More about Breastfeeding

All newborns lose weight after birth. Breastfeeding success is often measured by how quickly baby returns to birth weight. Yet some experts question using the birth weight as a litmus test for breastfeeding success. A recent study by Joy Noël Weiss, A Kirsten Woodend, Wendy Peterson, William Gibb and Dianne Groll (15 August 2011 International Breastfeeding Journal) entitled “An observational study of associations among maternal fluids during parturition, neonatal output and breastfed newborn weight loss” conclude that “ The phenomenon of newborn weight loss is complex. They found that maternal IV fluids received prior to birth (during labor) are related to newborn output and their weight loss. Consequently they warn that corrections in fluid balances in these newborns should be considered normal and therefore should not warrant outside interventions; i.e. introduction of formula, etc.
Furthermore they found that the reasons for delayed lactogenesis should be studied further; they found a correlation between late onset of lactogenesis 11 (more than 3 days after birth) was positively related to the total amounts of maternal fluids received from admission to birth. “ Most women (95% of the participants) noted first day of breast fullness however 41% of the women reported having late onset of lactogenesis . These women's babies were observed to have a significant positive correlation between late onset of lactogenesis ll (beyond day 3 reported by 41% of the sample) and percentage of newborn weight loss.

Letting nature take its course is still often the best advice. Over medicalization of birth, labor, and pain contributes to hyper concerns with regard to baby. The result is often early intervention using manufactured formulas which introduces other risks to baby and the breastfeeding success.
These researchers suggest that birth weight should not be the parameter from which clinicians measure success with breastfeeding – rather it should be other observable factors including wet diapers, etc. Finally, the reserachers concluded with this recommendation: do not use birth weight as a measure of breastfeeding success. Rather clinicians should use a 24 hour old weight as one of the parameters to determine whether or not intervention is necessary.
__________________________________________________________
Did you know that the current administration is very pro- breastfeeding. So much so that Ed Keefe , a Washington Post Staff Writer wrote this on Wednesday, December 22, 2010 :
President Obama is asking federal personnel officials to draft "appropriate workplace accommodations" for federal employees who are nursing mothers. The president issued a memo this week to the Office of Personnel Management asking that the new workplace accommodations be published when ready. The changes are mandated by provisions in the ObamaCare passed this year that require new breastfeeding rights, primarily for hourly workers in the private and public sectors. But Obama asked the federal government to go a step further by establishing new guidelines for all federal employees, no matter their status, according to White House aides. The federal legislation assures that women will not be discriminated against or fired for breastfeeding or pumping breast milk during breaks or lunch. It also provides tax breaks to employers who establish special rooms for breastfeeding mothers or that rent lactation-related equipment.
_____________________________________________________________
The Iowa Independent by Andy Birkey found a detractor of this new policy in Rep Michelle Bachmann. She stated her objections recently. They are:
over promotion of breastfeeding, particularly among black women, to curb obesity; the policy creates a nanny state which makes breast pumps tax deductible along with other over-the-counter medical items such as pain relievers, bandages and contact lens supplies.
How is that related to breastfeeding? Guess they have to be able to see baby's face. Bachmann continued, “I’ve given birth to five babies and I breastfed every single one of these babies. To think that government has to go out and buy my breast pump for my babies. You wanna talk about the nanny state? I think we just got the new definition of a nanny.”
_____________________________________________________

Finally, on March 30, 2010, "President Barack Obama signed into law Obama Care aka: Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act. Did you know that the Act mandates employerswith more than 50 workers to provide a room, not a bathroom, in which the female employee can express breast milk for her child as needed. The female is not obligated to work for or otherwise compensate for the time spent on this task. This can be done until the child is one year old.
While small companies with less than 50 workers are ‘exempt’ so to speak, if they make more than $500,000 per year, they too have to abide by the law. The law also requires that any company that provides medical or nursing care services, schools and government agencies abide by the Act. It requires the provision of a private and clean lactation room for mothers of babies younger than one."

While advocacy for breastfeeding is warranted, I guess the notion that everybody must help pay for every woman's choice to breastfeed is in vogue. This notion is consistent with the administration's belief that all must help pay for women's contraception, abortion services and other " health" issues as well. Hmmmm - thoughts?

"Save the BOOBs Campaign"

It’s 2009, overwhelming evidence points to the importance of exclusive and continued breastfeeding, yet legislators continue to negatively impact breastfeeding by wasting time and energy debating where and how mothers should breastfeed their babies in public!! Here is a clue for those worried about rising costs of health care- support breastfeeding every possible way to really reduce rising medical costs for babies, mothers, society!

Wisconsin (Bill 253.16) and North Dakota (Bill 2344) legislators have been debating public breastfeeding and recently passed legislation ensuring mothers of their rights to breastfeed in public as long as they are in an “authorized” location! Do you know mothers who prefer to sneak into unauthorized areas to breastfeed? Perhaps, if you know such a mother, she is merely trying to avoid the breastfeeding buttinskies that stare, worry about decency standards, and just don’t get breastfeeding! Thus far, Wisconsin has left out any modesty clauses to the bill; unfortunately North Dakota did not follow suit! ND legislators inserted this clause: "If the woman acts in a discreet and modest manner, a woman may breastfeed her child in any location, public or private, where the woman and child are otherwise authorized to be." Is anyone thinking? How and who are going to enforce “modesty”? The breastfeeding buttinskies- right! ?


I would have loved to have been a part of these debates! What are these legislators thinking? Does anyone bother to debate modesty standards for television, public places, or the fashion industry which puts out seductive clothing for young girls, teen girls, young women, and even older women?

Related to this is the “Support the Boobs Campaign”- no I am not inserting my own words. Recently such an ad appeared on UTube (http://mediablips.dailyradar.com/); it was followed up with a lively but one-sided discussion on FOX News. The ad is supposed to raise awareness for breast cancer; it's purpose is to bring in money for breast cancer research which works to eradicate breast cancer. It’s almost impossible to connect the dots between what you see and the ad’s intended purpose and message. The ad features a buxom, scantily clad (two piece – white- bikini), blond sashaying around in a public area – I think Wisconsin and North Dakota better get into the debate about the appropriateness and modesty of this ad! Anyway, the ad shows men smiling hugely at the passing blond whereas the 'watching" women are either expressing surprise, bewilderment, or jealousy; it was hard to judge their precise emotions. Meanwhile, the model bounces around the ad displaying a self confident smile that only a model in a white revealing bikini could pull off. By the way, I really can't remember what the model looked like! I mean her face!

Several female guests were asked by Bill O’Reilly whether the ad was offensive; unfortunately their responses clearly missed key reasons why the ad IS offensive to women. First, both women acknowledged that few men would be able to connect the ad with its appropriate message (reducing breast cancer); yet both thought it would be an effective fund raiser for breast cancer research since the men will enjoy watching the UTube ad and send in a few bucks! And they seemed to think that was ok! Enjoying the video for all the wrong reasons but sending in money – why? To save boobs? Whose boobs? Save the boobs For whom? The ad signals once again that it is ok to sexualize women's body parts while selling things or messages. This does nothing to raise the dignity of women - we are the ones most often exploited by porn and sex businesses.

Next, is anyone thinking about the breast cancer victims who have had to undergo mastectomies in order to survive??? Are these women now supposed to feel less attractive that the woman featured in the ad? Are they suppposed to feel less of a woman because of the treatment they had to undergo in order to stay alive? Are the husbands supposed to compare their wife to this model? The ad is out and out insensitive and hurtful to these women especially.

Third, why isn’t a breastfeeding mother used in the ad? Breastfeeding is a much more important reason to “save the boobs” campaign than sexualizing breasts for "girl watchers." Did you know that only western societies regard the breasts as sexual?

Fourth, why the ad didn't feature sick women fighting breast cancer as a reason to save the boobs campaign is beyond me! The campaign should have been dubbed " save the woman campaign featuring healthy but “boob-less” mothers and wives in loving relationships.


By the way, I cringe inside everytime I write boob- that is such a crass word for God's handiwork! Ok – now that I have gotten really worked up about this campaign, I want to tell you that this campaign is not going to get a nickel of my money! Even though gifts might fund research the way I look at it, it also sells the wrong message about the dignity of women. I won't be a part of such campaigns. I say we boycott donations to breast cancer research using these ads until and unless they get it right regarding why we really should save the "boobs". Readers, tell me where I have gone off the rails.