LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

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

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Brandy Hansen <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 10 Jun 2013 09:51:24 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (67 lines)
I heard the following story on NPR a few weeks ago...

http://www.npr.org/blogs/health/2013/04/25/178407883/gut-bacterias-belch-may-play-a-role-in-heart-disease

It just got me thinking...  if gut health and heart health could be this
closely related, what's the effect of changing the body's natural ecosystem
of the gut with artificial feeding?  What could a dosturbance in
hormone/microbe balance, caused by a lack of human milk, do to the risk for
heart disease and other cardiovascular/organ issues?  I would be interested
in seeing how this is related to heart disease/hypertension risk in women
who were nursed exclusively, partially, or not at all. A couple of
interesting thoughts for anyone interested in researching the
relationships. If a protective effect via gut health were linked to
breastfeeding duration/exclusivity, one could definitely make a case for
why 'just a little bit' of artificial milk would damage at least one of the
body's systems.

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

Also, on a slightly related note, I am confused by the tone of disbelief
that many people have regarding the potential and real harms of artificial
infant feeding here and out in the wide, wide world.  I talked to my
brother about this a few weeks ago, and he simply said flat out "I just
don't believe that it can be that harmful, because if it were, they
wouldn't have it out on the market."  I sat back and thought... if a little
too much or too little of a hormone can throw a body into chaos (thinking
diabetes and thyroid issues, just for starters), why is it so hard to
believe that an artificial substance fed to a human being during the most
dynamic and incredible period of growth could throw things off?  What is so
far-fetched about that?  Why do we assume that man-made substances somehow
have triumphed over nature?  Is it simply because babies aren't dying in
droves in the arms of their mothers in the US and we don't 'see' the
effects except in statistics?

Personally, I think it's a defensive mechanism to avoid internal or
external judgment of our action/inaction.  Not wanting to *admit* causing
harm is not the same thing as *not* causing harm.  I guess it has to do
with willingness to change?  If we acknowledge that something we have used
or put into our bodies (or the bodies of our children) could be damaging or
at least altering in a way that causes increased health risks, we'll plead
ignorance or just plain disbelief until we're ready to accept
responsibility and challenge the practice or system that facilitates such
damage.

That's my two cents, based on personal and professional experience with
people and their reactions to changing health, nutrition, and child-rearing
practices.  I know it doesn't always apply, but it's just a thought that's
been rolling around in the ol' noggin lately...


Brandy J. Hansen, IBCLC
The Mobile LC
309-319-6619
[log in to unmask]
http://facebook.com/mobilelactation

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome

ATOM RSS1 RSS2