http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...d-sfs020606.php

Policies supportive of new mothers in workplaces are strongly encouraged

(SACRAMENTO, Calif.) -- Babies fully breastfed for six months are less likely to suffer from respiratory illnesses in their first two years than babies fully breastfed for only four months, according to research conducted by investigators at UC Davis Children's Hospital, the University of Rochester and the American Academy of Pediatrics, Center for Child Health Research. "We found that babies who received an additional two months of full breastfeeding were over four times less likely to contract pneumonia and half as likely to suffer recurrent ear infections," said lead author Caroline Chantry, a pediatrician with UC Davis Children's Hospital. Chantry and her colleagues found that the health benefits of the additional two months of full breastfeeding continued to protect babies from respiratory illnesses through their second birthdays.

"This finding adds to the mounting evidence that the longer a mother breastfeeds her infant, the greater the health benefits," Chantry said. Previous research by others has shown that exclusive breastfeeding for six months also provides greater protection against gastrointestinal infections, she added.

The current findings appear in the February 2006 issue of Pediatrics. They were first reported in 2002 at a joint meeting of the Pediatric Academic Societies and American Academy of Pediatrics in Baltimore, Md. Since then, those preliminary findings have been used to support the recommendation that women breastfeed exclusively for the first six months of their baby's lives. The AAP first began making that recommendation in 1997.

As recently as 2005, however, the AAP Committee on Nutrition said more research was needed to support the position on breastfeeding. Chantry said she hopes the peer-reviewed publication of her research will finally settle the lingering controversy over the advice American women receive from their physicians and organizations like the AAP.

In the published study, Chantry and her colleagues conducted an analysis of a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey of 2,277 children between the ages of 6 and 24 months. They identified five groups -- formula-fed only, full breastfeeding for less than one month, full breastfeeding from one to four months, full breastfeeding from four to less than six months and full breastfeeding for six months or more. Full breastfeeding allows for the use of formula on less than a daily basis.

The researchers then looked at the percent of children in each group who experienced pneumonia, wheezing and recurrent (three or more) colds or ear infections. The results showing the protective effects of the additional two months of breastfeeding held even when the data were adjusted for age, birth weight, ethnicity, poverty, two-parent household, parental education, family size, child care and passive smoke exposure.

Despite the proven benefits of breastfeeding, the reality for many women is that breastfeeding is difficult to maintain after going back to work. By law, employers only have to give women six weeks of maternity leave.

"It may become burdensome to pump regularly even if a woman has an accommodating employer," Chantry said.

Chantry said research here and in other countries has shown that longer maternity leaves, pump-friendly workplaces and child care in the workplace all result in longer lengths of breastfeeding. In addition, employers who provide clean, comfortable places to pump and on-site child care save money due to decreases in absenteeism due to child illness, lower employee turnover due to dissatisfaction and lower direct health care costs.

While many women need support to continue breastfeeding when returning to work, others need help right from the start.

"Most women experience difficulties when they leave the hospital. These challenges often lead to premature weaning," Chantry explained. Women need access to lactation consultants and others who can support their efforts to fully breastfeed their babies. Supporting women early on, she added, means healthier babies and children in the long run.

Thanks Mike,

I was wondering how long to breast feed the baby & how long to take off from work.

The viewpoints on that vary: some recommend 2 years, some at least 9 months. For full-term babies, as "little" as 6 months will bring great benefit as it will allow the baby's immune system to develop while fully supported by the breastmilk and the mother's immune system; however because breastmilk changes constantly depending on the baby's needs, continuing to breastfeed along with feeding the baby other foods will offer an even stronger support for the health and overall development - assuming the mother's diet is adequate and she isn't ingesting toxins that are going through the breastmilk (pesticides from improperly washed produce, hormones from non-organic meat, heavy metals from alluminum cookware deep sea water fish or non-pharmaceutical grade fish oils, certain medicaments, most artificial sweeterers, etc.)

Once a mom goes back to work she can pump at specific times during the day and freeze the breastmilk in small containers that can be thawed and used individually to feed the baby while the mom is away, and she can then nurse directly from the breast when back at home (early morning, late afternoon/evening, at night if needed, or whenever her schedule allows).

You can do a search on google for "breastfeeding and work" or "pumping at work" or similar and you'll come up with lots of articles and forum discussions where you can probably find useful tips from moms who have been there, done that

Children's immune systems aren't fully developed for years after birth, so the longer you can breastfeed, the better. I did BFing until self-weaning with my 2nd son. I only wish I had done it with my first.

It is the official recommendation of the World Health Organization exclusively breastfeed for 6 months (no formula, no solids), and to continue to breastfeed for 2 years:
http://www.who.int/child-adolescent...TION/infant.htm

Here's the AAP policy:
http://aappolicy.aappublications.or...trics;115/2/496

I didn't say that their immune system is fully developed at 6 months. But it is a point where, unless the child has some serious allergies running in the family, the immune system can kind of handle it on its own. Nursing for 2 years isn't up everyone's alley not is it real for everyone since a lot of moms need to go back to work way before then.

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/bfextended/index.html
http://www.breastfeeding.org/articles/benefits.html
http://parenting.ivillage.com/tp/tp...0,,3x5j,00.html
http://www.mothering.com/articles/n...fter-three.html

I don't want to debate - but I've done voluminous research on this and the WHO recommendations are obviously made after extensive research and not to be taken lightly. If you continue to BF after 6 months, your child will only benefit from it. BFing is not an "all or nothing" proposition either. Many children can do "reverse cycling" and nurse mainly during the hours when mom is home from work. Moms can also pump while they work, and many continue to do so for the first 2 years.

I was not always so informed - I did work out of the home fulltime when my older son was born and unfortunately only nursed for about 4 months. After studying this subject, I vowed to give my children the best start possible by nursing as long as possible the next time(s) around.

I wonder if that's why I kept getting bronchitial infections. My mom didn't breast fed. And she said as a baby I had it real bad. And I thought I got better because we moved to Louisiana when I was real young which must have been around the time my lungs gotten stronger. But it didn't start acting up till I came back to Texas in my teens. Which I just assumed was because we came back here. Thanks Karen that's very interesting.

Oh, absolutely the child will benefit. But that doesn't mean that limiting it to 6 months will damage the child's health.

Also, I never meant to say that the recommendations are far off. I simply meant that as you said, "BFing is not an "all or nothing" proposition" so BFing for a few months should IMO still be acknowledged as it's better than nothing and as you said, the first time around we aren't always so knowlwdgeable to be able to organize it so we can continue "part time". I just have a problem with the "all or nothing" I often pick up from some breastfeeding advocates, that you are not good enough for having stopped before the 2nd or even before the first year of age. Since it's not easy for some moms to get it going and keep it going I don't think it's nice to "diss" it simply because they weren't able to take it the full period.

I feel very strongly about breastfeeding and have supported more than one girlfriend through the beginning phase so they woulnd't give up, but I tried to also be be non-judgemental about it. Also, while I feel strongly about it and I believe it to be the best way to feed a baby, I personally don't feel comfortable with the idea of nursing a 2 year old, and I have friends who feel the same way as well as friends who nursed their toddlers also while pregnant with the next baby etc - no problem with either if you ask me.

I think it's good to let moms know the recommendations but also that their babies will benefit from a reduced nursing period, too - I think it's good to be able to choose because you want to do it and not be pressured or feel bullied into it - afterall the baby can tell when the mom is not relaxed or enjoying the nursing session, which I don't think is better, from an emotional point of view.

JMO

That could be. Almost every person/child I know who wasn't breastfed as an infant suffered from ear infections and/or asthma or other breathing difficulty or illness often as a child.

I breastfed for "only" ( ) 6 months but my daughter never had an ear infection until last year (she's almost 7) and then it came from a cold that was coming and going and only lasted a couple of days. She rarely ever gets sick.

I think your right because my SIL didn't breast feed & her 2 boys constantly had colds & bad allergies.

For a while bottle feeding was the norm, people thought breast feeding was weird. Now everyone has assumed I'd be breast feeding without me even telling them that I plan on it. I guess it's because these are people who know me.

BFing can help on so many levels, and I encourage each and every one of you to at least try it and continue as long as you can. It was not easy at all for me, but I'm so glad I stuck with it.

Both of my children are very healthy, but my second son is the one who BF in extended fashion. He is over 4 yrs old and has never had to go to the doctor for being sick. His illnesses (only colds) have been so minor. If we both caught the same bug while I was BFing, it was over it in no more than 48 hours while it took me considerably longer.

Karen,
Wow that's amazing. How many years did you Brfeed, your 2nd son?

I've heard that Brfed kids are smarter & have more confidence then bottle fed kids.

A correlation in the population doesn't mean that you can explain every individual case. I breastfed by son for 18 months. He never took a bottle or had any formula. Starting at around 8 or 9 months he had continuous bad ear infections and he also went through a period of having recurrent bronchitis. You can't blame every ear infection or case of bronchitis on bottle feeding.

I also breastfed my daughter for over a year and she also had multiple ear infections, although not nearly as bad as my son had.

My mother breastfed me for a year and I had recurrent ear infections as a child.

Some kids are just genetically susceptible to ear infections or bronchitis.

That said, I certainly agree that breast feeding gives a baby/toddler the best start in life. There have also been some studies that claim to show that breast fed kids have higher IQs. As my grandmother once said, "If human babies were supposed to drink cow's milk, they would have been born to cows." Just like we are trying to eat whole foods as adults, whole food for a baby is his or her mother's milk.

Victor weaned on his own, a little after his 4th birthday. He was winding down with it considerably, nursing only before bed at night, but my milk dried up from this pregnancy and then he stopped. He was a very high-needs type of baby that wanted to be held 24-7 and nursed frequently. When he was just a tiny infant, our family doc predicted that he would nurse at least 3 yrs if I let him, just due to his personality

It might sound "strange" to nurse a child of that age group, but it truly is the norm for most of the world. I started with a much shorter goal as far as nursing, but it seemed so silly to me to stop at some arbitrary point on the calendar when he was so happy and thriving from it. So, the "goals" kept getting adjusted upwards.

I also read this while DS#2 was an infant, and it made a huge impression on me (my maternal grandmother died of breast cancer):

"Each year of breastfeeding reduced the risk of breast cancer by 4.3% (p < 0.0001), in addition to a decrease of 7% for each birth. The size of the effect was not significantly different for women in developed vs. developing countries nor for any of the other personal characteristics examined (i.e., parity, ethnicity, menopausal status, mother’s age when first child was born, etc.).

To expect women in developed countries to return to a pattern typical in some traditional societies of bearing many children and breastfeeding each one for years is unrealistic. Nevertheless, the authors estimate that, if women in developed countries had an average of 2.5 children and breastfed those children for 6 months longer than they currently do, then about 5% of breast cancers might be prevented annually. If they breastfed for an additional 12 months, about 11% of breast cancers might be prevented.

Source: Collaborative Group on Hormonal Factors in Breast Cancer. Breast cancer and breastfeeding: collaborative reanalysis of individual data from 47 epidemiological studies in 30 countries, including 50,302 women with breast cancer and 96,973 women without the disease. Lancet 2002; 360: 187-195.

Can you imagine how ill your children could have been without you BFing? I agree that some children are extremely susceptible to infections, especially those darn EIs. I am kind of amazed how healthy my son has been, especially with his older brother bringing home God knows what germs from school, and I literally took him everywhere with me for his first 2 years because he was so clingy and wanted only me.

I totally agree with your grandmother too