1. I am going to put myself out there by saying that perhaps what makes mothers who breastfeed different than mothers who do not is the physical skin to skin contact they consistantly get with baby. The emotional bond if hightened by the physical one, so perhaps that makes the mother more 'engaged'. That isn't to say parents who formula feed are not capable to have the same physical bond, but it is harder to structure in the time, and many parents rely on others to help feed baby (or they use props, or when baby is old enough to hold them own bottle, letting them do it).

Also, there have been pretty comprehensive studies that show that less educated, lower income mothers tend to breastfeed less consistantly, and for shorter times. Be it because they need to go back to work sooner (and can not afford the nice breastpump) or because they do not realize the benefits of breastfeeding, the economic and education line is there.

Perhaps a hypothosis you can agree with is that mothers who are economically better off are able to be at home with their kids, thus their breastfeeding relationship is not threatened by having to leave baby, and they are also able to give baby more one on one floor time. So it isn't the way they feed baby that makes them 'different', it is the circumstance that creates the two effects.

Posted at 12:23AM on May 6th 2008 by ivory

2. Why is it hard to accept that during the most vital part of the development of a child's brain, the quality of their food will affect that development?

I don't think breast feeding is the only determining factor in the success of the child, but obviously a food source, engineered by God, gods, evolution, whatever you believe, for the express purpose of sustaining and nurturing early life is going to better for the baby then a powder you mix with water.

Having said that, I disagree with the people who make it sound like if you don't breast feed, you're an uncaring parent who might as well put your child up for adoption because obviously you have no heart.

Posted at 12:43AM on May 6th 2008 by eugene

3. Last week I read a post here about how the guilt that formula feeding moms feel is largely self-inflicted. I would say that whatever guilt we feel is due to stories like this.

Maybe you've caught me on a bad day here, but I am just so sick of being separated into "moms who breastfeed" and "moms who don't." As though that categorization defines us as mothers somehow, or gives any insight at all into our children.

I think that as long as we love our kids and do what's best for our families, we're all on the same side.

Carolyn
http://www.momsontheedge.ca

Posted at 2:43AM on May 6th 2008 by Carolyn

4. >>> Yes, current wisdom holds that breastfeeding is the best thing since sliced bread.

If you mean that briefly there was a bit of lunacy around the 70s when we thought we should all be living in space-stations eating only pills, and apart from that blip, people have believed forever that breastfeeding is best - then, yes.

"current wisdom", puts the lie to any semblance at neutrality you were attempting to achieve.

That aside, remembering that Mum's milk is adjusted to the child's needs so that milk from a milk-bank (the second best option according to the WHO) isn't even so good - then you can see plainly that generic formula will never be as good as the real thing.

If you can't. That's fine. But make your best effort.

Posted at 4:54AM on May 6th 2008 by pbhj

5. Man, this is just a fight waiting to happen...

And let me make a little clarification. I don't think there is anybody who is actually AGAINST breastfeeding, we just choose not to or are unable to do it. I have been all three - with my first I couldn't, with my second I did, and with my third I chose not to because his latch was so poor it left me no time to care for my other children.

And I agree that statistics that say that "breastfed babies are smarter" is really a lot of hooey because unless you can take identical twins (and do this with several sets of them) and breastfeed one and formula feed that other there is no real way to "prove" anything. And even then there are still going to be differences as even identical twins are different people.

I really hate studies like this.

Posted at 8:45AM on May 6th 2008 by Inger

6. Hmmm, my bottle-fed-from-birth baby tested gifted when she was 8. 98th percentile. Interesting. Wonder what the study has to say about her. Exception that proves the rule? :-)

I hate studies like this too. There are so many other factors that contribute to intelligence - why do we get caught up with breastfeeding as a prime factor?

Posted at 9:10AM on May 6th 2008 by Rhonda

7. You can't prove that breastfed babies are smarter by comparing them to other children. You could only prove that if compared to themselves.

Maybe your gifted at 8 child would be even MORE gifted if she was breastfed. Since there is no way to determine this, it is something that can't be proven. We can't go back and compare the children to themselves. This is a dumb study that doesn't take into consideration a multitude of other factors and that can't single out one cause of intelligence.

Clearly breast is best. There are reasons for not breastfeeding and there are medical reasons it isn't possible (although not nearly as many as claim there is). I'm not sure how the arguments about "whatever works for each family" work. At whose expense? Because if it is the child that suffers, then how is that ok?

That said, and knowing that I'm 100% right about breastfeeding being the best thing for the baby, I'm certainly not critical of a mother, that in all other respects is devoted to their child. People are complex and sometimes we make decisions that are not the best. I just wish people would admit it and stop trying to justify it.

And there are many other behaviors that are much more harmful to a child than not breastfeeding. It isn't ONE thing that makes a mother good or bad, but an overall pattern. It is generally the compilation of decisions that makes a mother good vs. bad.

Either way, the great thing is that we all do judge parenting behaviors as we judge all other behaviors and make a character decisions based on the choices. This is not a bad thing. God will judge their soul (judge not lest you be judged) but it is my responsibility to judge behavior and make choices about relationships.

Either way guilt is useless. If you make the best decisions you know to make at any given time, there is no point feeling bad about it even if you find out later there may have been a better way. You cannot change the past.

Posted at 9:57AM on May 6th 2008 by Karen

8. You make so much sense!

This was my favorite line: "I'm not sure how the arguments about "whatever works for each family" work. At whose expense? Because if it is the child that suffers, then how is that ok?"

Posted at 12:01PM on May 6th 2008 by Mel

9. As a parent through adoption I am largely unaffected by the breastfeeding debate. That being said, I am sick to death of hearing reports that breastfeeding mothers are more vested in their children than other mothers. It's a ridiculous conclusion that completely ignores the variety of circumstances that preclude breastfeeding.

Posted at 10:01AM on May 6th 2008 by CLM

10. "So, someone who chooses to not breastfeed or can't breastfeed given the circumstances is not as invested in her child?"

Yes, precisely. And don't bring up that ubiquitous hysteria about "some mothers just can't." Yeah, I get that. Medical impossibility applies to a tinytinytiny percentage of non-breastfeeders. Certainly, you're lumping together working mothers in your "given the circumstances" caveat. See, that's still a choice. It just is. So, the long and short of it is that breastfeeding mommys are more invested than non-breastfeeders. UNLESS: The non-breastfeeder fits into the miniscule percentage of women for whom breasfeeding is IMPOSSIBLE.

Posted at 10:53AM on May 6th 2008 by Mel

11. In response to mothers who breastfeed are more vested I suppose your opinion wouldn't include mothers who breastfeed and work? It is insulting to say that a woman isn't vested in their children solely on the way they choose to feed their child. I breastfed both of my children but would never say that I am more vested in my children than my friends who opted not to and I am sure their children would agree. Show a little bit of tolerance.

Posted at 12:49PM on May 6th 2008 by Kelly

12. Love the new site design, hate the same old vitrulent commenters.
"Knowing that I am 100% right about breastfeeding" and "the long and short of it is that breastfeeding mommys are more invested than non-breastfeeders" makes me glad we can choose our friends and the blogs we read. And teach tolerance to our children.

Posted at 11:11AM on May 6th 2008 by Kate

13. They've been bothering me to put my 3 year old in Kindergarten, she's outsmarting the 5 year olds in her class. I hesitate to think how much smarter she'd have been if she'd have latched on, if I had not had to work, if I had not made the concious choice to take the only post-partum depression medication my state-sponsored insurance would pay for, which wasn't safe for breastfeding moms, in short, If I Chose Another Path. As far as my son goes, I know he'd be dead if I'd continued to breastfeed him, I'm glad they caught his rare allergy to all mammal milk as early as they did. No guilt on that one, and he's of above average intelligence too.

Posted at 11:46AM on May 6th 2008 by Sabrina

14. He was allergic to your milk??? Am I reading that right? That's rough...

Posted at 1:34PM on May 6th 2008 by Meagan

15. My milk, your milk, cow's milk, goat's milk, any milk from any mammal. It's more rare than a regular milk allergy, and unfortunately a lot of formula options carry protiens from at least one mammal's milk. It was interesting. Luckily he's now old enough for straight soy milk.

Posted at 1:42PM on May 6th 2008 by Sabrina

16. This is news, now? I thought this was news two decades ago, not today.

At any rate, it's not right.

Breastfeeding is the biological norm. We're fortunate in that, if we can't breastfeed, we have an alternative. However, that does not make this alternative natural.

Breastfed babies are *normal*. Formula fed babies suffer and have their intelligence damaged.

Posted at 3:02PM on May 7th 2008 by Uly