My mind has already started spinning. :-) I read the article back-to-back
with an article in the latest JHL, "Patient with Insufficient Glandular
Tissue Experiences Milk Supply Increase Attributed to Progesterone Treatment
for Luteal Phase Defect."

I read the Luteal Phase article first, and with that info in mind, the
Huggins article. In the first article, a mom had been diagnosed with
hypoplastic breasts by someone who should be considered very knowledgeable
in this area. If hypoplastic breasts are necessarily genetic, that seems to
imply a permanency of the condition. However, in the Luteal phase case, they
postulate that progesterone therapy for the pregnancy may have allowed
normal breast growth during a subsequent successful pregnancy, which then
implies that the lack of breast tissue development may be hormonally related
and not necessarily permanent.

I realize that there are probably many permutations of possible etiologies
for hypoplastic breasts and insufficient glandular tissue, but I am
intrigued by the possibility that perhaps some of the moms diagnosed as
insufficient tissue may actually not be in a permanent state as we may see
them. Perhaps this also explains why some of Kathleen's case mothers began
to produce increasing amounts of milk over time, whereas others did not.

Comments from others?

Lisa Marasco, BA, IBCLC

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