GEOff, sorry for my typo in previous post.

What I'm still not seeing from your responses is info as to when these "silent aspirations" occurred.  If they're found on autopsies in teenagers -- that gives them a long time in which to have aspirated a variety of substances.

Just from your recent post, it looks like they were all identified as having some
kind of CP problems.      As you ask, which came first.  What about 
autopsies on teenagers with no hx of CP problems, do any percentage of 
them  show the damage you talk about?

(Yours)  The research that does exist relates to long term effects of silent 
aspiration in adolescent, chronic silent aspirators who presented with 
varying histories of cardiorespiratory problems.  One issue raised was 
what came first, "the chicken or the egg" - chronic silent aspiration or 
chronic CP issues. 

 (Yours)However if you leave a bottle of EBM in a 98.5 environment, does it not colonize?  

       (Mine re above)  I think you are equating non-equivalents.  How long would you have to leave a bottle of EBM at 98.5 before it colonizes?  And how long does aspirate of human milk remain unabsorbed in the lung?  I am referring to aspirate of human milk as it is being swallowed, as opposed to as it is being regurgitated, since the regurgitate also has other ingredients in it. 

(Yours)  I wonder what would have happened had Einstein or Oppenheimer 
said, "Gee, Let's just split this atom and see what happens?"

        (Mine)  But isn't that essentially what they did at first, long before the bombs grew out of their researches?

(Yours quoting mine) I think most of the literature related to aspiration, that you are reading, has to come from babies who were bottlefed formula, since that is how the majority

(Yours) Recheck your resources, you'll find that to be inaccurate.

        (Mine)  I am asking about your resources.  Not knowing the resources you quote, I am asking whether they divide breastfed, bottle fed, human milk fed or ABM fed.


   (Yours) A man comes upon a thousand dollars. He wants to surprise his wife with the money, so he goes to the river, splits the money into ten jars and floats them downstream.  Problem is the river divides before it gets to 
his house.  How many jars does he average if he were to repeat this 
process 10 times?

(Mine) Having been a whitewater kayaker for a number of years, I need to ask these questions:  How wide is the river? Where does he put in his jars of money--which bank or the center?  Which fork does he live on, the one of higher flow or lower flow?  How far from the fork is his put in.  How far from the fork is his house?  How many areas are there where the bottles might get sucked into spaces behind rocks midstream, and go no further?
I have kayaked waters that had a few areas beyond my scope.  I did those in inflatable river kayaks (less tippy, but also slower to respond to manipulation) -- when a passage was truly hairy (for me that meant class three and a half) I could lie flat in the kayak.  The natural pillows around the rocks caused the kayak to take the route of the major force of water, and I would get through to the safer slow waters beyond without capsizing.
If I took a hard kayak (much more maneuverable, but much more tippy)
 invariably I would do that stretch of water upside down, again being pushed by the natural flow along the major force of water.  I saw a lot of rivers upside down in my early kayaking days. 

But I digress.  My point is that there are variables upon variables in your hypothetical situation, and I am not a good enough mathematician/ theoretician to work your problem.  And my thinking (with tongue in cheek) is that unless his wife has a natural habit of going after jars in the river, or  unless they have a bay into which most flotsam naturally flows, she will not get any of them.

And we do not just go ahead and pour milk into cupfeeding babies --  in the first place, we do not pour it at all.  And we do various tests first to make sure other mechanisms are working well enought that the baby may be successful.

You state "Quite frankly my only *negative* reply was from you." I didn't think my reply was negative.  I am trying to learn about areas in which my knowledge is short, and your experiences and research come from a different perspective than my own.  I am asking the same questions I would ask if your information appeared in the Journal of Human Lactation, or in a nurse/midwives journal, or in a  maternal/child journal.  What were the populations studied, what where the variables.  These affect my use of the results.

(Yours) Service ace, 15-love. Or something to that effect.

(Mine)  Before back and neck injuries interrupted my game, I was an avid tennis player.  But the game I loved best was not for points, but to establish long volleys between equals, getting a good workout.  That is also how I would prefer to regard this thread between you and me and the rest of lactnet.  We are all here to share, learn and teach.


Sincerely, Chanita
In San Francisco, where it is too hot to do anything but lie with icecubes in the shadiest, breeziest areas of my house and yard.