>
>And just to really throw the cat amongst the pigeons - energy intake (in
>breastmilk) has not been shown to be correlated to infant growth.
>"growth is not related to either concentration or amount of fat, protein or
>energy":  Mitoulas et al (in press) British Journal of Nutrition. Leon
>(Mitoulas) found that infant growth was only correlated to volume intake.
>This in fact supports much earlier research (Butte et al. 1984) "the amount
>of milk, and not the concentration of its constituents exerted the greatest
>impact on growth".


You know, this is just not making sense.  Is it me?

Growth *only* being correlated to volume?


The only way this could be tested for would be to feed the babies in
the study on expressed breastmilk only, which had previously been
tested for fat, protein or energy (what does he mean by energy?
That's not a nutrient...it's a measure of (usually) fats and sugars)
and to continue doing this for several weeks.

Did they really do that?

Or did they take a sample of expressed breastmilk, and work out from
that how much the baby was getting in a day?

Curious....

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