Interesting (and sad) statistic

[Melissa]

Yesterday at my bf'ing support group (which is actually barely about bf'ing
anymore since the babies are 4-8 mths old) the leader, who is an LC, said
that in the US 16% of women bf exclusively for 6 mths and around 2% (she
couldn't remember the exact figure) do it for one year. Although my brain
new that it was this low, I felt that it was higher since (a) I hang out
here and (b) many of my friends were met at The Pump Station, a store that
offers classes (like the support group) dedicated to bf'ing.

OTOH, 16% means that more than 1 in 10 babies gets a relatively good start
in terms of breastmilk.

--
Melissa (in Los Angeles)
Mum to Elizabeth 4/13/03

[Naomi Pardue]

>Yesterday at my bf'ing support group (which is actually barely about bf'ing
>anymore since the babies are 4-8 mths old) the leader, who is an LC, said
>that in the US 16% of women bf exclusively for 6 mths and around 2% (she

>couldn't remember the exact figure) do it for one year.

Actually, I think this is a slightly old statistic. I can't quote precise
numbers, they are actually a bit higher now (esp. the one year figure) since
the AAP began recommended bfing for a minimum of one year back in 1997. IIRC,
somewhere around 10% of women maybe are still bfing at one year? (Though the 6
month figure hasn't changed much. Basically, most women are still not bfing at
all, or stopping quite early, but if she stick it out to 4 or 6 months, they
are fairly likely to stick it out for a full year.)

Naomi
Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)

[Akuvikate]

(Naomi Pardue) wrote in message >...
> >Yesterday at my bf'ing support group (which is actually barely about bf'ing
> >anymore since the babies are 4-8 mths old) the leader, who is an LC, said
> >that in the US 16% of women bf exclusively for 6 mths and around 2% (she
>
> >couldn't remember the exact figure) do it for one year.
>
> Actually, I think this is a slightly old statistic. I can't quote precise
> numbers, they are actually a bit higher now (esp. the one year figure) since
> the AAP began recommended bfing for a minimum of one year back in 1997. IIRC,
> somewhere around 10% of women maybe are still bfing at one year? (Though the 6
> month figure hasn't changed much. Basically, most women are still not bfing at
> all, or stopping quite early, but if she stick it out to 4 or 6 months, they
> are fairly likely to stick it out for a full year.)
>
> Naomi
> Naomi
> CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator
>
> (either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
> reply.)


Here's link to the complete 1998 stats. As it was only 1997 that the
AAP started recommending bf'ing for 1 year, I suspect things may be
better yet.

http://www.healthypeople.gov/Document/HTML/Volume2/16MICH.htm#_Toc494699668

Couple years ago I did a paper on the history of breast & bottle
feeding in the US over the past 150 years. When you look at it from
that perspective, it's actually pretty encouraging. 100 years ago
non-breastfed babies had 5-8 *times* the infant mortality of breastfed
babies, and still 20% of women never breastfed. And the formulas then
were horribly complex mixtures of various things.

Kate
and the Bug

[Naomi]

(Akuvikate) wrote in message >...
> (Naomi Pardue) wrote in message >...

>
> Couple years ago I did a paper on the history of breast & bottle
> feeding in the US over the past 150 years. When you look at it from
> that perspective, it's actually pretty encouraging. 100 years ago
> non-breastfed babies had 5-8 *times* the infant mortality of breastfed
> babies, and still 20% of women never breastfed. And the formulas then
> were horribly complex mixtures of various things.
>
Though, keep in mind that, 100 years ago, a significant percentage
(though of course not all...) of the women who didn't bf did so for
very real
physical reasons. MANY mothers had significant physical problems
(consumption,
heart problems, prolonged recovery from difficult births that would
hav
made it difficult or impossible to establish a milk supply), so had
no real choice. Other mothers had work situations that made bfing
impossible.
(If you had to go back to your 12 hour day in the factory or in the
fields when baby
was 2 weeks old, leaving the child to the care of an older sibling, or
grandma,
bfing wasn't really a possibility either. And, lets not forget the
mothers
who died in childbirth. Unless father could find a lacating friend or
relative to take over, or afford to pay a wetnurse (and by the turn of
the century, wetnursing wasn't seen much anymore), artificial feeding
was the only
option.

(And while formulas were often 'complex'... at least if the mother
was wealthy enough to afford them with percentages of ingredients
calculated, supposedly, to meet the precise nutritional need of each
baby...
-- most mothers I'm sure just gave
the babies sweetened, diluted cows milk, or just ordinary milk -- they
didn't really contain "various things" -- milk, sugar, water, and
sometimes lime. (They actually got MORE complex later in the 20th
century, as different
types of milk became available, and different types of sugars (corn
syrup, for
example), and doctors began spending many weeks and months working
with desperate mothers fiddling with the formula trying to find a
mixture that the colicky/sick/poorly gaining/whatever baby would
tolerate and thrive on.)

Naomi


> Kate
> and the Bug

[Tine Andersen]

"Naomi" > wrote in message
om...
> (Akuvikate) wrote in message
>...
> > (Naomi Pardue) wrote in message
>...
>
> >
> > Couple years ago I did a paper on the history of breast & bottle
> > feeding in the US over the past 150 years. When you look at it from
> > that perspective, it's actually pretty encouraging. 100 years ago
> > non-breastfed babies had 5-8 *times* the infant mortality of breastfed
> > babies, and still 20% of women never breastfed. And the formulas then
> > were horribly complex mixtures of various things.
> >
> Though, keep in mind that, 100 years ago, a significant percentage
> (though of course not all...) of the women who didn't bf did so for
> very real
> physical reasons. MANY mothers had significant physical problems
> (consumption,
> heart problems, prolonged recovery from difficult births that would
> hav
> made it difficult or impossible to establish a milk supply), so had
> no real choice. Other mothers had work situations that made bfing
> impossible.
> (If you had to go back to your 12 hour day in the factory or in the
> fields when baby
> was 2 weeks old, leaving the child to the care of an older sibling, or
> grandma,
> bfing wasn't really a possibility either. And, lets not forget the
> mothers
> who died in childbirth. Unless father could find a lacating friend or
> relative to take over, or afford to pay a wetnurse (and by the turn of
> the century, wetnursing wasn't seen much anymore), artificial feeding
> was the only
> option.
>
> (And while formulas were often 'complex'... at least if the mother
> was wealthy enough to afford them with percentages of ingredients
> calculated, supposedly, to meet the precise nutritional need of each
> baby...
> -- most mothers I'm sure just gave
> the babies sweetened, diluted cows milk, or just ordinary milk -- they
> didn't really contain "various things" -- milk, sugar, water, and
> sometimes lime. (They actually got MORE complex later in the 20th
> century, as different
> types of milk became available, and different types of sugars (corn
> syrup, for
> example), and doctors began spending many weeks and months working
> with desperate mothers fiddling with the formula trying to find a
> mixture that the colicky/sick/poorly gaining/whatever baby would
> tolerate and thrive on.)
>
> Naomi

I think I was given diluted cows milk with sugar - and I'm only 45!

Tine, Denmark

[Naomi Pardue]

>I think I was given diluted cows milk with sugar - and I'm only 45!

Yup. While commerial formulas were around as early as the 1920's (and even
earlier, though the earlier ones weren't what we'd think of as 'formulas' in
that they weren't designed to replicate human milk), as near as I can determine
from my reading, in the U.S. at least, most women continued to make 'home-brew'
formula well into the 1970's. (Spock gave instructions for making formula from
scratch -- mentioned commercial formula only as a convenient, but expensive
alternative -- into the 1970's. Even the 1985 edition gives instructions for
making evaporated milk formula, and I can't find any indication that he
considered it inferior, nutritionally, to the commercial varieties.)


Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)

[Chookie]

In article >,
(Naomi Pardue) wrote:

> >I think I was given diluted cows milk with sugar - and I'm only 45!
>
> Yup. While commerial formulas were around as early as the 1920's (and even
> earlier, though the earlier ones weren't what we'd think of as 'formulas' in
> that they weren't designed to replicate human milk), as near as I can
> determine
> from my reading, in the U.S. at least, most women continued to make
> 'home-brew'
> formula well into the 1970's. (Spock gave instructions for making formula
> from
> scratch -- mentioned commercial formula only as a convenient, but expensive
> alternative -- into the 1970's. Even the 1985 edition gives instructions for
> making evaporated milk formula, and I can't find any indication that he
> considered it inferior, nutritionally, to the commercial varieties.)

DH was born in 1966 and was fed evaporated milk formula. My sister got S-26
in 1971, so preumably the price had dropped. The late '60s and early '70s
were the nadir of bfing in Australia... then along came the Nursing Mothers'
Association of Australia in 1972 (now the ABA) and there has been a vast
improvement.

--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

"Jeez; if only those Ancient Greek storytellers had known about the astonishing
creature that is the *Usenet hydra*: you cut off one head, and *a stupider one*
grows back..." -- MJ, cam.misc

[Anne Rogers]

> >I think I was given diluted cows milk with sugar - and I'm only 45!

my aunt (47) was given (as far as I know) straight cows milk, my grandma
thought this was ok as they kept one cow specially for her (interesting
concept of a wet nurse! have a cow instead!), she's turned out very tall
ane very thin, wonder if this has anything to do with it

[Heather]

Anne Rogers > wrote in message >...
> > >I think I was given diluted cows milk with sugar - and I'm only 45!
>
> my aunt (47) was given (as far as I know) straight cows milk, my grandma
> thought this was ok as they kept one cow specially for her (interesting
> concept of a wet nurse! have a cow instead!), she's turned out very tall
> ane very thin, wonder if this has anything to do with it

Speaking of cows... if you've ever worked on a dairy farm or lived on
one, you know that calves are generally allowed to nurse from their
moms for day or so but then they TOO are fed formula. ("milk
replacement," it's called). I've had to bottle feed calves and it's
not easy.

Anyway, regarding the original posting. I don't know what the actual
numbers are today but I think they are still on the low side.
However, there is shift in attitudes. When one of my friends became
pregnant she said she wouldn't even consider breastfeeding. As her
pregnancy moved along and she read more about it, she decided to try
it and now (at six months) she's a true believer. Another friend
formula fed her first two. She told me nursing didn't appeal to her at
all but pumping would be OK so for her last two babies she pumped and
bottle fed. The point is that people change. The more educated
people become about breastfeeding, the better. Like that post about
that wicked bridesmaid. I'd be willing to bet that when SHE has a
child, her tune will change.
Heather

[Anne Rogers]

> > my aunt (47) was given (as far as I know) straight cows milk, my grandma
> > thought this was ok as they kept one cow specially for her (interesting
> > concept of a wet nurse! have a cow instead!), she's turned out very tall
> > ane very thin, wonder if this has anything to do with it
>
> Speaking of cows... if you've ever worked on a dairy farm or lived on
> one, you know that calves are generally allowed to nurse from their
> moms for day or so but then they TOO are fed formula. ("milk
> replacement," it's called). I've had to bottle feed calves and it's
> not easy.

didn't know that, my grandparents were dairy farmers, hence my aunt
getting her own cow!

[Leslie]

>Like that post about
>that wicked bridesmaid.

"The Wicked Bridesmaid" sounds like a great book title.

Leslie