Mime-Version: |
1.0 |
Sender: |
|
Subject: |
|
From: |
|
Date: |
Tue, 4 Apr 2000 19:50:47 +0100 |
In-Reply-To: |
<020c01bf9e50$c0e0e640$0bd808d5@yaelw> |
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="us-ascii" |
Reply-To: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
I wrote: >>It is also risky. In this society, when mothers are so
preoccupied with
>>food and calories, 500 calories a day sounds huge. It could put women off.
>>
>>Also, what is the point of giving this info (I think everyone should have
>>info, but only if it is correct and helpful)? No one expects a mother to
>>actually count those calories in....eat according to your hunger is the
>>most we can say with any degree of authority, surely?
>>
>
Yael wrote: >The point of giving this info is that many mothers ask for it,
and there are plenty of mothers who are interested in making a conscious
yet safe effort to lose weight after giving birth.
That's fine. I meant, like you mean, that any info has to be based on good,
sound evidence, which we do not appear to have.
I do recall seeing a recent study where mothers who were very overweight
and bf were given a programme based on exercise and dietary restriction,
and their babies were not seen to have their growth compromised in any way.
But that is not the same as a mother who is *not* very overweight going on
a diet or counting calories when bf. Weightwatchers used to allow extra for
mothers who were pregnant or bf, and I think sensible weight loss and
exercise when bf is probably fine - why not? But AFAIK, we can't say for
certain you need X calories extra a day to feed...even 'about' X calories
extra a day. And if we don't know, we should say so.
Heather Welford Neil
NCT bfc Newcastle upon Tyne UK
***********************************************
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
|
|
|