I wrote: >>It is also risky. In this society, when mothers are so
preoccupied with
>>food and calories, 500 calories a day sounds huge. It could put women off.
>>
>>Also, what is the point of giving this info (I think everyone should have
>>info, but only if it is correct and helpful)? No one expects a mother to
>>actually count those calories in....eat according to your hunger is the
>>most we can say with any degree of authority, surely?
>>
>
Yael wrote: >The point of giving this info is that many mothers ask for it,
and there are plenty of mothers who are interested in making a conscious
yet safe effort to lose weight after giving birth.

That's fine. I meant, like you mean, that any info has to be based on good,
sound evidence, which we do not appear to have.

I do recall seeing a recent study where mothers who were very overweight
and bf were given a programme based on exercise  and dietary restriction,
and their babies were not seen to have their growth compromised in any way.


But that is not the same as a mother who is *not* very overweight going on
a diet or counting calories when bf. Weightwatchers used to allow extra for
mothers who were pregnant or bf, and I think sensible weight loss and
exercise when bf is probably fine - why not? But AFAIK, we can't say for
certain you need X calories extra a day  to feed...even 'about' X calories
extra a day. And if we don't know, we should say so.

Heather Welford Neil
NCT bfc Newcastle upon Tyne UK

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