LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 28 Sep 2003 08:41:36 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (50 lines)
As many of us in the US are dealing with the bad press and fallout from the
latest round of reports regarding "toxic breastmilk," I had wanted to have
something readily available for parents and the press. Both La Leche League and
ILCA have position papers and statements on environmental contaminants in breast
milk that I have downloaded and distributed. These media reports have
accomplished exactly what environmental groups wish to accomplish, which is attract
the attention of policy makers, legislators, and regulators. There is no doubt
that our environment needs to be both cleaned up and protected from further
assaults by chemical pollutants. However, there are other ways to monitor these
chemicals in the environment besides the use of breast milk. No one pays much
attention the body burdens of 56 year old women or 45 year old men, but they
do listen when it comes to "harming" babies. Why can't other body fluids or
materials be used to monitor these chemicals in the environment? The excuse is
usually that it is too invasive or expensive. It also does not lend itself to be
sensationalized by the media nor to good pressuring tactics.

Deterring women from breastfeeding is also expensive, especially to the
health of their infants. Mothers are already worried about not giving their babies
breast milk because it "does not have enough vitamin D, because formula has
the same fats as breast milk," etc. Attacking formula does not divert attention
from the presence of these chemicals in breast milk. As usual we find
ourselves defending breastfeeding and putting out fires. The major effect these
chemicals have on an infant is in utero. The provision of breast milk has an
offsetting effect or mending qualities. How many of us have been asked to recruit
lactating mothers to provide their milk for testing?

Describing all of the toxic contaminants in breast milk and then saying that
mothers should still breastfeed is ludicrous. The damage has already been
done, the doubts placed, and the reaction like the one I heard from a new mother
the other day has happened: "I am going to supplement with formula so my baby
does not get as much of the chemicals." I have a hard time figuring out why
breast milk is the only way to track chemical contamination, why health care
providers have allowed this, and how mothers are supposed to breastfeed in light
of yet another brick thrown at breastfeeding.

Marsha Walker, RN, IBCLC
Weston, MA

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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2