Okay, so if the difference in IQ was observed with the highest duration 
of bf'ing, so wouldn't that suggest that these are the kids most likely 
to have been exclusively bf as well? Babies weaned at 2 or 3 months 
usually have been having AIM for quite some time before weaning occurs.

  I am also curious about the IQ of the mother--I wonder how the 
relationship of the mother herself having been bf might play out here? 
Of course, there is also the issue that we have come to understand in 
recent years, that IQ as it has traditionally been measured is only one 
aspect of intellectual functioning. And, while teachers reporting on 
what they perceive as function of intelligence may not know which 
children were bf. they do tend to know something about the families. It 
has certainly been documented that a teacher's expectations of a 
child's ability can influence that child's performance. So, if the 
teacher knows the parents are well-educated (perceived as intelligent), 
would he assume the child is intelligent as well and report differently 
than he might for another child?

  One of the things that has always troubled me is the desire to tease 
out the relational aspect of the feeding equation as if it is a 
confounding factor--this is absurd--the fact that bf'ing positions the 
infant for normal psychological and emotional development is not a 
confounding factor by any means--it is part of the evidence that normal 
infant feeding is synergistic and mediating at all levels of infant 
development.

  Another thought, though--since it is a tenet of functional medicine 
that neurological vitality depends upon gut health, I am concerned that 
the risks of AF that have traditionally been minimized by feeding at 
the breast are creeping into the equation for bf babies. I am stunned 
by those who think that food allergies are present in a very small 
number of babies, and that that they tend to be outgrown during 
childhood--this is so far from reality. We in the US not only have the 
highest consumption of AIM, we also have the highest consumption of 
transfats, processed foods and other garbage packaged as food. When 
mothers grow their babies in utero on processed "foods", then bf while 
eating these same foods and are themselves living with severely 
compromised gut function, then their babies' health, including 
neurological function will be compromised. Breastfeeding cannot 
mitigate all of the damage of the SAD (standard American diet), nor IMO 
even come close. While AF will always be a far greater risk, if we 
really are concerned about infant health, we need to tackle this issue 
as well. Further, not only are infants "indirectly" exposed in these 
ways, but even mothers who bf today in the US tend to feed their 
children garbage as they grow older. It isn't only AF kids who are 
becoming obese and developing chronic diseases in early life. I still 
have the good fortune to find myself sitting watching my children in 
classes such as gymnastics and dance (I live in an upper middle class 
community where children are more likely to have been bf, at least for 
some time) and I am seeing a rapid rise in rates of obesity, and as I 
listen to conversations between parents, I hear such incredible 
ignorance about nutrition and can tell you that the common dinner 
solution for these families always on the run (so is mine, believe 
me!!) is a fast food restaurant. We know that what children eat has a 
huge impact on their neurological function, so how can we even pretend 
to be able to do any kind of useful evaluation?

Add into the equation that more and more babies are born into forced 
prematurity due to the new fad of induction at 37 weeks, more babies 
are born by cesarean section and most births in the west are highly 
medicalized, as is the post-partum period. Then we have the fact that 
so many mothers are taking antidepressent drugs and no matter how much 
we support bf'ing--the truth is we have no idea on earth what the risk 
is to the infant's brain. This is just as much of an unknown as feeding 
AIM. Then you have the kids who are themselves directly drugged for 
depression, ADD and so on. Remember, that so many of these folks could 
likely eliminate these drugs if their nutrition and activity levels 
were excellent. So, how do we legitimately evaluate the impact of AF on 
IQ in the context of these factors? I do not believe we can, at least 
not in the West.

 Jennifer Tow, IBCLC, CT, USA
 Intuitive Parenting Network LLC


________________________________________________________________________
Check out the new AOL.  Most comprehensive set of free safety and 
security tools, free access to millions of high-quality videos from 
across the web, free AOL Mail and more.

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

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