Hi all,

Had a thought about thumbs as I was "thumbing" through the posts.... :)
 Could it be possible that thumb sucking is NOT related to a specific need
(i.e. sucking not being met appropriately at the breast -- after all, not all
bo fed babies suck their thumbs or a pacifier -- ), but is simply habit?  For
some kids, it feels good -- just like twisting and rubbing hair, or any other
habit that kids/people get into.  I can see in some cases why thumb sucking
may meet a need that hasn't been met by the mom, but in many cases, just as
you all have described, as far as mom knows, all needs have been met at the
breast and baby/child still sucks the thumb.  I had two pacifier babies
(shame on me -- my addiction, not theirs), and one that had neither blankie,
nor thumb, nor pacifier.  But he now twists his hair, and it is driving me
nuts!  (I think it is typical of 11 year olds -- I remember doing it myself
and driving my mom nuts, but I do have a vision of him as a 35 year old
corporate executive in a heavy duty financial negotiation twisting that
little piece at the back of his neck.)

OUr library doesn't have Bo feeding (I REFUSE to make it all one word....have
been trying too long to get Breastfeeding all one word) without Guilt either.
 $15?  Not sure I want to shell out that kind of money.....even if I do spell
the word the way the author wrote it and find it at B&N.

Finally got around to reading Pediatrics (Nov. 95) yesterday, and there were
a couple of interesting articles you all might want to get your hands on:

"A pacifier increases the risk of recurrent acute Otitis Media in Children in
Day Care Centers."  Recommendation that pacifiers be limited to kids under
age 10 months when not so susceptible ot AOM.  Interesting thoughts....

"Increased incidence of severe BF Malnutrition and Hypernatremia in a Metro
ARea"  I'd like to respectfully request that we do NOT refer to it as BF
malnutrition or dehydration.  It is LACK-of-BF that causes the problem.  If
these babies were bf, it wouldn't have happened.  Reports of 5 case studies
in 5 months.  Would LOVE to have a birth history on the moms.  All they
reported was vag/C-Section.  Then a great commentary from Ruth Lawrence
regarding same article -- essentially saying that it was never proven that
the mode of feeding was the problem, especially with the ones that had the
leg amputation or the strokes.  All agreeing that better followup is
necessary.  If mom & baby aren't bf well (how do we define that?  Good,
nutritive suck, baby latching on readily, mom at least relatively comfortable
with feeds) at hospital discharge, why aren't we noting this as a risk factor
and doing something about it routinely????

Also, same journal, a report on human milk, BF and Transmission of HIV in the
US from the Committee on Pediatric Aids.  This is the piece I wanted to quote
as a followup to all the discussion on gloving (it is not the end all and be
all, but I did want to point out what they said) when handling mom's breast &
babies, etc.

"Breast milk is not included in the OSHA standards definition of "other
potentially infectious materials."  Although human milk has been implicated
in perinatal transmission of HIV and the hepatitis B surface antigen has been
found in the milk of mothers infected with HBV, contact with breast milk does
not constitute occupational exposure as defined by the OSHA
standards......Gloves are not recommended for the routine handling of
expressed human milk; but should be worn by health care workers in situation
where exposures to breast milk  might be frequent or prolonged, for example,
in milk banking."  Pediatrics, Nov. 1995, p. 977-978.

I think that's it.  Have a great day, everyone!

Jan B.  Cold here in Wheaton, IL.