I am enjoying this thread.  Gee, it's amazing the differences in what people
think/tell moms!  Two things I'd like to add to what has already been said.
First, I have probably mentioned this before, so indulge me if you've heard
it, but I remember the Mexico City earthquake (like 15 or 20 years ago) and
the hospital that was leveled as a result.  They found 5 babies, if I am not
mistaken, who were buried for 11-13 days.  Now these were newborn babies
whose mothers did not survive and these babies' only physical sequelae to
being "starved" for almost 2 weeks was dehydration.  When they were
rehydrated, all of them showed NO LASTING EFFECT of this early deficit.  I
like to tell people that so they won't overreact to a baby who doesn't feed
well in the first day or two, not that I am advocating doing nothing, mind
you.  However, I think it is important to look at what we can do to help in
this situation (besides the obvious) and I tell parents that they can help
their baby by doing two things.  1) Don't make/let the baby cry as this
burns calories while the baby isn't taking in many; and 2) Don't let them
get too cold or hot as this also burns calories.  Now skin to skin works to
accomplish both these things nicely, so parents feel they are (and actually
are) helping their baby in what can feel like a helpless time!  This leads
to the second thing I wanted to say.  That is that at some point when babies
don't get what they need, they shut down, which is a protective mechanism to
conserve calories.  I often find it counter-productive to try to awaken a
really sleepy baby just because it's "time" to feed, when all they do is cry
(as though they are saying 'leave me alone') and go back to sleep when you
stop bothering them.  The result is we've burned more calories and no
feeding took place.  I prefer to look for an optimum feeding window, even
minor hunger cues, to make such an attempt and am careful not to push too
hard, if indeed I push at all, which I don't unless we are "under the gun"
to get the baby fed or else!  I've also read that babies burn ketones when
they are underfed and these have an antioxidant effect (I think that's what
it is, someone else care to elaborate?) and in any case, this is helpful to
the baby.  Sooo, the upshot of all this is that the baby does have
mechanisms to cope with inadequate intake for a period of time, as the
Mexico City babies did when the "experts" explained their remarkable
condition by saying that they didn't move or cry much during their ordeal
after the first day and of course, they were warm because it was Mexico
City.  Consequently, I don't jump the gun at supplementing babies unless
their really is an indication, though I also do not advocate waiting out
obvious latch/feeding problems, when intervention is necessary.  That old
"tincture of time" prescription is often what is most needed.

Marsha, who likes Jan's proposal for a study.  Unfortunately, we couldn't do
it at my hospital for the same reason!

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~Marsha Glass RN, BSN, IBCLC~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Mothers have as powerful an influence over the welfare of future generations
as all other earthly causes combined.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~John S. C. Abbot~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

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

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