The infection rate is only 0.5-1% if the mother is colonized.  That means
that at least 99 of 100 babies born to mothers colonized with GBS do not
become ill.
But the danger to that one baby in a hundred is so great that the tradeoff
in terms of unnecessary prophylaxis to the other 99 is deemed to be
worthwhile.

Perhaps at some point in the future there will be a way to see which babies
are most at risk, i.e. which ones don't get protection from maternal
antibodies or whatever the factor is which prevents the vast majority of
colonized babies from becoming life-threateningly septic babies, and we can
reduce the use of antibiotics.

Has anyone examined the role of BF or not, in how the course of illness is
in babies with GBS infection?

Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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