TO: Newsweek editors
FROM: Kathleen G. Auerbach, PhD, IBCLC
             6145 N. Beulah Avenue
            Ferndale, WA 98248
           (360) 384-1755)

Thank you for a (mostly) enlightening and well-written collection of pieces.

Several statements, however, gave me pause and prompt me to ask if a fact
checker was employed when this special issue was put together.

Examples follow.

(p.32- "Rooting for Intelligence" sidebar) "It' potent enough to keep
babies alive for the first 16 weeks of life."  Really? Then what happens?
The majority of infants breastfed prior to the advent of
commercially-produced formulas did not die thereafter when breastfed.  They
continued to grow and thrive through the entire breastfeeding course, which
often extended many years.  Yes, solids may have been added, but rarely as
early as 4 months of age, when very few babies have teeth!

(p.32 - same sidebar as above) "may act as a natural (though imperfect)
contraceptive."  What do you mean by imperfect?  Breastfeeding has served
to protect against more pregnancies than all the other chemical/barrier
methods put together! A bit more explanation here would have been helpful
to your readers.

(p. 32 - same sidebar as above) I found it most interesting that you quoted
the medical director of a commercial baby milk manufacturer.  How
unfortunate that he did not mention that the companies considering adding a
polyunsaturated fat have yet to inform the public whether such an
addition--like many other elements in their concoctions--are bioavailable
to the baby being given it. There is more to the picture than simply
putting something in bovine/vegetable-based fluids to make it appear to be
closer to human milk.  The big issue is whether the baby is able to use the
element(s) in question which are given him/her in such a medium.

p. 58 - 1 mo old - "most babies drink thre eto four ounces of milk per
feeding."  How do you know this if referring to a breastfeeding baby?
Mothers' breasts do not include calibration lines and they would be
meaningless in any case insofar as the breast is both a manufacturing site
and a delivery system which is never empty like a glass or plastic bottle.

p. 58 - 4 mo old - "some babies may begin eating puréed solids like
cereals." Only if the parent has been told to give it.  Most babies will
quite happily cotninue at the breast with no real interest in other foods
until he/she can grab for them or dive into parental plates.  There is
nothing sacred about  puréed foods (except that they cost more than those
adults eat and must be purchased from a company that makes money doing what
a fork will easily accomplish).

p. 58 - 5 mo old - "Some babies may be ready for weaning."  From what? The
bottle?  The breast? To what? a cup perhaps?  How does the baby indicate
this, when anthropological evidence suggests that the natural age of
weaning is closer to 5 years than 5 months?!

p. 58 - 6 mo old - "may be down to three meals a day plus nutritious
snacks."  Of what kind? Who determines that baby only eats three times/day?
Most breastfeeding babies are still nursing far more often than that with
or without "nutritious snacks" or solids.  This statement misleads parents
into thinking that 6 mo old babies can be placed on a feeding schedule much
closer to the adult variety than is appropriate for optimal growth.

p. 59 - 10 mo old - "Most babies this age need between 750 and 900 calories
a day, more than half from breast milk or formula."  How do you determine
what the baby gets from the breast when its caloric load varies from
beginning to end of the feed, from one feed to the next, and from one time
to the next throughout the day or evening?  Formula is a concoction based
on an AVERAGE for the 1- mo old baby.  It never changes (20 cal/oz).  Human
milk changes as the baby changes and thus more closely-and for a far longer
time-meets the baby's needs.  Implying that breast milk and formula are the
same (equivalent) by mentioning both in the same sentence is misleading.

p. 59 - 14 mo old - "Needs about 1,000 calories a day to sustain proper
growth. May drink less milk, but solid foods cover nutritional needs."  Do
they?  Doesn't this depend on what kind of solids are offered? Are you
referring to young children already weaned from the breast here? No mention
is made of breastfeeding past the first year anniversary--which many babies
do.

Finally, I noted that you mentioned the top 10 health worries of parents,
but failed to point out that in several cases, breastfeeding substantially
reduces the likelihood of these occurring and, if they do occur, their much
reduced severity in the breastfeeding infant.  Specifically, these include
ear infections, fevers, dehydration, diarrhea, and skin infections.
Failure to mention this implies that there is nothing a conscientious
mother might choose to do to reduce the likelihood that her child(ren) will
suffer from these problems.

Thank you for publishing this special issue.  In most cases, the
information it provided will be helpful to new and more experienced parents
as they seek to understand how their child ticks and what they can do to
nurture their young as best they can.



     mailto:[log in to unmask]

"We are all faced with a series of great opportunities brilliantly
disguised as impossible situations."
Kathleen G. Auerbach,PhD, IBCLC (Ferndale, WA USA) [log in to unmask]
WEB PAGE: http://www.telcomplus.com/~kga/lactation.html
LACTNET archives http://library.ummed.edu/lsv/archives/lactnet.html