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:
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 10 Sep 1999 14:27:36 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (44 lines)
Dear all,

One of the problems I see with scheduling feeds and making a goal that of
getting babies to sleep through the night early on, is that not only does it
limit breastfeeding to "nutrition-only" status, (and potentially limit the
amount of milk available to the nursling) but that it also potentially limits
the amount of immunological factors the baby receives through nursing.  We
know that a mother develops antibodies to --whatever-- when she is exposed to
them, either from the infant, or from another  source.  And that she
transfers those to the baby, thus protecting the baby from the illness.

I am trying to find some sort of documentation for my assumption that when
babies don't feel well or they have been exposed to a virus/bacteria/illness,
that they breastfeed more frequently in order to increase the amount of
physiologic protection to that illness they receive through the milk.  And if
they aren't allowed to breastfeed as often as they want during that time
(because of a misguided attempt to keep the baby on schedule), then the
natural protection is partially sabotaged.

I've been known to not phrase things so that people understand what I am
saying/asking, so I'll try to rephrase it to make more sense:

If an infant who is limited (by scheduling) to breastfeeding every 4 hours,
or 5 times/24 hours and is kept to that schedule regardless -- will that baby
benefit from, or receive as much immunological protection from the breastmilk
as a baby who is allowed to nurse ad lib?  Let's assume (for the sake of
argument) that he's getting approximately the same amount of food over the 24
hour period....in one case, he's getting a greater amount per feed, in the
other case, he's taking a smaller amount per feed (perhaps higher in fat,
however because feeds are closer together).

Does anyone know if this makes sense?  Is it documented anywhere?  Or is it
one of those things that no one knows?

Jan Barger, who is really tired of having to have "proof" for everything, but
would really like to have MORE reasons to get rid of the current "get my baby
on a schedule" craze.

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