk feeding.

In her brilliant short resume on this in Feb 2000 Breastfeeding Abstracts
(LLLI) 'What is the definition of breastfeeding?' says that "it becomes our
duty, each one of us, whether researcher of lactation consultant, program
planner or health care provider, mother or supporter, to be cognizant of the
variety of definitions used by writers and researchers."  I think if we all
start using what we like and feel comfortable with [and I will say, yes I am
guilty of this] then we are probably undermining the protection, promotion
and suppport of breastfeeding.

Labbok says that the JHL advises authors to use the IGAB definitions, but I
thought they used WHO???  Does anyone have a sense of which are used in
practice?  My feeling is that JHL authors arenlt that scrupulous about this,
but don't flame me if I am wrong.  (I just think this is not emphasised or
even very clear in articles I have read, rather than they are willfully
subverting these definitions).

I personally would like to see us all using the WHO definitions and possibly
reforming them from within if we find we need more categories or explicitly
oriently the terms we do use to these terms (e.g. "my definition of
exclusive breastfeeding, or breastfeeding itself, differs from the WHO usage
in the following ways...").

When I heard the term 'human milk harvesting', I did not connect it to the
breast-milk feeding mother, but to the harvesting by researchers, and
especailly commercial enterprises and so on.  I could spend an interesting
afternoon debating whether I see milk banks in that category.  I find the
term powerful and justified for some who seek human milk, but certainly full
of implications that I would not be willing to lay at the door of women who
feed their own children their own milk without putting the baby to the
breast

Magda Sachs
Breastfeeding Supporter, BfN, UK

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2