> Since it was October (Br CA Awareness Month) they had a lot of materials
on
> display re breast CA.  I mentioned that I didn't see anything on the list
> about bf to reduce risk.  The woman rolled her eyes and said "That's
because
> you have to bf for at least 6 mos to reduce the risk and nobody is going
to
> bf that long!"

Oh, Puh-leez!  :-(  6 months sure isn't THAT difficult, is it?  And you
gotta wonder how many more moms WOULD breastfeed for 6 months if they had
this kind of information!  Isn't it 6 cummulative, not consecutive, months
so that a mother who breastfed 2 children for 3 months each would have
reduced her risk (rather than breastfeeding 1 child for 6 months)?  Am I
wrong on this?  That would be a lot "easier" for this lady who thinks no one
breastfeeds for 6 months.

~ Heidi
1st child bf 6 months (bad advice > bad management > damaged milk supply)
2nd for 15 month
3rd for 33 months
4th for 36 months
5th for 22 months and still going!
*I guess I'm nobody!  <bg>

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