FROM: Sturgess, Frances Coulter
TO:[log in to unmask]
SUBJECT: extended abm
DATE: 03-28-97   17:01 EST
PRIORITY:


RE: below--my error, thanks.  Probably the *older* recommendation was what I
was remembring.-

However, I brought up the extensions issue )*because* of the encouragement to
nurse for two years.  If it is better to nurse for two years,( and the abm
coompanies, as I said, are playing on this in producing toddler formula), why
(other than cost) are we urging the switch to cows milk?  We have a lot of
anemic kids in our county after they go off formula (we are iin the middle of
a huge campaign to correct this---with fortified foods and "whole" foods like
beans that are natrually higher in iron--we are *not* pushing ABM...)

Please refresh my memory --its been awhile--is the idea that at one the cows
milk is less of an assault on the gut (aside from being low in iron) and the
kid is eating a sufficient amount and variety of "table food" that special
formulas are not needed?

And the physical (as opposed to emotional, developmental etc) reason to
continue to breastfeed after one year of age is primariily to continue the
development of the immune system?  Obviously Abm does not duplicate that.  But
there may be other things it does "try" to duplicate that would be an
advantage to preserve past one year also--balance of minerals, etc.

The info I remember for feeding after one year relies heavily on the 16oz of
cows milk for protein, calories, and Calcium and other minerals and vitamins.
I have just been assuming that commercial stuff offers no advantage over cows
milk, but have not looked at the stuff to really analyze it.  Realize this is
sort of off topic of lactation but for teaching and advocacy i think we may
need to challenge more of the "feeding at one year" instructions which assume
*all* infants are as well or better off weaning/no bottles/go ahead and switch
to whole cows milk, its ok.

old message follows:
:    Tue, 25 Mar 1997 21:19:12 -0500
From:    Cindy Turner-Maffei <[log in to unmask]>
Subject: Re: milk for one-year olds

Frances wrote:
>the more I see on Lactnet, the more I am wondering whether the medical
>establishment is right in urging weaning to Cows Milk at one year for ABM
>babies..  (AAP still think it is OK at 6 mo),,###OOPS###

Here is the AAP's stance on whole milk during the first year, from the

"Where We Stand" section of their web page at
http://www.aap.org/advocacy/wwestand.htm

"Formula. *The Academy
recommends that whole cow's milk and low-iron formulas not be used during
the first year of life.*

I certainly agree that it would be lovely to see the recommendation
expanded to embrace breastfeeding beyond "the first 6 to 12 months."  (I do
hope this is part of that infamous new-and-improved AAP BF statement that
is coming soon, we hope.)

Was someone suggesting extending the recommendation of formula as a
breastmilk alternate of choice beyond the first year?  If so, I share
Frances' concerns about this: at well over $1,000 for formula annually,
that would be a severe strain on most families budgets.  What would be the
benefit this recommendation?