LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Sender:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Alicia Dermer <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 1 Feb 1996 00:09:24 -0500
In-Reply-To:
<[log in to unmask]> from "Marsha Walker, RN, IBCLC" at Jan 31, 96 09:22:12 am
Reply-To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (27 lines)
Hi, all:  I got to see the program.  It was a call-in show in which the
host interviewed Naomi Baumslag, Jan Richter and a director of WIC
programs whose name escapes me (the host went on to say that he had
invited representatives from the major abm manufacturers and none had
accepted).  The host had nothing but praise for breastfeeding (although
mainly couched in the usual terms of human milk vs. formula, no mention
of breastfeeding itself or its maternal health benefits) and the main
subject of discussion was why breastfeeding rates were so low despite
general knowledge of how good breastfeeding is.  The guests made some
good points (Dr. Baumslag and Ms. Richter got the better part of the
deal, since the host was very supportive and threw them good material to
respond to).  The WIC director was kept on the defensive as the $400
million spent on formula was compared to the $35 million spent on
breastfeeding promotion.  He did OK, but didn't mention that the
breastfeeding rates among WIC clients have had the most dramatic increase
of all sectors since the breastfeeding promotion was started.  The
callers were mostly positive about bf, and several related either
positive or negative experiences re bf promotion in their WIC agency.
Overall very positive, although the host kept saying that 53% of women
breastfeed in this country and failed to point out how much lower the
rates are even within 2 months, and he also kept using that pesky 5%
figure (his point being that if only 5% of mothers truly can't
breastfeed, but 47% aren't doing it, there's obviously a problem - can't
argue with that except that we all know that the true number who can't is
probably much less than 5% and the true number who don't is much higher
than 47%).  Alicia.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2