Instead of using BM, in writing, I use EBM.   And in charting in hospital, I write ABM if discussing formula generically.  If I am talking about a particular feeding, I use Enf or Sim to also indicate which formula was used - the protocol in my hospital.  Too many people think that "milk" means the white stuff that comes from a cow, so I always refer to "mothers' milk" or "your milk" when speaking of that which comes from human breasts, and formula or "that other stuff" when talking about any replacements.

I suppose, if I could reorganize the world in how to refer to all of this, I would call it MM, EMM and AM -- mother's milk, expressed MM and artificial milk.

Sincerely,  Chanita, San Francisco

----------
From:   Barbara Wilson-Clay,BSE,IBCLC[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
Sent:   Monday, October 13, 1997 7:15 AM
Subject:        abbreviation for human milk

I appreciate attempts to standardize vocabulary so we all know what we are
talking about.  The establishment of a specialized nomenclature is always
important in any branch of science.  But as Diane Weissinger has so
eloquently pointed out to us in print and here on Lactnet:  HOW we say it
matters!  Consequently, can I just say once more that to use the
abbreviation "BM" for human milk seems unwise.  Given the tendency
breastfeeding already seems to have to stir unconscious taboos about
excretory functions, calling our milk after the existing abbreviation for
"bowel movement" seems unfortunate to say the least.

I vote for the 'keep it simple' approach.  I call what mothers make: "milk,"
and what comes out of a can: "formula."  The one is quite clearly natural,
the other (by definition, inference and custom) is artificial.  Everyone
understands exactly what you mean, and it isnt a new off-putting jargon that
has to be constantly defined to the uninitiated (which seems insulting to me.)
Barbara

Barbara Wilson-Clay, BS, IBCLC
Private Practice, Austin, Texas
Owner, Lactnews On-Line Conference Page
http://moontower.com/bwc/lactnews.html