Rachel makes some good points about the study purportedly ahowing
that early bottles do not impact breastfeeding longevity:
"Since as Heather W. Neil pointed out, this study is contradictory
to many,
many other studies into the same topic, it should be carefully
examined to
try to find out WHY."
It is so important to read an entire paper, not just the abstract
and conclusion (although those can give you an idea of whether it is
something you'd be interested in reading in more detail.)  And a
paper doesn't give the whole picture of a study-just what the
researchers (and quite possibly those funding the research) think
you should know!  As so many previous postings have shown, any
outcome is highly dependent on how the study was constructed
(definitions of "breastfed" being just one factor).
I'm sure that no matter what your preconceived idea is, you can find
a "study" somewhere that appears to support your view.  This seems
to be the case in the incident reported where the nurses were firmly
entrenched in the "necessity" and "harmlessness" of using bottles
with babies who were breastfeeding (or supposed to be
breastfeeding).  They zeroed in on a study that seemed to validate
their dpreconceived ideas while being blind to the ones that did not
support their view.
We as LCs have to be careful not to fall into the same trap. While
we would probably all (or certainly a great majority) look for
faults in a study claiming to show no significant difference in
health between breastfed and formula fed infants, how do we respond
to studies that challenge some of our own ingrained ideas?  Among
these might be: Are breast shells of any use in dealing with flat or
inverted nipples?  What impact do nipple shields have on
breastfeeding outcomes?  Are there or are there not "lactiferous
sinuses"?  Is it safe to breastfeed in ____________ situation?
So studies (or evidence basis for interventions) play an important
role in our function as professionals, but they must be considered
carefully.  While a proponderance of studies making the same point
with different approaches is most likely solid evidence, individual
studies need to be looked at as one piece of evidence, not total
proof.  They are in effect a snapshot, not a full movie (or these
days, video) of an entire situation.  Something to carefully
consider and take into account in our decisions, but at the same
time, not entirely discarding experience and observation by
ourselves and especially respected colleagues just because it may
not agree with an individual study, no matter how well constructed.

Winnie

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

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