Dear (very) wise ones,

Tonight I'm looking up the Dutch research on PCB's / dioxins exposure - pre
en postnatal. Something struck me quite hard and that was that in this
research it was found that those 'breast' baby's (n=200) tested at 2 weeks
had a lower optimal (but not abnormal) neurological score and a lower muscle
tone (but not abnormal) than the ABM baby's (n=200).
Now my question, which is only based on pure optimism and of course crystal
clear bias for breastfeeding:
Is it possible that breast baby's do actually have lower muscle tone and
score slightly less on the neurological tests at 2 weeks, because they are
breastfed and thus (in theorie anyway) happy, relaxed, normal baby's?
 I guess that all the research on what is 'normal' neurologically and what
is normal muscle tone has been done on mainly mixed breast / ABM baby's? Has
anyone ever done any research to see if their is inherently a difference
between breast and AMB baby's on these tests at 2 weeks?

I hope that you get my drift. My question is thus do breast baby's
inherently display different neurological behaviour and muscle tone than ABM
baby's? Breast is normal argument.

Measurements on neonatal neurological development is way out of my league
(at the moment ;-) - so wondering if anyone can feed me some info.

thanks,

Sara Bernard
The Netherlands.

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

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