Karen, did your search reveal where the 1958 single study was done?

The key point to the study was that light made a difference.  I suppose many
latched on to the sunlight tx as "natural" versus the bili lights as "un
natural".

They missed the important point that in 1958 US BF customs were: nurse
limited times (3,5,7, minutes)  on one side at a feeding q. 4 hours, f/u
with x oz sterile H2O.  So starvation was probably a significant contributor
to jaundice. Early studies on hyperbili are certainly skewed by the feeding
regime.  Even today the studies on hyperbili and BF/bot fdg are skewed by
limitation of access to breast (mothers and babies are NOT together in an
umlimited fashion) .

And I know the East coast US is way behind in this.  In New Jersey we have
state regulations that require x number of square feet in a nursery per
postpartum bed and by hook or by crook if we have a fabulous nursery we WILL
use it!

The whole situation of hyperbili is complex, with so  many individual
factors that can impact a bili (ethnicity, sex, meds used in labor, time to
first feed, (which effects) time to first stool, what is fed, sepsis, etc.)

The baseline is that just using sun light is not an effective tx for
physiologic jaundice.  You need to keep all the factors in mind and monitor
the bili. Do you get the point I'm making that physiologic jaundice is
different in different babies in different places?  Sorry to ramble, Pat in
SNJ

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

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