RE: What is WIC.
I work for a WIC Program. The acronym is Women, Infants and
Children. This is a branch of the United States Department of Agriculture.
It is a federally funded supplemental food program. They give vouchers for
free formula to low to moderate income families with infants, and vouchers
for free food for families with children up to five yrs of age. Also
pregnant women are enrolled on the program and receive vouchers for food
through their prenatal period, they continue with the regular food vouchers
for the women who choose to breastfeed.
WIC employs IBCLCs and other breastfeeding advocates. The rate of
formula feedig is high, but many mothers in my area have decided to
breastfeed after hearing accurate information. I teach prenatal classes
about breastfeeding, and do home and hospital visits after the baby is born.
Also do support groups for them, since May 1991.
RE: Have seen five women during my employment for WIC attempt breastfeeding
after breast reduction. One mom said that when her surgeon was doing it he
claimed that he was reconnecting the ducts (microsurgery?) ...she did ok.
She used an SNS, because she did not feel comfortabler with P-syringes. (My
preference)
The results have been mixed to very favorable, 2 of the five,with a
full milk supply and eliminated the tube/syringe feedings. One produced
milk, but complained that her breasts were very sensitive (altho, one would
probably expect lack of sensation), so she stopped. One really never
produced much at all, even with pumping and one was partial breastfeeding
with a supplementer til she tired of it. I like to let the mom know that
there is no telling how much the baby will receive. So, I recommend (to
them) using an hospital quality pump with the product of the pumping offered
at the breast. I just don't like to watch for signs of inadequate milk
intake ...but like to protect the gut wall at the same time.
Paula Bermingham, IBCLC
Lake County CA. USA
At 04:20 PM 10/16/96 -0400, you wrote:
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:20:47 -0400
>Reply-To: Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
>Sender: Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
>From: Automatic digest processor <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: LACTNET Digest - 16 Oct 1996 - Special issue
>To: Recipients of LACTNET digests <[log in to unmask]>
>
>There are 13 messages totalling 418 lines in this issue.
>
>Topics in this special issue:
>
> 1. <No subject given>
> 2. musings of an insomniac...
> 3. soft drinks and osteoporosis
> 4. WIC
> 5. Soda Drinks (2)
> 6. Hollywood Gossip
> 7. SORRY!!
> 8. Keep Those BFing Horror Stories coming!
> 9. Madonna and Lourdes and Dr. Paul Fleiss
> 10. Dr. Sears on "Dateline"
> 11. charcoal
> 12. [Fwd: Leaving Lactation Field]
>
>To post to the subscribers of LACTNET, send your note to
>[log in to unmask]
>To change your subscription options as in those listed below, send commands
>in e-mail to: [log in to unmask]
>Note that LISTSERV is a *computer program,* not a human, so don't add punctu-
>ation or words like "please." Here are some commonly-used *commands*:
> To leave LACTNET, write: SIGNOFF LACTNET
> To temporarily stop your subscription, write: SET LACTNET NOMAIL
> For information on other commands, write: HELP
> LACTNET WWW site: http://www.mcs.com/~auerbach/lactation.html
> LACTNET archives on WWW:
http://library.ummed.edu/lsv/archives/lactnet.html
>
>
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 11:02:15 -0400
>From: Phil Shea <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: <No subject given>
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>Does anyone have information on breastfeeding by a mother with Cushing's
>disease. The disease has been in remission for fifteen years and she had
>a normal pregnancy. B.W.= 7'2''. Weight at 8 days= 6'2''. Probably due
>to mismanagement and some degree of ineffective feeding ( Feeding every
>4-5 hours. ) But I want to be sure that the Cushing's is not part of
>the problem. Thanks for your help. Eileen Shea, BSc, IBCLC
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 09:41:09 -0400
>From: Melissa Vickers <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: musings of an insomniac...
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hi, all
>
>Lying awake at 4:30 am with a pounding headache can either provide a
>creative burst of energy, or deprive you of needed sleep.... In any case,
>the following started brewing in my aching head. (Apologies to New Mom
>Magazine's article "Breastfeed or Bust.")
>
>EAT HEALTHY OR BUST A GUT TRYING
>One veteran eater tells you all you really need to know to weigh whether
>eating healthy is the best choice for you and your belly:
>
>It's a Kodak moment. Your family is standing in line at the all-you-can-eat
>pig out bar, drooling at the thought of the treats that lie ahead. And
>somewhere in the back of your subconscience comes the voice from your
>nutritionist: "What are YOU going to eat here?"
>
>Uh-oh. Time for the real challenge: eating healthy. Can you really eat
>healthy when those around you are pouring on the gravy on those ribs and
>chocolate sauce on that sundae?
>
>For me the answer was yes. I wanted to do the whole foods bit from the
>veggie soup to the soybeans. And I was lucky. They ran out of chocolate
>sauce just before I got there.
>
>What I never really realized beforehand, but you should: You're completely
>on your own when you eat healthy. Your mom can't do it for you. Neither can
>your husband. Nor your nutritionist. It's a huge commitment. So it helps to
>know all you can before you try it. It also helps to set aside some of the
>myths that surround eating healthy. That's what follows here. Read on.
>
>Myth #1: Everybody should eat healthy.
>
>Truth is, there are some folks on death's door who just shouldn't be
>bothered with trying to eat healthy. And there are countless others who
>shouldn't force it simply because is isn't working out.
>
>Take Petunia Porker, who gave eating healthy a try for 2 meals 10 years ago.
>"I was very nervous and nearly starved to death. Finally I switched to
>eating candy bars." Petunia's been happy ever since, with the added bonus of
>getting to buy a new wardrobe every 6 months.
>
>And eating healthy can be dangerous. Cutting all those vegetables and
>cooking on the stove can lead to cuts and burns.
>
>Bottom line: Eating healthy is tough. In the early days you will have to
>lock up every piece of chocolate in your house and force yourself to go
>through the candy-free aisles in the grocery store. So if you REALLY don't
>want to eat healthy, don't force yourself out of guilt or pressure.
>
>Myth #2. You won't get sick.
>Yes, there are studies showing that eating healthy cuts your risk of heart
>attack, stroke, cancer, etc., but what do they know?
>
>In a study of 50 humans who ate healthy and 50 folks who didn't, researchers
>from the "When In Doubt, Make It Up" Tabloid Weekly found that 30% of the
>healthy eaters got sick at least once, 89% didn't. 35% of the unhealthy
>eaters got sick at least once, 20% didn't. (Numbers don't add up to 100%
>because some of the participants died before the end of the year long data
>collection period.)
>
>Myth #3. Eating healthy is instinctive.
>For dogs and cows, maybe, but not humans. We were put on this earth to eat
>chocolate. Learning to eat healthy is a long and difficult process plagued
>with cravings and stomach rumblings.
>
>Myth #4. You'll lose weight faster.
>Only if you lay off those candy cravings that hit when you least expect
>them, like morning, noon, and night.
>
>Myth #5. Eating healthy's more convenient.
>Yeah. Right.
>
>Bottom line: Eating healthy is anything but convenient.
>
>Yes, it is healthy. Yes, it can be filling. But the trick is to do it only
>if you really want to. What really matters is that you give yourself your
>love, not vegetables.
>*****
>Have a lovely day!
>
>Melissa Vickers, IBCLC (I Be a Chocolate Loving Consultant!)
>[log in to unmask]
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 08:51:44 -0700
>From: Deborah V Barr <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: soft drinks and osteoporosis
>
>Just a few clarifications on soft drinks and osteoporosis.
>
>Not all soft drinks contain phosphorus. Soft drinks which usually contain
>high levels of phosphoric acid are colas, "Dr. Pepper", some root beers,
>and many powdered drink mixes (kool-aid, hawaiian punch, lemonade).
>Other light-colored soft drinks (like 7-up and orange soda) usually use
>citric acid instead of phosphoric acid. You can tell what is in your
>favorite soft drink by reading the ingredients on the label.
>
>The issue of osteoporosis is not as simple as it may seem. The issue is
>not just phosphorus intake, but the *ratio* of calcium to phosphorus in the
>diet. Too much phosphorus and not enough calcium (*in combination*) is
>what will contribute to osteoporosis. So, it is equally important to ensure
>adequate calcium intake. Soft drinks are just one source of dietary
>phosphorus, it occurs naturally in many foods. Our intake of phosphorus
>in the US is increasing because we are eating more processed foods.
>
>In assessing diet, it is important to look at the entire diet. I think the
most
>important aspect of evaluating soft drink intake is looking at what people
>are *not* drinking. What are these empty calorie beverages replacing?
>Are they drinking these beverages regularly or occasionally? Are there
>other drinks with some nutritional value that they would be willing to drink
>instead of soft drinks?
>
>Feel free to e-mail me if you'd like the references for this info.
>
>Debi VanderMey Barr, MS, RD, LD
>Breastfeeding Promotion Coordinator (and Public Health Nutritionist)
>Oregon WIC Program, Portland, Oregon
>(who tries to drink Orange Juice mixed with carbonated water for her
>"soft drink", but craves Dr. Pepper every once in a while.....)
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 09:15:24 -0700
>From: Deborah V Barr <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: WIC
>
>Ruth -
>Welcome to LACTNET! WIC stands for the "Special Supplemental
>Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children." It is a national,
>government sponsored program in the US for low-income pregnant,
>post-partum and nursing women, and children to the age of five. It
>provides nutrition education, breastfeeding support, vouchers for food,
>and referrals to other programs.
>
>In the US, WIC is controversial because it supplies infant formula to
>low-income babies. However, it is also the primary source for
>breastfeeding support for low-income moms. Believe me, working for a
>program that does both makes my job quite interesting!
>
>Debi VanderMey Barr
>Breastfeeding Promotion Coordinator
>Oregon WIC Program
>Portland, Oregon
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:08:51 EDT
>From: Linda Inglis <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Soda Drinks
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
>
>I was interested in the statement in the 15 October issue of Lactnet on
>artificial sweeteners. In the 8+ years I have worked in the area of
>nutrition for children I have not seen any evidence of "horrible side
>effects" from artificial sweeteners. I would be very interested in
>documentation of the sources of this information. Please respond to this
>as there are many of us on the list who work with children and infants in
>the nutrition field.
>
>Also am interested in the link between phosphorus and calcium in relation
>to soda intake. It is my understanding that there is a optimal ratio of
>Phosphorus:Calcium and that it is important for the body to stay within
>this range. However with both calcium sources and phosphorus sources in
>our diets I wonder just how we are supposed to keep this all straight.
>There are many sources in the diet for phosphorus, including milk and milk
>products (our main source of calcium) and all meats, eggs, and legumes.
>So...should we not drink milk or recommend that because it also has
>phosphorus??? There is 61 mg of phosphorus in a sample diet soda, the
>source I used said that 2 gram or less of phosphorus daily does not appear
>to affect calcium metabolism, provided calcium intake is adequate. That
>is 32, 12 oz servings of soda in a 24 hour period. Not impossible but
>improbable...imagine all that time in the bathroom! Once again it appears
>that moderation is the key!
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:48:20 -0400
>From: Janet Simpson <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Hollywood Gossip
>
>Hi All,
>In response to Evi's question about Paul Fliess, according to the news report
>he IS the baby's pediatrician! Cool, huh? So I guess that means that IF
>madonna DOESN"T BF that he will get on her case about it??? I hope so! Of
>course, knowing how pro-BF Paul is, I am sure he has already talked to her
>about it and she is following his expert advice!
>Just my opinion, nothing known for sure (except that the news did say he was
>the Ped)
>
>Jay
>Don't you wish Paul was around to give us the scoop? I mean it isn't like we
>wouldn't keep it private, right?
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:52:32 -0400
>From: Hotheaded Red <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: Soda Drinks
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>On Wed, 16 Oct 1996, Linda Inglis wrote:
>
>> I was interested in the statement in the 15 October issue of Lactnet on
>> artificial sweeteners. In the 8+ years I have worked in the area of
>> nutrition for children I have not seen any evidence of "horrible side
>> effects" from artificial sweeteners. I would be very interested in
>> documentation of the sources of this information. Please respond to this
>> as there are many of us on the list who work with children and infants in
>> the nutrition field.
>
>Do a web search on Nutrasweet. The references and evidence is pretty
>convincing. I won't let the stuff NEAR my lips or my daughter's, and I
>have a pretty poor diet (I can't believe I am admitting this here!) in
>general. Believe me, I don't abstain from many foods, but that Nutrastuff
>is awful!
>
>> There are many sources in the diet for phosphorus, including milk and milk
>> products (our main source of calcium) and all meats, eggs, and legumes.
>
>I also have to ask you about this. I am an AVID milk drinker. I drink
>skim milk, and i go thru about 2 gallons (at least) per week. Up until a
>few months ago, I believed that milk was, in fact, healthy. During my
>research about human milk, and diet in general, i have come across much
>evidence to the contrary. Basically, the evidence I have read shows an
>INCREASED risk for osteoporosis in milk drinking societies. The
>explanations usually deal with the high protein in milk actually leaching
>calcium from your bones instead of giving you a benefit. Could you maybe
>shed some light on this, or point me towards some studies showing ANY
>benefit of milk whatsoever? I am beginning to think the Dairy Farmers
>Assoc. has as much influence as the ABM companies, if not more! ;)
>
>Heidi- who still LOVES! milk, and who will have a hard tiome giving it up!
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:53:05 -0400
>From: Hotheaded Red <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: SORRY!!
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>That last post re: milk was supposed to go private! I know it is OFF
>topic! Sorry!
>
>heidi
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 14:07:27 -0400
>From: Catherine Alliso Granju <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Keep Those BFing Horror Stories coming!
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>I am still seeking health professionals' stories concerning instances of
>medical negligence, lack of informed consent, etc in the area of lactation
>medicine.
>
>Please e-mail me
>
>Thanks-
>
>Katie Allison Granju
>University of Tennessee College of Law
>Knoxville, TN
>[log in to unmask]
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:07:45 -0500
>From: "katherine a. dettwyler" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Madonna and Lourdes and Dr. Paul Fleiss
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>For those of you who may not know, Dr. Paul Fleiss is a famous pediatrician
>in Los Angeles. He is a staunch supporter of breastfeeding, and is
>pediatrician to Madonna's (the rock music star) new daughter, Lourdes. She
>had stated publically before the birth that she planned to breastfeed.
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>-------
>Katherine A. Dettwyler, Ph.D. email: [log in to unmask]
>Anthropology Department phone: (409) 845-5256
>Texas A&M University fax: (409) 845-4070
>College Station, TX 77843-4352
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 13:13:48 -0500
>From: Ronald Whynaucht <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Dr. Sears on "Dateline"
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
>
>Hello to all!
>There was a wonderful segment on the news magazine TV show "Dateline"
>(?NBC?) last evening
>featuring Dr. Sears and attachment parenting, calming a fussy baby, etc. I
>was at work in my OB setting and the mom I was assisting had it on. Wish I
>could have watched the entire segment. What I did watch was so
>refreshing!----supportive of breastfeeding to the point of saying that he
>actually recommends breastfeeding as many as 20 times a day if THE INFANT
>NEEDS to Yippee! He had a way of making it permissable and loving, as we
>KNOW it is. The mother that I was helping with breastfeeding was most
>impressed. Gosh, it would be so wonderful if all parents could have a
>copy. I wonder if all the right people were watching----you know, the ones
>who think we're nuts if we nurse closer than every 3-4 hours.
>
>Have a nice day!
>Barb Whynaucht,R.N.
>[log in to unmask]
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:42:26 -0700
>From: "Catherine Watson Genna, IBCLC" <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: Re: charcoal
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>Maureen,
>Charcoal is not the issue with charred steaks, the carcinogens that form
>when meat is charred are heterocyclic amines. Charcoal by itself is
>harmless. It is often given as first aid for poisoning, to absorb the
>poison and buy time until the patient can have the stomach pumped.
>--
>Catherine Watson Genna, IBCLC NYC [log in to unmask]
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 16:13:15 -0400
>From: Melissa <[log in to unmask]>
>Subject: [Fwd: Leaving Lactation Field]
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="------------317C1F3036B3"
>
>sorry if this is a repeat having mail problems
>--
>Melissa Brancho
>The Nursing Corner Fax: 814-624-0846
>RD 7 Box 382 Voice: 814-623-9357
>Bedford, PA 15522 E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
>X-Mozilla-Status: 0001
>Message-ID: <[log in to unmask]>
>Date: Wed, 16 Oct 1996 15:59:45 -0400
>From: Melissa <[log in to unmask]>
>Organization: The Nursing Corner
>X-Mailer: Mozilla 2.02Gold (Win95; I)
>MIME-Version: 1.0
>To: [log in to unmask], [log in to unmask]
>Subject: Leaving Lactation Field
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
>After a hard two years and several severe bouts with lactation burnout, I
have decided
>to leave the field. I simply cannot devote the amount of personal time
away from family
>and the financial burden of pursuing IBCLC at this time. This has been an
incredibly
>hard decision that will come as a surprise to the people who know me
personally. Who
>knows, maybe one day I will pick up where I left off but for now I must put
it aside and
>look for an area of interest where I can be paid for the work that I do.
>
>I will also be unsubbing from Lactnet sometime in the next two weeks. I am
putting a
>list together of all of the items I may be interested in selling. If you
are looking
>for something please feel free to contact me via email.
>
>This has been a tremendously hard decision me, if anyone should reply
please be kind. I
>will keep up with LLL and continue to be involved as much as I can on a
strictly
>volunteer basis. Thanks for all of the help for fellow Lactivist and
Lactnetters.
>--
>Melissa Brancho
>The Nursing Corner Fax: 814-624-0846
>RD 7 Box 382 Voice: 814-623-9357
>Bedford, PA 15522 E-Mail: [log in to unmask]
>
>
|
