I haven't worked w/any HIV babies, but that DRs advise sounds strange.  I always
thought it was the virus that caused the infection and the antibodies were the
body's defenses against the virus.  I have never heard of antibodies causing
infection.  It was also my understanding from my readings that official
guidelines are to recommend no BF because there is a 'safe' alternative in the
USA & other 1st World countries.  However, it is also my understanding that of
ABM-fed babies who  seroconvert, do so on average around 9 mos of age, and of BF
babies who seroconvert, do so on average around 18 mos of age.  It would seem
that the antiviral factors in fresh HM help fight the HIV virus.  Those who
don't seroconvert were probably carrying mom's antibodies.  This idea of being
'clear' and having it show up again later is new to me.  Can someone 'splain it
to me and straighten out my misunderstandings?
Re: Long Term nursing:  A mom consulted me to assistance in sticking to her own
wishes to continue nursing her year old boy.  They were a USAF family.  Dad was
an enlisted man and the Ped was a Major.  Medical 'advice' was actually a
medical 'order', at least in this situation.  When mom balked at weaning, they
did an end run around her and harassed him thru his C.O.  Then dad started
pressuring mom to at least begin weaning, if only to make life easier for him in
this Unit.  It seems the Major doctor was implying this continued BF of a boy
baby would affect his masculinity.  The military has an 'attitude' about
masculinity.   :-/   They started to tell people the boy was weaning, and BF
went 'in the closet'.  It got the USAF Brass out of their private lives for a
while.  :-]   (military smile)
It's experiences like this that help me understand why we always lived off-base
when I was growing up (Navy family).
Phyllis Adamson, IBCLC