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:
"Lisa Marasco, IBCLC" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Mon, 18 Sep 1995 09:42:12 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (21 lines)
Joy-
Just one comment about the "proven unusefulness" of breast shells. I was
glad to see that you noted that this study was done in England. From what
I have seen, English breast shells have larger openings in the back than
the ones that we typically use for this problem in the U.S. Indeed, M----
makes two types, one for "sore" nipples with a wide hole, and one for
"inverted" nipples with a small hole. If the study used only the wider
opening shells, then I can understand the results. However, I would like
to know if they tested those like the M--- that were specifically made
for inverted nipples. I think that this hole size can make a big
difference. Do you know the specifics to this study that may answer my
questions as to its validity?
TIA,
Lisa

******************************************************************************
Lisa A. Marasco, IBCLC                                /  [log in to unmask]
International Board Certified Lactation Consultant    /  [log in to unmask]

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2