Michel Odent was the first one to really point out that homebirthed babies
did not seem to experience the weight loss that is assumed to be normal in
hospitals.  He attributed it to the increased levels of endogenous oxytocin
in women giving birth undisturbedly, I think.  Also, the uninterrupted
contact between mother and baby, with much more frequent feeds yielding
higher volumes as early as the first day of life, would make a difference.

In my limited experience with babies born at home, only about 5 per cent of
them have had a weight loss of more than 5 per cent of birth weight by the
third day.  We have similar results in our hospital when breastfeeding gets
off to a good start, with frequent, effective feeds early on.  We discharge
mothers and babies within 72 hours if all is well, and most of them are
within 6 or 7 per cent of birthweight at that time.  Observations of feeds,
stools, and mother's breasts supports the assumption that milk is coming in
early and well in these cases.

We can accept a 10 per cent weight loss without getting panicked as long as
we know why it is that great - delayed first feed due to baby's lack of
interest being the main reason.  That is not the same as saying 'a 10 per
cent loss is NORMAL'.  It is not cause for alarm in itself, but it needs to
be watched.

As far as I know, speculations that maternal IV fluids are causing
artificially high birth weights in the babies are no more than that -
speculations.  Babies are normally full of fluid at birth; it could be meant
to tide them over while they get the milk supply going.

Another factor at work in baby-friendly hospitals is that the baby will not
have been weighed before it has had uninterrupted skin contact with mother
for at least half an hour.  In Norway it is often a couple of hours before
the baby is weighed, and they have often passed large amounts of meconium,
making for an artificially low 'birth' weight, and laying the foundation for
a smaller drop over the next 2-3 days.

The article referred to in previous posts was based on middle-aged adults
who were artificially fed infants and the risk of overweight increased
significantly for every 100 grams of additional weight gain in the first
week of life.  It is vital to remind everyone who doesn't already know, that
what happens when you feed mammals the milk of another species, can not give
you any information about what happens when they are fed appropriately.
Some babies seem to want to be round, and some want to be long.  Some grow
fast and some grow slow.  As long as they are happy and healthy and GROWING,
my hunch is that we shouldn't mess with them.  More and more studies are
being published about the subtle and not-so-subtle negative effects of
tampering with infant growth; within ten years I bet we will have different
policies on growth deviations.

On a related topic, you can all look forward to hearing more about real
kangaroo care, because they are doing it in Uppsala, Sweden now.  Babies on
mother's body 24/7, or on father's if mother is temporarily unavailable.  I
was fortunate enough to hear Kerstin Hedberg Nyqvist speak in Stockholm on
Friday, about this project.  The photos were amazing.  They have discharged
babies at gestational age 34 weeks, fully breastfed.  That is feeding at the
breast!  

Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

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