These are thoughts I had on reading the article at
http://www.rps.psu.edu/probing/breastfeeding.html

First, let me say I bet that the journalist asked John Messmer 'so what's
wrong with formula' and he might have said 'nothing, really', or something
like that.  Or, the journalist may have simply put those words in Messmer's
mouth in writing the article.  All the direct quotes from Messmer in the
article make me wonder whether he would have made such a statement at all.

It occurs to me that it would be more apropos to inform people about the
purpose of breastfeeding, rather than advantages of it, or dangers of other
things.  We know why umbilical cords exist before birth, we know why there
are placentas, and we used to know that pregnancies needed to last as long
as they do so that the offspring could get everything it needed for a normal
start in life.  (I realize that the traditional forty plus week pregnancy
has been officially shortened to just over thirty-six in the US, but in some
places we still believe in supporting the spontaneous onset of labor as a
strategy for minimizing neonatal morbidity and mortality.)

Breastfeeding is necessary for the continued normal development of the human
child after birth.  As we know, humans are born less mature than the young
of every other species, because of our anatomy which would preclude giving
birth if we were to delay it until such time as the infant could be left on
its own to forage for food and keep itself warm and safe.  Our brains need
to continue growing and developing long after birth, and that is why
breastfeeding exists, to provide the correct mix of nutrients for that
process and to ensure that the other circumstances needed for normal
development will be easy to achieve.  Human babies are programmed to take in
nutrients and immune support while being held in the arms of the nurturer,
and later while facing the nurturer, in close bodily contact.  This
closeness is also an essential need for the normal development of the
cerebral cortex.  In addition, the human infant is born with a highly
immature immune system, and breastfeeding is a necessary part of its normal
maturation process, continuing to transmit immune support directly and
effectively from the mother long after the umbilical cord is divided, which
puts an end to the possibility of IV transmission of antibodies from mother
to child.  

When you think about it, it's pretty sick that any society is allowed to
operate as though these things don't matter enough to make sure all mothers
and babies have the opportunity to breastfeed, with help available to deal
with problems that may arise, and with complete, implicit acceptance that
This Is The Way It Is.  The abovementioned article doesn't mention the lack
of paid maternity leave for all mothers, nor the lack of protective
legislation for breastfeeding mothers in the workplace, as obstacles to
normal duration of breastfeeding.

I write this, well aware that there are babies who are unable to breastfeed,
and naturally it is incumbent upon us to give support for their mothers to
feed them breastmilk to the greatest extent possible, in ways that most
closely approximate the conditions of the baby at the breast.  But we need
words that really assume normalcy of the whole process, and not the
minimalistic view that acknowledges the so-called superiority of human milk
over all other milks for human babies.

Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
Mail all commands to [log in to unmask]
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or [log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet or ([log in to unmask])
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]