On 21 Sep 2002 at 18:16, COUNTRY.KIDS wrote:

> Apparantly the length of a breastfeeding Mum on the
> study was classes as 4 weeks or more. When questioned weather this is
> long enough he said that there were a few Mothers who exclusively fed
> for longer but the group was to small to be seen as enough to make a
> scientific conclusion. This study is a joke!!  4 weeks is really not
> long enough to base such a important study on.

And shall I give you a nice quote that disqualifies the total study?

***quote***
Although many newborns who were breastfed received a
nightly formula feed while in hospital to allow the mother
to sleep, most had hospital stays of only 3–4 days. Thus,
the extent of other feeding, if only in that period, was
minor. Those infants not breastfed generally received
formula feeding prepared from dried cow’s milk powder.
had a bronchodilator response test only.
***unquote***
So the majority of the 'breastfed' population was given formula on day 1 - 4.
Why would anyone who knows anything about allergies and baby's gut say that exposure so close
at birth is not important? Don't we all know 1 exposure can lead to allergy or intolerance?

also:

***quote***
Initiation and duration of breastfeeding were
documented independently by interviewers who assessed
the cohort at age 3 years.
...
Duration of breastfeeding and
age at introduction of cow’s milk and other foods to the
infant’s diet were verified at age 3 years from records
maintained through the New Zealand Plunket Nurse
programme, in which newborns and infants were assessed
through regular home and clinic visits, weekly at first then
less frequently, until children were aged 2–3 years.
***unquote***
I would think this is quite a long  time after most of the children were weaned off the breast, even
with the double checking in the Nurses archives.

***quote***
Of 1037 children in the longitudinal study, 463 (45%)
were not breastfed. In 70 (7%) children, breastfeeding
was attempted but was discontinued before the child was
4 weeks old. Preliminary analyses showed that these
70 children had outcomes much the same as those who
were not breastfed, and quite different to those breastfed
for 4 weeks or longer. These 70 children were therefore
included in the non-breastfed group, making a total of
533 children (51%).
***unquote***

So what are they testing. Breastfed or never breastfed at first, but when babies who received 'some'
mothers milk had the same (better) outcome than nursing babies, they were switched to the other
group to make the difference between  the 'any breastmilk ' and 'no breastmilk' groups larger? If
they want to make such a division, make 'any formula' and 'no formula' groups, that would be much
more honest to mothers milk.



---
Heleen Hayes
Je kunt vanaf nu de borstvoedingsagenda 2003 bestellen
Informatie vind je op http://www.xs4all.nl/~hhayes/agenda
***Nu met voorbeeldpagina***

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

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(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html