We measure jaundice differently, so I have no idea what the levels given in Judy's post are equal to. I do know that forward-thinking and bf-friendly paediatricians believe pathologcal jaundice is gravely overdiagnosed and treated here. There are several studies showing the huge variation in what would be considered to be a normal level of jaundice in the first two weeks of life. Dr Edmund Hey's essay in MIDIRS, March 1995, deals with some of these issues, with a useful overview of diagnosis and treatment. He recommends an icterometer (mentioned on this list a week or so ago!) which is a pocket-held colour-matching tool costing 20 US dollars; staff learning to train their eyes; and lab blood sample ordered when there is a reading of 3.5 on the icterometer. He points out that lab results are very variable, too. There are lots of refs in this article. His article is also based on a lifelong interest in this topic. I have heard him speak twice on this issue, and he is very, very irritated with his colleagues for their lack of evidence-based practice. His conclusion is that when there is no haemolytic disease present, jaundice calls for medical treatment 'in one term baby in a 1000'. 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