I think it's cultural. Westerners are less likely to breastfeed even when they can. I watched a doco about Celts in Ireland and this seemed to be part of the culture even back then in ancient times, to stop breastfeeding early on in the infant's life.
In some Asian cultures, breatfeeding can go on for years. I read somewhere ages ago that Eskimos used to breastfeed their children until they were five years old. In some Middle Eastern cultures, the Kurdish culture is one such culture, mothers commonly breastfeed until the child is four, and you will commonly find children spaced out in this way, four years apart.
Many mothers who claim they can't breastfeed because their child won't take to the nipple etc and so they have to switch to bottle milk are not being persistent enough and giving up too easily. There was a study that showed this. This sort of behavior is commonly seen in western culture where for many centuries breastfeeding and for a prolonged period was not given high value.
The OP is an example of defensiveness that tries to pressure people to alter or soften facts to suit individual's circumstances and maintain their comfort zone about how they are treating their children.
A person who wasn't defensive and had some problem that made it outright impossible to breastfeed, such as a mastectomy, would come onto the board to seek out advice about what formulas Wai and RRM thought was best for her baby. A person who believed in the truth of Wai's message would seek all sorts of ways to overcome the obstacles to breastfeeding as much as she could, as lack of time, the awkwardness factor of using a breastpump and so on .. instead of attacking members here, projecting the guilt that she obviously feels about her 'inability' or 'unwillingness' on Wai and the members themselves.
IOW, the OP is one of those people who would shut people up if they stated facts that were uncomfortable for her. She ignores the fact that if Wai and her supporters were to do that, that would hurt many people who might have benefited from the advice Wai gives and the knowledge Wai shares with us.
It is the same defensiveness and the same attack on free speech that the Catholics showed when confronted with the findings of Galileo that the earth revolved around the sun and not the other way around. It made them uncomfortable because it contradicted what the bible said, and so they sought to attack the truth and the individual who spoke the truth, seeking to suppress anything that rocked their view of themselves. The OP is more about the poster herself than about the members of the board or about herself.
Breast Feeding
-
spring
- Posts: 128
- https://cutt.ly/meble-kuchenne-wroclaw
- Joined: Sat 13 Aug 2005 00:01
development
RRM, During these first 18 months, and then in the few years immediately afterward, what is the brain's development like with regard to cholesterol and glucose?
I am wondering if the things that happen later on a standard diet are happening in reverse early on... for example, the same receptors that 'wear out' later under the influence of cooked-foods simply aren't built well.. or fast enough... or at all... and if this brain development ever fully catches up.
Many children from non-ideal backgrounds hardly eat animal products in the first years-- or mother's milk-- especially if they are institutionalized (orphanages). They are lacking in clean cholesterol, overall.... and probably do not eat enough, also... this cannot affect the brain's development well, of course; but what is happening in the brain under these circumstances?
There is a very good book called _The Continuum Concept_ by Jean Liedloff... it talks about many of the things that the attachment parenting movement has adopted. Indeed, many things in the first years of life are completely biologically necessary, and one is obligated to do them for a child, if at all possible. Affection and contact with a close human 24 hours a day, whether mother or father, is absolutely and unequivocally ideal for a newborn infant.
It is amazing in watching nature documentaries on TV that feeature primate sanctuaries....i am always struck that the fulltime parent surrogates do feed, sleep with, play with, and maintain constant contact with the infants...We humans it seems do not have the resources in institutions to do this for human infants. And yet we are so similar, with similar needs...
I am wondering if the things that happen later on a standard diet are happening in reverse early on... for example, the same receptors that 'wear out' later under the influence of cooked-foods simply aren't built well.. or fast enough... or at all... and if this brain development ever fully catches up.
Many children from non-ideal backgrounds hardly eat animal products in the first years-- or mother's milk-- especially if they are institutionalized (orphanages). They are lacking in clean cholesterol, overall.... and probably do not eat enough, also... this cannot affect the brain's development well, of course; but what is happening in the brain under these circumstances?
There is a very good book called _The Continuum Concept_ by Jean Liedloff... it talks about many of the things that the attachment parenting movement has adopted. Indeed, many things in the first years of life are completely biologically necessary, and one is obligated to do them for a child, if at all possible. Affection and contact with a close human 24 hours a day, whether mother or father, is absolutely and unequivocally ideal for a newborn infant.
It is amazing in watching nature documentaries on TV that feeature primate sanctuaries....i am always struck that the fulltime parent surrogates do feed, sleep with, play with, and maintain constant contact with the infants...We humans it seems do not have the resources in institutions to do this for human infants. And yet we are so similar, with similar needs...
-
benzapp
- Moderator
- Posts: 77
- Joined: Mon 17 Oct 2005 00:01
- Location: Park Slope, Brooklyn, NY
- Contact:
Well, I was breast fed until I was 1.5 years old and I feel fine - although better since I started the Wai diet of course!
The cultures you mention historically have had inferior diets compared to what most westerners consumed, especially in the years after the black death when food was plentiful. Even today, the Kurds live primarily on bread and oil, with some lamb once in a while. Perhaps their extended breast feeding time was necessary in order to provide sufficient nutrients, at the detriment of the mother.
I'm of German descent and I grew very fast at a young age, despite having been weened early. By the time I was 4 I was already nearly 3.5 feet tall. I was the biggest kid in class all throughout school.
My growth slowed down a bit but by the time I was 12 I was 6 feet tall, had my wisdom teeth out, and had a full 2-year stint of braces (adult teeth required).
I know anecdotal evidence means almost nothing... but it's tough when your own life seems contradictory to a given statement!
The cultures you mention historically have had inferior diets compared to what most westerners consumed, especially in the years after the black death when food was plentiful. Even today, the Kurds live primarily on bread and oil, with some lamb once in a while. Perhaps their extended breast feeding time was necessary in order to provide sufficient nutrients, at the detriment of the mother.
I'm of German descent and I grew very fast at a young age, despite having been weened early. By the time I was 4 I was already nearly 3.5 feet tall. I was the biggest kid in class all throughout school.
My growth slowed down a bit but by the time I was 12 I was 6 feet tall, had my wisdom teeth out, and had a full 2-year stint of braces (adult teeth required).
I know anecdotal evidence means almost nothing... but it's tough when your own life seems contradictory to a given statement!
Re: development
Cholesterol is essential to brain development in infants (human milk contains 25 to 29 mg cholesterol / 100 gram).Marty wrote:RRM, During these first 18 months, and then in the few years immediately afterward, what is the brain's development like with regard to cholesterol and glucose?
Luckily, awareness increases.
Human milk also contains 6.6% lactose (glucose + galactose), and there is a reason why particularly children prefer sweet tastes. Another name for galactose is "brain sugar", as it also is essential for brain development.
Good question, and very much worth studying...They are lacking in clean cholesterol, overall.... and probably do not eat enough, ... what is happening in the brain under these circumstances?
Yes. It seems so clear, and yet we have trouble to grasp it...Affection and contact with a close human 24 hours a day, whether mother or father, is absolutely and unequivocally ideal for a newborn infant.
early development
Ah, thank you....
It seems that much nutritionally starts not just in childhood, but at the very youngest ages... That question I posed is the one that many of my other questions crystallize around.
Even putting nutrition aside, the need to be held in arms (pretty much constantly) is also compromised in many modern cultures... it is a form of 'nutrition' too.... If you do not think so, just consult the Harry Harlow (sp?) experiments on monkeys who preferred to starve rather than be deprived of a soft, mother-like model to cling to.
These things affect the brain more than we can ever know. And in many cultures... I am so struck by the American culture, now-- there is almost constant talk of developmental 'delays'-- vaguely defined...and consultation with 'experts' to address the delays...even before entering school....
One wonders.
---
I am on my way to London and Jakarta for a few weeks;
Happy holidays and continued love and peace, everyone.
-M.
It seems that much nutritionally starts not just in childhood, but at the very youngest ages... That question I posed is the one that many of my other questions crystallize around.
Even putting nutrition aside, the need to be held in arms (pretty much constantly) is also compromised in many modern cultures... it is a form of 'nutrition' too.... If you do not think so, just consult the Harry Harlow (sp?) experiments on monkeys who preferred to starve rather than be deprived of a soft, mother-like model to cling to.
These things affect the brain more than we can ever know. And in many cultures... I am so struck by the American culture, now-- there is almost constant talk of developmental 'delays'-- vaguely defined...and consultation with 'experts' to address the delays...even before entering school....
One wonders.
---
I am on my way to London and Jakarta for a few weeks;
Happy holidays and continued love and peace, everyone.
-M.
No, the Kurds don't have an 'inferior' diet compared to westerners; it's the other way around. They eat much of their food unprocessed and natural. Eg. their dairy foods is not pasteurized. And they don't eat just lamb and oil; they eat many fruits and vegetables, beans, dairy products, as well as meat. Their diet is typical Middle Eastern type of diet, and although not as good as Wai's diet, it is better than the western diet.benzapp wrote:Well, I was breast fed until I was 1.5 years old and I feel fine - although better since I started the Wai diet of course!
The cultures you mention historically have had inferior diets compared to what most westerners consumed, especially in the years after the black death when food was plentiful. Even today, the Kurds live primarily on bread and oil, with some lamb once in a while. Perhaps their extended breast feeding time was necessary in order to provide sufficient nutrients, at the detriment of the mother.
I think it's a cultural thing; the Persians who live right next to the Kurds don't breastfeed for as long as the Kurds do. The Kurds are famous for breastfeeding and in public too; they think nothing of baring their breasts to breastfeed in the home and in public they will not hesitate to breastfeed but they will cover up more outside.
I have been a guest in a Kurdish household and the woman there was breastfeeding her 2 year old child showing her breasts and everything - not that I have a problem with that but some westerners would - so I point this out to show the different attitudes in cultures.
I was "breastfed" until I was five. It wasn't serious breastfeeding in the last few years. There wasn't any milk coming out in the later years but the breast was used as a pacifier more or less.
I read that the IQs of breastfed and non-breastfed children tend to equalize in later years although breastfed children show an edge in their early years. Why would that be?
Perhaps the nutrients in breast milk don't significantly improve brain function and development?
Returning
It is wonderful to have travelled.... I am back in the U.S. now.
It was wonderful to sit on the beach overseas and smell the scent of clove cigarettes wafting through again... and to see the bright lights of the holidays strung on palm trees as well as tall buildings. How beautiful it is to travel and return.
In the closeness with family, I too recalled my childhood.
Of course in early childhood development it is not simply the nutrients we literally ingest....
To be breastfed on demand for years; to enjoy being closely proximate to a parent 24 hours a day for 18 months or more... this too is nutrition. This forms the brain (and the heart).....
It is indescribable, the benefits of what is known as 'attachment parenting' in early years. You may read Jean Liedloff's book _The Continuum Concept_ or just rely on your own innate human understanding of what is best for humans in their early years.
Seeing my family members I realized the richness of my upbringing overseas in those early years...particularly the constant contact with my mother; the cosleeping in my parents' bed as an infant; the way I was never in a stroller, on a cradleboard, or anything separated from a living parent or relative. There is a richness to this that I am sure is linked to the effects too of nutrition when there is breastfeeding involved in this...
Happy New Year to everyone-- continued good nutrition and love, which is also nutrition....
It was wonderful to sit on the beach overseas and smell the scent of clove cigarettes wafting through again... and to see the bright lights of the holidays strung on palm trees as well as tall buildings. How beautiful it is to travel and return.
In the closeness with family, I too recalled my childhood.
Of course in early childhood development it is not simply the nutrients we literally ingest....
To be breastfed on demand for years; to enjoy being closely proximate to a parent 24 hours a day for 18 months or more... this too is nutrition. This forms the brain (and the heart).....
It is indescribable, the benefits of what is known as 'attachment parenting' in early years. You may read Jean Liedloff's book _The Continuum Concept_ or just rely on your own innate human understanding of what is best for humans in their early years.
Seeing my family members I realized the richness of my upbringing overseas in those early years...particularly the constant contact with my mother; the cosleeping in my parents' bed as an infant; the way I was never in a stroller, on a cradleboard, or anything separated from a living parent or relative. There is a richness to this that I am sure is linked to the effects too of nutrition when there is breastfeeding involved in this...
Happy New Year to everyone-- continued good nutrition and love, which is also nutrition....
Other studies show otherwise.spring wrote:I read that the IQs of breastfed and non-breastfed children tend to equalize in later years although breastfed children show an edge in their early years.
Its not the nutrients (although they are optimal, of course), its the special growth factors and hormones specifically.Perhaps the nutrients in breast milk don't significantly improve brain function and development?
In a control study with non-breastfed siblings as the controls, the study found that there was no difference in intelligence. They concluded that maternal intelligence was the factor influencing the child's intelligence and more intelligent mothers tend to breastfeed their children.RRM wrote:Other studies show otherwise.spring wrote:I read that the IQs of breastfed and non-breastfed children tend to equalize in later years although breastfed children show an edge in their early years.
http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2006/10/ ... ed-iq.html
Breastfeeding offers no IQ boost, study says
Last Updated: Wednesday, October 4, 2006 | 1:24 PM ET
CBC News
Breastfeeding is important for healthy growth and development but it does not help a child's intelligence, researchers say.
Breastfed children score higher on IQ tests, but the effect is likely because mothers who breastfeed tend to be more intelligent, better educated, wealthier and provide a more stimulating environment at home, the British team concluded.
other studies
So, this is not one of the other studies RRM is talking about....