Babies are dying because breastfeeding advocates are lying


The original photo that got me banned from Facebook is here.

Breastfeeding has a death toll.

In itself that’s not surprising because breastfeeding is yet another aspect of reproduction and all animal reproduction, including human reproduction, has very high rates of wastage from miscarriage, death during childbirth and death in the early months of infancy. What’s surprising is that deaths from breastfeeding, which in industrialized countries had been reduced to zero with the advent of infant formula, have begun to rise again.

The scientific literature contains new and disturbing reports of infant deaths due to hypernatremic dehydration as a result of inadequate breast milk consumption, deaths from falling out of mothers’ hospital beds as a result of pressure to room-in to promote breastfeeding, and, most recently, reports of hyponatremia due to dilution of breastmilk with water. It’s only a matter of time before there are illnesses and deaths from contaminated breastmilk bought and traded on the internet.

Why are these babies dying? They’re dying because lactivists are lying, exaggerating the benefits of breastfeeding far, far beyond anything in the scientific literature. And they’re lying about non-existent “risks” of formula to the point that mothers are afraid to use it even when supplementing with formula is a matter of life and death.

The biggest lie and perhaps the one that has done the most damage is the claim that “breastmilk is the perfect food.” To understand why that claim is a lie we need to consider what characteristics a perfect food for infants would have.

Here are the 3 characteristics that a perfect infant food would have:

1. It should contains all the nutrients and other factors that an infant needs.

2. It must be available in sufficient quantity to promote vigorous growth of the infant.

3. The infant must be able to access it easily.

Any food that does not meet ALL THREE criteria cannot, under any circumstances, be a perfect food for that child. Breastmilk may be the perfect food for some infants, but it is highly imperfect for many others.

Lactivists routinely ignore critera 2 and 3, and babies die as a result. They get around the need for an adequate supply of milk with a claim that is manifestly a lie, the claim that all mothers produce enough milk. It’s pretty clear that up to 5% of mothers cannot produce enough breastmilk to fully meet a baby’s needs. That’s hardly surprising since no biological process is guaranteed to work perfectly. If established pregnancies can have a 20% miscarriage rate, and they do, it is hardly surprising that breastfeeding can have a failure rate of only a fraction of that amount.

Lactivists get around the third criterion with another lie, that every baby is capable of efficiently extracting milk from the breast. Some babies just can’t do it for anatomical reasons, because of weak muscle tone, or because they simply never get the hang of it. It is a serious problem that lactivists simply fail to address.

Those are the critical foundational lies that lead to deaths, but the are accompanied by a myriad of other, smaller lies about the benefits of breastfeeding. Breastfeeding does not prevent asthma, allergies, diabetes, obesity or anything beyond mild respiratory and mild gastrointestinal illnesses. Breastfeeding does NOT increase IQ.

The latest lie to enter the lactivist catalog of lies is the claim that breastfeeding is a public health issue. There has never been EVEN ONE STUDY that has demonstrated that breastfeeding benefits public health. The studies that make the claim of public health benefits or healthcare saving are all theoretical and are based on the ASSUMPTION that breastfeeding provides benefits that are in reality unproven.

Why are lactivists lying? Lactivism is a business and breastfeeding is their product. True, lactivism does not yield multimillion dollar profits, but for lactation consultants and lactivism advocacy groups it yield 100% of profits. Consider the Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative that credentials hospitals based on whether they meet specific breastfeeding promotion criteria (criteria that ironically have never even been shown to improve breastfeeding rates). The credentialing organization charged more than $10,000 per hospital for the privilege. Extolling and exaggerating the benefits of breastfeeding improve the bottom line.

Lactivists and their organizations are not lying knowingly, of course. Their belief in the benefits of breastfeeding is akin to religious devotion and like religious devotion is not affected by the actual scientific evidence. They believe, they want everyone else to believe, and they will say nearly anything to convince people to believe, that breastfeeding is critical whether it is true or whether they merely believe it is true.

That wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t for the dead babies. The deaths make a vet big problem indeed. So let’s be very clear on some important facts.

Breastmilk is NOT the perfect food.

In first world countries, the benefits of breastfeeding are TRIVIAL.

And, most importantly, infant formula is LIFE SAVING for many babies.

The truth is that there has never been a single identified infant death from properly prepared infant formula. In contrast there are quite a few babies who have died as a result of exclusive breastfeeding.

Unfortunately, babies will continue dying until breastfeeding advocates stop lying, so they should temper their rhetoric immediately. Otherwise future deaths will rest on them and their irresponsible, damn the consequences, efforts to promote breastfeeding.


Addendum: I’ve gotten numerous request for citations to the breastfeeding related deaths so here are several:

Breastfeeding-Associated Hypernatremia: Are We Missing the Diagnosis?

The incidence of breastfeeding-associated hypernatremic dehydration among 3718 consecutive term and near-term hospitalized neonates was 1.9%, occurring for 70 infants…

Conclusion. Hypernatremic dehydration requiring hospitalization is common among breastfed neonates…

Neonatal hypernatremic dehydration associated with breast-feeding malnutrition: a retrospective survey

Hypernatraemic dehydration and breast feeding: a population study

Deaths and near deaths of healthy newborn infants while bed sharing on maternity wards

Although bed sharing with infants is well known to be hazardous, deaths and near deaths of newborn infants while bed sharing in hospitals in the United States have received little attention … These events occurred within the first 24 h of birth during ‘skin-to-skin’ contact between mother and infant, a practice promoted by the ‘Baby Friendly’ (BF) initiative … We report 15 deaths and 3 near deaths of healthy infants occurring during skin-to-skin contact or while bed sharing on maternity wards in the United States. Our findings suggest that such incidents are underreported in the United States and are preventable…

In eight cases, the mother fell asleep while breastfeeding. In four cases, the mother woke up from sleep but believed her infant to be sleeping when an attendant found the infant lifeless. One or more risk factors that are known or suspected (obesity and swaddling) to further increase the risk of bed sharing were present in all cases. These included … maternal sedating drugs in 7 cases; cases excessive of maternal fatigue, either stated or assumed if the event occurred within 24 h of birth in 12 cases; pillows and/or other soft bedding present in 9 cases; obesity in 2 cases; maternal smoking in 2 cases; and infant swaddled in 4 cases.

825 Responses to “Babies are dying because breastfeeding advocates are lying”

  1. Becca Nova
    October 29, 2017 at 11:33 pm #

    I enjoyed your article so much. When I got pregnant I KNEW I wanted to breastfeed. I thought that I would be a FAILURE if I couldn’t do it or even if I supplemented with formula just a little bit. About a week after my son was born, I knew something was wrong, but every book, every lactation consultant (I saw 2 different ones during this time), every blog said that all women are able to produce enough milk. I thought that the more I nursed him, the more milk I would produce.

    My son continued to lose weight until thankfully, a family member suggested supplementing. He gulped his first bottle down!!! He was so hungry. I also started pumping my milk during this time and found out that I produce a measly 16 ounces per day… about 2/3 the amount he should have been getting.

    I don’t think the lactation consultants are lying though… they are just spouting out what they’ve been taught through their certification. I want to counter all of these ignorant lactivists by sharing my story and educating the women who cannot produce enough milk. Supplementing is not a crime!!!!

  2. Roadstergal
    April 24, 2017 at 6:58 pm #

    Given all of the advances in understanding of NEC and the factors that reduce the risk, I think it’s reasonable that we will have formula within my lifetime that is more reliable than breastmilk at preventing NEC.

    And when that happens, Nikki Lee will be telling women that it’s poison, advising them to avoid it, and cracking their babies’ necks.

    I just randomly had that thought, and got pretty depressed.

  3. nikkilee
    April 15, 2017 at 8:19 am #

    Should all formula be banned because of this rare occurrence? Of course not. The companies must be held accountable for safe preparation of their product.

    Same is true for breastfeeding. Rare occurrences drive changes in policy and practice.

    • Nick Sanders
      April 15, 2017 at 10:24 am #

      The article doesn’t say how the contamination happened. Was there a problem during manufacturing and shipping, which would indeed be the liability of the manufacturer, or was the contaminant introduced at a later point, in which case they are not to blame.

      • nikkilee
        April 15, 2017 at 2:28 pm #

        The process for making powder can’t be sterile. . . manufacturer’s haven’t figured out that one yet.

        • Nick Sanders
          April 15, 2017 at 2:40 pm #

          Boobs can’t be sterile either. At least, not while they are attached to the mother and she is alive.

          • nikkilee
            April 16, 2017 at 12:01 pm #

            Yes, you are right. The difference is that thing you all scoff at. . . .human milk can resist germs better, because of that thing folks here say is insignificant.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 16, 2017 at 1:32 pm #

            Tell you what, I’ll leave a canister of powdered formula and a glass of breast milk out at room temperature overnight, and we’ll see has more microbial activity in the morning.

            Of course, that wasn’t what I was talking about to begin with. The liquid itself is only part of the picture, the container is the rest. While I don’t know for sure, I doubt many women are scrubbing their nipples down with alcohol wipes before each feed, let alone actually sterilizing them with something truly effective, like boiling water. And then, there are things like mastitis and “strawberry” milk, that lactivists seem to insist you keep right on feeding through.

          • nikkilee
            April 16, 2017 at 10:20 pm #

            Fresh breast milk had lower bacterial counts after 10 hours at room temperature than it did when it was freshly pumped. No way would that happen with formula.

            Mastitis is not a contraindication to breastfeeding. The breast tissue is inflamed in mastitis. The milk is not infected.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 16, 2017 at 10:39 pm #

            Even if the bacterial claim is true, I’m not talking about comparing before and after bacteria levels in milk; I’m talking about comparing them in milk to the formula powder.

          • Heidi
            April 16, 2017 at 11:12 pm #

            Just no. Neither prepared powder formula nor breast milk are to be served after 10 hours at room temperature. Quit peddling this dangerous misinformation! I guarantee in a real life setting, mothers are not pumping with sterile equipment nor sterile breasts. Breast milk, like any other mammal milk, is a good enough medium to grow bacteria in.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 17, 2017 at 7:59 am #

            I’d like to clarify that I was referring to formula that had not been prepared, which is why I kept saying powder.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 6:03 pm #

            There’s a pretty long list of things you shouldn’t put in your child’s mouth after 10 hours at room temperature…!

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 5:29 am #

            Are you for real? Bacterial infection absolutely IS a possible cause of mastitis.

          • Who?
            April 17, 2017 at 6:32 am #

            Whose room? An eskimo’s?

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 8:38 am #


            CDC guidelines for milk storage.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 17, 2017 at 1:36 pm #

            Put the goalposts back where you found them.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:00 pm #

            So…..where did you come up with the claim that milk that stayed on a counter 10 hours had less bacteria?
            Because even the CDC says 6-8h according to your link (my government says 4 btw) and says nothing about bacteria at 10 hours.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:06 pm #

            Public health recommendations are always more conservative than research findings, because public health recommendations aim for minimum standards of safety. Every organization has variations on the guidelines for milk storage, based on what studies they used.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:10 pm #

            So you just pulled out ’10 hours’ out of your ass? Are you actually recommending people use milk that stayed outside for 10 hours?

          • Lilly de Lure
            April 18, 2017 at 4:34 am #

            Indeed, but the research you’ve cited is 30 years old – plenty of time for public health recommendations to catch up with its findings if they were considered convincing, valid or replicable.

          • Who?
            April 18, 2017 at 5:26 am #

            Yes but what public health recommendations are you, personally, relying on when you quote the 10 hour figure?

            Surely you’re not just making that number up to impress the gullible? Or do you dress it up with a healthy helping of ‘use your own best judgment’?

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 7:52 am #

            10 hours was one research finding. 3, 4 5, 6 or 8 hours at room temperature are recommendations from different organizations: pump companies, medical organizes, and the CDC.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:13 pm #

            Barger, J., Bull, P. A comparison of the bacterial composition of breast milk stored at
            room temperature and stored in the refrigerator. International Journal of Childbirth
            Education 1987; 2:29-30.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 4:32 pm #

            The article isn’t available through Pubmed or, as far as my search engine is helping me, online at all. Share the PDF of this exhaustive, convincing study.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:32 pm #

            One study older than I am. Very impressive. We all know that reliably reproducing results isn’t an important part of science. And I’m sure we have made NO scientific advancement in the field of microbiology in the last 30 years.

            I can’t even find the study anywhere. Very convincing indeed.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:36 pm #

            Ok then.

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 7:56 am #

            I learned in graduate school that references older than 5 years weren’t acceptable. Blanket recommendations have holes in them.

            For example, newborn behaviors haven’t changed in thousands of years; a classic study published in 1990 (Righard and Alade) will be as current now as nearly 30 years later. Same with milk spoiling at room temperature.

            Studies about drugs or surgical techniques need to be current, to reflect current knowledge and the state of the art.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 18, 2017 at 11:23 am #

            You know, I looked for the Barger study.
            I found lots of people citing it as a reference for their leaflets on safe breastmilk storage, but even when I went onto the journal in question’s website and attempted to search for it, I couldn’t find either an abstract or a way to pay to access the study.

            If you have it in front of you, could you provide an abstract please?

            If you have a link to the study in full, that would be even better.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 18, 2017 at 11:34 am #

            Oh, but I did discover that neither J Barger not PA Bull are microbiologists, they are lactation specialists.

            So I’d REALLY be interested in reading that paper.

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 9:41 pm #

            I used to have a paper copy. No idea where it is. The stacks at the Medical Library carry that journal, but only going back to 1990. I will ask my colleagues. It is cited in 23 articles! I also asked ICEA if they had a copy.

          • Who?
            April 19, 2017 at 4:23 am #

            It’s funny.

            I’m running an assessment program at the moment, the basis of which is essentially made up stories, with a bit of contractual heft thrown in for good measure. As I worked throught it and began to understand it, my standard position became ‘written down, preferably in approved meeting minutes or a Council resolution, or it didn’t happen’.

            It’s given me a really good insight into how people, who are often well meaning but also extremely opinionated, can take something perfectly respectable and turn it into nonsense by fetishising it.

            The Barger study may well be another case in point.

            Twenty-three articles in 30 years doesn’t sound like a lot.

          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 8:10 am #

            I too, am interested in seeing this article. I know one of the authors and will contact her.

          • Azuran
            April 19, 2017 at 10:00 am #

            Wait…….are you saying you’ve never seen it before?

          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 12:16 pm #

            I had a copy. . . it was a long time ago. I just got another copy. It doesn’t say what I was taught it said.

            As Dr. Kitty said, something perfectly respectable was turned into nonsense.

            There is no way to upload a file. Milk from 30 mothers of babies from 2 to 6 months was studied.

            However, “Comparisons of the data were performed with the non-parametric Mann-Whitney statistical method (nonpaired) and the Wilcoxon signed rank test (paired). Bacterial levels of the breast milk stored for 10 hours at room temperature was not significantly different from the bacterial levels of the refrigerated breast milk at ten hours. (p. <.005)

            That is not less than bacterial growth. I was wrong. Thanks for pushing me to discover this.

            The fact that there was no significant difference between refrigerated storage and room temperature is interesting.

            Human milk has been found to kill things such as HIV ( and bacteria ( points to yet another difference between liquids.


          • Azuran
            April 19, 2017 at 8:40 pm #

            FFS there isn’t HIV in formula so there is absolutely 0 need for formula to be able to kill HIV.
            RTF formula doesn’t have bacteria and is sealed. So no need for it to be able to kill bacteria
            Powdered formula is made with boiling water, which kills bacteria, so no need for it to be able to kill bacteria either.
            All of this doesn’t matter one bit if you follow basic formula and breastmilk storage recommendation. Who cares which one has less bacteria at whatever time passed the recommended time?

            And although the risk is low, breastmilk absolutely can transmit HIV.

          • momofone
            May 14, 2017 at 9:13 pm #

            “It doesn’t say what I was taught it said.”

            What you were *taught* it said? So you haven’t even read the damn thing yourself?

          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 12:25 pm #

            What would happen if formula was left out at room temperature for 10 hours? Now there’s a study waiting to be done. It does have ingredients to enable the nutrients to last on the shelf for 3 years, but once exposed to the air, what happens?

          • myrewyn
            April 19, 2017 at 12:43 pm #

            I’m not sure why we are fixated on the question of leaving milk/formula out at room temperature for hours longer than would be best practice for even adult consumption.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 19, 2017 at 1:08 pm #

            Nikkilee- found some studies on breastmilk bacterial contamination for you.

            The Conclusion you claim for the Barger study doesn’t appear to have been replicated.


          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 7:43 pm #

            CDC says human milk can be left out at room temperature (up to 77 degrees) for 6-8 hours.

            AAP says the same.

            ABM says 3-4 hours optimal; up to 6-8 hours under very clean conditions.

            Medela says 4-6 hours.

            AAP says that infant formula left out for 1 hour should be thrown away.

            Freshly pumped human milk resists spoiling by inherent mechanisms. Infant formula can’t do that.

          • Azuran
            April 19, 2017 at 2:35 pm #

            First: WHY would I leave either formula or breastmilk out for 10 hours.
            Second: Nothing very impressive is going to happen to formula that is left out for 10 hours. Bacteria will grow in it. That’s basically it. The nutrients in it aren’t going to just magically disintegrate because of air.
            And third: You REALLY think that no one tested how long formula can safely be kept at room temperature?

          • Dr Kitty
            April 19, 2017 at 6:04 am #

            Being cited by other people doesn’t tell me anything about methodology, sample size, rigour etc. Wakefield got cited a lot for a while.

            It certainly doesn’t tell me if your claim that after sitting for over 10 hours breastmilk has fewer bacteria is true, has ever been replicated or was a finding that can be attributed to chance.

            Do you even science?

          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 8:08 am #

            Is science a verb?

          • Heidi
            April 19, 2017 at 8:24 am #

            Where’ve you been? Verbifying is pretty common. So yes, Dr. Kitty just made science a verb.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 19, 2017 at 9:01 am #

            Nikkilee- it’s a pop culture reference.
            There is a meme based on “Do you even lift, bro?”

            I am indicating, through humour, that you don’t know how citations actually work (i.e to be useful you actually have to be able to use the reference, as well, a reference) nor that you understand how scientific research works (that in order to judge the merit of a paper and the veracity of it’s findings, again, one has to actually be able to read the paper).

          • Azuran
            April 18, 2017 at 12:12 pm #

            Actually, there have probably been A LOT of change in the field of microbiology in the last 30 years.
            We likely got way better at culturing and identifying bacteria.

            Also, seems to me like you forgot your initial claim. Your claim wasn’t that milk at 10 hours was safe. It was the milk at 10 hours HAS LESS bacteria than fresh milk.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 4:37 pm #

            Maybe the bacteria outgrow the nutrients and start to necrose at 10hr. :p

          • Mishimoo
            April 19, 2017 at 8:13 am #

            4 hours is what I was taught, but I think it’s gross to leave milk so long. Everything I pumped went straight to the freezer.

          • Azuran
            April 19, 2017 at 10:02 am #

            I wouldn’t drink cow milk that has been outside the fridge for 4 hours, And it’s pasteurized.
            I wouldn’t give breast milk that stayed out for 4 hours to my baby either.

          • Mishimoo
            April 19, 2017 at 10:04 am #

            Exactly! It’s gross

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 7:05 am #

            So…………. We should leave breast milk on the counter to let the bacteria die? What even is the point of this? You aren’t supposed to give breast milk that stayed 10 hours on a counter to your baby, so what should it matter?
            You can’t even stay constant on whether you think bacteria are are good or a bad thing.
            (Also. source or it didn’t happen)

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 7:28 am #

            Yes, you can continue to breast feed if you have mastitis.
            Most mastitis is caused by bacterial infection by staph aureus and the bacteria will be present in the milk (along with copious neutrophils attempting to kill the bacteria).but since it is also present on skin anyway, and is killed by digestive acid, it isn’t considered a risk to the baby.

            The milk *is* infected in mastitis- it is why we send it to the lab for culture and sensitivity- it will grow the causative bacteria and make sure the antibiotic is the correct one.

            In mastitis breast milk enters the maternal blood stream and usually causes a fairly horrible immune reaction, with flu like symptoms, fevers and chills. If this doesn’t settle with 24 hours of alternating ice and heat on the breast, massage, frequent feeding or pumping to prevent milk stasis and simple analgesia such as ibuprofen, the advice is to start a 2 week course of high flucloxacillin. Mastitis can lead to sepsis and death if not managed properly.

            You can feed through it, but you shouldn’t *just* feed through it if it continues to get worse.

            Too often “just because you have mastitis doesn’t mean you have to stop breastfeeding” becomes “mastitis is no biggie, just feed more!”.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 8:35 am #

            There are two kinds of mastitis. The “itis” ending means inflammation. The beginning, the first 24 hours is the result of milk stasis. Milk proteins can then leak out into the surrounding tissue with resulting redness, swelling, pain, and heat. Frequent drainage (feeding or pumping) and removing the cause of the milk stasis can usually resolve this in a day. If she still has a fever after 24 hours, then it’s time for a call to provider. In any case, breastfeeding should continue. When the mastitis is bilateral, this is a sign of strep mastitis, and may require hospitalization and IV antibiotics, as this is the mastitis that can lead to death. And, as you say, any untreated mastitis can lead to sepsis and death.

            Mastitis is always a “biggie”. . . it is a symptom of something else that needs resolution. Nipple damage, (allowing entry of bacteria) and oversupply, anemia and too-tight bras are some of those reasons.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 1:03 pm #

            Babe, do you at all want to take back your erroneous statement that breastmilk from a woman with infective mastitis doesn’t contain bacteria?

            Breast feeding *can* continue, if a woman with mastitis wants to. Many, because they have cracked, bleeding nipples, red, swollen tender breasts and aches, chills and sweats prefer to pump until they feel better.
            Some have co-existing thrush and even pumping is agonisingly painful.
            Some feel crappy on antibiotics and have babies who feel crappy on breastmilk with antibiotics in it and choose to pump and dump and feed formula until the course of medication finishes.
            For some mastitis is the last straw and they prefer to stop BF.
            Some get recurrent mastitis, and while they might still want to BF after the first episode, decide after the fifth that it just isn’t worth it.
            There is no *should*, only what individual women want.

            I’m the care provider who gets called when supportive treatment fails Nikkilee.
            I’m the safety net for when your advice fails.
            And no, not just bilateral or strep mastitis needs hospital admission and IVABx.

            We had two women die of sepsis locally within 48hrs of symptom onset on recent years, both of whom had been advised that mastitis was no big deal by the MW and HV and had been so keen to continue breastfeeding and so sure that antibiotics would damage BF that they delayed seeking treatment. Since then there were massive changes to policies and procedures.

            BF has some risks- if we are talking about saving costs and improving health outcomes for babies we also have to talk about maternal risks of mastitis, breast abscess, milk cysts etc.

            Every women who needs two weeks of oral antifungals and antibiotics needs to be counted in the con column, just like those mythical 3 IQ points and one episode fewer of viral gastroenteritis gets counted in the pro column.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 2:15 pm #

            Human milk contains bacteria.

            Fatigue is another reason for mastitis.

            Recurrent mastitis is linked with anemia and with oversupply. With anemia, one’s resistance to infection diminish. With oversupply, more milk is being made than the baby can remove; milk stasis is a set-up for mastitis.

            All the variations in maternal experience are accurate.

            Is mastitis common enough to be termed a risk factor? The WHO says the incidence ranges from a few to 33%.

            Maybe. . .

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 2:38 pm #

            Of all the bacterial mastitis (several, despite our area’s horribly low BF rated) I have treated in the last 3 years none had anaemia.

            Mostly they are just exhausted mums who finally have a baby that sleeps through the night around 3 months, long after BF is well established and they know what they are doing.

            Baby then ravenously feeds the next morning and the combo of cracked and bleeding nipples and milk stasis from a missed night feed is enough to set up the perfect storm for mastitis.

            Since fewer than 10% of my patients feed beyond 6weeks, I only start antibiotics at 24hrs if supportive treatments don’t work and I end up prescribing antibiotics for mastitis maybe twice a month, I’d say 33% is much nearer the mark.

            Again, if BF actually results in high rates of mastitis and subsequent ABx use, the merits of preventing viral gastroenteritis and otitis media might be a wash…

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 3:45 pm #

            up to 33% is not common enough for you? FFS what is wrong with you?
            So, now that you’ve laid out some causes of mastitis, what are you going to do about it? Doesn’t seem to me like there is much that you can due to reduce fatigue, anemia or oversupply.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 3:48 pm #

            I can think of something that would help with fatigue – sharing feeding duties with another member of the family. But that might involve the f-word, and Nikki Lee dun’t swing that way.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:02 pm #

            Of course, but formula apparently isn’t something Nikky Lee knows how to use.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 17, 2017 at 4:07 pm #

            Why is containing bacteria ok for breastmilk, but not being sterile something to be held against formula?

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:31 pm #

            You know what my YouTube feed shows?
            It shows a hell of a lot of tichel and turban tying videos (
            Do you know why?

            Because this time last year I found a breast lump.
            I was breastfeeding at the time.
            And while logically I knew it was probably fine, a part of me was still preparing for the worst.

            It took a week from when I first found the lump to an ultrasound, fine needle aspiration and an all-clear with a diagnosis of milk cyst.
            It was not exactly the best week of my life.

            Again- this is a well known, common risk of breast feeding and it is either dismissed as rare, or as no big deal. Neglectingebtureky the stress and anxiety that any woman with a new breast lump will feel.

            I breast fed, I liked breast feeding, I found it easy and I would do it again AND YET it is not perfect, it it. It painless and it has a cost that will sometimes outweigh the benefits.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:34 pm #

            Sorry. Mobile phone predictive text.

          • MaineJen
            April 17, 2017 at 3:37 pm #

            ??????Two women DIED of mastitis recently???????

            I didn’t know mastitis was potentially fatal.

            …mother nature really hates women, doesn’t she?

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 3:45 pm #

            Mother Nature DGAF about women, one way or another.

            Despite what Nikki Lee is trying to sell.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 3:52 pm #

            When I was in school, one of my patient was a cat that had bacterial mastitis. Despite every ATB in the world, the infection got so severe her mammary glands started necrosing and she developed septicemia. We had to do a total bilateral mastectomy to save her life.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:43 pm #

            Which is why I find it laughable that 3 IQ points, one episode of otitis media and one episode of viral GE in the pro column seem to outweigh all the FTT, breastmilk jaundice requiring admission for Light therapy or transfusion, hyponatraemic dehydration, mastitis requiring antibiotics, thrush requiring oral antufungals, breast abscesses, milk cysts, DMERD etc.

          • Heidi_storage
            April 17, 2017 at 5:02 pm #

            Yikes!! So was I foolish not to seek medical advice when I had mastitis roughly every month and a half, last time around? I just waited it out, and it never lasted more than a day and a half, but maybe I should call my obgyn if I get it again.

            (I was pumping 100 oz per day with my second kid. Gave up at 11 months because it was awful, but I had enough milk to see him almost to the year mark.)

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 3:45 pm #

            J Trop Pediatr. 2006 Dec;52(6):399-405. Epub 2006 Sep 27

            ETC: if that’s the study you’re thinking of, it shows the exact opposite of what you think it does. Milk is a robust medium for bacterial growth, and it’s teeming with bacteria after only a few hours at RT. Pathogenic bacteria grow very well in it.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 3:53 pm #

            Thanks for the link.
            There are conflicting reports. I wonder, as this study was done in South Africa, if room temperature is different.

            The CDC is specific about is what room temperature.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 3:55 pm #

            “If room temperature is different”

            LOL. Does this really fly with the people you hang out with? Show us the study you’re thinking of. We can’t read your mind (thank god).

          • Azuran
            April 16, 2017 at 1:34 pm #

            Boiling water is also extremely effective at getting rid of bacteria.
            Honestly, babies are probably exposed to a LOT less bacteria from a properly prepared bottle of powdered formula than they are sucking on breasts.
            But either way, unless you can come up with some study that says a significant number of bottle fed baby are getting bacterial infection from properly prepared formula, it’s not something anyone need to really be concerned about.

          • Charybdis
            April 16, 2017 at 4:32 pm #

            That is incorrect. Milk is milk is milk, no matter the species. ALL are subject to bacterial contamination and overgrowth, a short holding time before spoiling and the potential to transmit diseases. Just because it comes from a woman’s breast, does not immediately elevate it to “better than”, not does it imbue the milk with miraculous, legendary properties.

            It all gets digested in the end anyway. Saliva, enzymes and stomach acid break down/denture and digest the protein, fat and milk solids.

            Other than being species specific, which isn’t as big a deal as you like to think it is, because species will cross nurse, there is no major bonus to breastmilk . There are accounts of mother cats who adopt and nurse a baby squirrel or bunny, a mother dog adopting and nursing a kitten, a goat nursing a calf or foal or providing the milk for bottle feeding.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 16, 2017 at 4:37 pm #

            But what about that special, mysterious “thing”?

          • Who?
            April 16, 2017 at 6:46 pm #

            nickilee will never tell.

          • MaineJen
            April 17, 2017 at 3:31 pm #

            Soooo how long can you keep human milk at room temperature before it spoils?

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 3:40 pm #

            If you leave it out long enough, eventually it will have negative bacteria and starts bending time and space.

    • Azuran
      April 15, 2017 at 11:05 am #

      Indeed, which is exactly what we are trying to do: Inform people on the risks of breastfeeding failure and how to recognize and prevent them. And most lactivists are actively fighting against this.

    • maidmarian555
      April 15, 2017 at 11:57 am #

      Actually, this is a known issue with formula. The best thing you can do to minimise this risk is to use RTF formula in the early weeks/months, ensure good practice when it comes to keeping bottles clean and sterilised and always use boiled water when prepping a bottle. You want to know how many of the midwives and health visitors who CAME TO MY HOUSE checked we were following best practice after we told them we were combo feeding my son? None. Not one of them checked we knew these things or that we were prepping bottles correctly. I can’t tell you how furious I was after I found out about the risk of using powdered formula for a newborn when my son was around 3 months old. Luckily for us, we’d been using RTF formula simply because he was only having one bottle a day and we couldn’t be bothered with the powdered stuff until it became clear to us that the one bottle a day was definitely staying. I find it interesting you imply that the responsibility for ensuring parents know everything they should know about formula should rest with the formula companies (there are prep instructions and safety warnings on every can already). Personally, I think that HCPs have a pivotal role to play here.

      • AnnaPDE
        April 17, 2017 at 10:25 am #

        Um. Not meaning to deny that RTF is more convenient and easier to not contaminate, but RTF doesn’t even exist outside of hospitals in Australia and FF babies here do just fine, even in the tropical parts where mould manages to grow on stainless steel. So maybe that’s something that’s ok to be fairly relaxed about.

        • Azuran
          April 17, 2017 at 11:21 am #

          I think they are severely overeacting about the risks of formula contamination.
          I mean, breast milk isn’t sterile,
          Breasts sure as hell aren’t sterile (And I really doubt anyone is cleaning her nipple with anti-septic soap before and after each feeding)
          Babies put everything in their mouth, especially their hands.
          No one is sterilizing a pacified every single time it drops from a baby’s mouth.

          Yet people are going crazy about potential bacteria in powdered milk and about how you have to STERILIZE every single bottle and nipple after ever single use.

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 7:58 am #

            With powder, one must take precautions because powder contains spores of cronobacter, or salmonella or clostridia. Preparing powdered infant formula should be like home canning. This is not true for liquid formulae.

          • Azuran
            April 18, 2017 at 12:13 pm #

            Oh I was still told to sterilise everything I used even when using RTF formula.

          • Heidi
            April 18, 2017 at 12:55 pm #

            No, *could* contain. One doesn’t have to take special precautions, although I would argue the information should be given and families can do with this information what they want. Next baby, for example, I might prepare this way for the first two months but will probably go back to the Brezza that served us so well. The occurrence is rare (single digits a year, predominantly younger babies who were born preemies and/or low birth weight) and when an occurrence does happen, formula is recalled and many times, if not usually, contamination has been found to occur from an outside source. And no, it’s not like home canning. No need to use pressure nor water over the boiling point. 160 farhenheit will kill potential pathogens without compromising the milk.

        • Charybdis
          April 17, 2017 at 11:29 am #

          Are you serious? (I’m sure you are, I just can’t believe that RTF formula can’t be purchased at the store. That is insane!) RTF is the greatest thing ever. And so convenient, especially when the baby is really new and those 2 oz nursette bottles with nipples you screw on and then toss are the BEST THING EVER! Nothing to prepare or clean up afterwards. Screw on nipple, feed, toss. No fuss, no muss and you are sure the baby is getting fed.

          • AnnaPDE
            April 17, 2017 at 9:18 pm #

            Honestly the one part that I hated most about formula prep was getting the temperature right, as Mr Fussy wanted it warm-ish. Warming it in a bottle warmer/warm water bath is just way too slow when you’ve got a hungry baby on your hands, and microwave efficiency varies a bit between amounts, bottle positioning and starting temperature, so it was a bit too much trial and error. Not to mention a husband who was overcomplicating things a bit in an effort to be very helpful.

        • maidmarian555
          April 17, 2017 at 12:03 pm #

          I just think that FF parents have a right to know that the risk exists and how to minimise that risk. I don’t think it was ok for my HV to imply that feeding my son even a drop of formula would make him fat and stupid but not mention the importance of preparing a bottle properly. Nikki Lee’s article pissed me off because it ended with “OMG DID YOU KNOW HOW DANGEROUS FORMULA IS??!!” without mentioning that are a number of fairly simple things you can do to ensure that it isn’t dangerous at all. To put it into context, apparently the CDC get 4-6 cases a year like the one in her article reported to them. We’re talking a really, really vanishingly small risk here but it is real and not one of the numerous made-up bullshit ‘risks’ of formula that we get rammed down our throats as part of breastfeeding promotion. The likelihood is that even if you fail to sterilise a bottle, or if the water isn’t quite boiled that this won’t happen to you but that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t be given information on how to prepare a bottle safely or that if RTF is available that it’s safer. I’m sorry RTF doesn’t exist where you are. That stuff made our lives immeasurably easier in the early days.

          • AnnaPDE
            April 17, 2017 at 9:15 pm #

            I absolutely agree, that whole risk thing is totally blown out of proportion AND the simple means to address it aren’t even mentioned. I just wanted to throw in a bit of international “interestingly we’re not dying in droves either” perspective from a first-world country with a famously nanny state approach and a serious fetish for OH&S.

    • Heidi
      April 16, 2017 at 9:55 pm #

      I thought you were done here? This post is nearly two years old.

      • Nick Sanders
        April 16, 2017 at 10:06 pm #

        The post being ridiculously old has never stopped a nutcase before.

        • Heidi
          April 16, 2017 at 10:20 pm #

          I think she must not know how to internet.

    • Heidi
      April 16, 2017 at 10:09 pm #

      So do you take any responsibility for this death? Because you should! You know what’s not told to us mothers by health professionals and lactation consultants? We aren’t told how to eliminate the rare risk of contamination. It’s pretty simple too. Boil water, cool to 160 F and then mix. But no we’re only told to fucking breastfeed. But some of us can’t or don’t want to but we’re​n not supported. I went home without anyone even acknowledging I didn’t make enough. I was only allowed to supplement because of low blood sugar. No lactation consultant was there to help me minimize formula feeding risks, just there to teach me the football hold.

      • nikkilee
        April 16, 2017 at 10:17 pm #

        It has been paradoxical to be a lactation consultant and to have to be teaching about safe formula preparation and about bottle-feeding. I never had to learn about those things before. (The BFHI includes a section on teaching about formula.)

        • Nick Sanders
          April 16, 2017 at 10:37 pm #

          It’s not paradoxical. A teacher needs to be able to instruct people in what they need to learn, not just what the teacher likes.

        • Heidi
          April 16, 2017 at 10:41 pm #

          Well, let’s see: plenty of women have lactation fail and have to depend on formula. Teaching women and anyone else involved how to properly and safely feed their baby is not paradoxical. You obviously didn’t bother to seek out the information.

          • maidmarian555
            April 17, 2017 at 3:10 am #

            She’s providing an excellent live example of how these people don’t take any responsibility for the information they give to parents. They won’t warn parents about the risks of breastfeeding as it ‘might scare them’ and they don’t see themselves as responsible for warning about the actual risks (as opposed to the usual bollocks they spout about it causing obesity, diabetes and a drop in IQ points) associated with formula when lactation fails as it’s ‘not their responsibity’. And then suggest parents should go to the formula companies for information, after they’ve been told over and over again that the formula companies are evil and you can’t trust anything they tell you….and then wonder why people think the advice about RTF formula is a marketing gimmick and not actual safety advice.

        • Amazed
          April 17, 2017 at 6:19 am #

          Yes, quite paradoxical indeed. You know what you and your ilk should have done? ACKNOWLEDGED that breastfeeding doesn’t always work, said “If it doesn’t work for you, seek out experts who will teach you how to properly prepare formula,” and have clean hands. Instead, you lie about how many women can’t breastfeed, you lie about the real adverse effects that are possible with formula, you make mothers freak out about things like IQ points and obesity, neglecting basic safety, and then you shrug your shoulders and whine how weird it is to be regarded as an expert in infant FEEDING when you did all you could to equate feeding with breastfeeding.

          Your – general your – ignorance kills.

        • moto_librarian
          April 17, 2017 at 9:39 am #

          Exhibit A for why I have such a low opinion of lactation consultants. Goddess forbid you should learn how to teach about safe formula preparation since it conflicts with your ideology.

        • AnnaPDE
          April 17, 2017 at 10:20 am #

          Oh wow. “I’m a driving instructor, why would I need to know about pedestrians and cyclists and what road rules apply to them? Why would I even talk about that to my students?”
          Facepalm to the max.

        • Daleth
          April 17, 2017 at 10:25 am #

          That’s like saying it’s paradoxical to be a doula and have to learn about supporting women who get a c-section. What use is a doula who only knows about supporting vaginal birth if her client’s labor goes wrong and she needs an emergency c-section?

          There’s no paradox here at all. You have to learn about the various ways of getting a baby born (or fed), not just the one you personally favor.

          • kilda
            April 17, 2017 at 10:56 am #

            well, as I understand it, a doula’s job is to support women. The LC’s job (at least as they appear to see it) is to support breastfeeding. Crucial difference there.

          • Daleth
            April 18, 2017 at 11:07 am #

            a doula’s job is to support women. The LC’s job (at least as they
            appear to see it) is to support breastfeeding. Crucial difference

            Yes, and the thing is, if you’re an LC and you see your job as supporting breastfeeding, then you’re a salesman (or woman), not a healthcare professional. The purpose of healthcare professionals is to help their PATIENTS, not to advocate for a particular treatment.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:04 pm #

            It was paradoxical to me, having never used a drop of formula in years of breastfeeding, and coming from my breastfeeding militancy at the beginning of my career.

          • momofone
            April 17, 2017 at 4:05 pm #

            At the beginning? How would you compare that to now?

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 4:33 pm #

            “having never used a drop of formula”

            How on earth does that qualify you as an infant feeding expert? Or to be responsible at all for women for whom breastfeeding might not work out, leaving their children at risk of brain damage or death due to the lack of experience of someone who ‘never used a drop of formula’?

        • Heidi
          April 17, 2017 at 10:25 am #

 I’m going to leave this here for you, should you in the future accept that something like 70% of women do ultimately choose to formula feed, whether out of necessity or because of preference or something in between. Even if it’s because they didn’t receive proper support to breastfeed, facts are facts and mothers deserve information about ALL of it.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:03 pm #

            Yes, you are right. I use excerpts from the CDC version of this in my classes.

        • myrewyn
          April 17, 2017 at 11:17 am #

          If this is true about lactation consultants, then hospitals have NO BUSINESS employing them.

        • April 17, 2017 at 11:28 am #

          Whaaat? You’re literally saying that when a woman comes to you and wants help combo-feeding, you can’t or won’t help her do it? You’re a terrible lactation consultant if that’s the case.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:02 pm #

            Not at all. I recommended mothers start using formula immediately in several cases this year when their newborns hadn’t gained sufficient weight at the first visit. In one case, mom was fine with that. In the other, the mom was very upset that exclusive breastfeeding wasn’t working for her. In that case, we spent a lot of time discussing what was going on, and encouraging her to supplement her baby while milk supply issues and structural issues were addressed.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:05 pm #

            Maybe she wouldn’t have been so upset about not being able to exclusively breastfeed if the lactation industry hadn’t been telling her that 1 drop of formula would destroy her breastfeeding relationship and sentence her baby to be a stupid, obese, diabetic leukemia stricken baby that will die of SIDS.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:13 pm #

            Several, or two?
            Because it sounds like two.

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 8:00 am #

            Two so far this year.

          • April 17, 2017 at 4:13 pm #

            So why aren’t you helping people with how to properly prepare formula, then, if you know they might need the help?

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 8:00 am #

            Who says I am not?

          • April 18, 2017 at 12:32 pm #

            You did. You said you did not do that and didn’t need to know it.

          • nikkilee
            April 18, 2017 at 9:34 pm #

            When? I have said that I teach about preparing powdered infant formula safely in my classes.

          • swbarnes2
            April 18, 2017 at 10:02 pm #

            Nikki, you are a liar. It does you no good at all to try and pretend that you are an honest person. You just aren’t. You aren’t going to convince anyone otherwise.

          • momofone
            April 19, 2017 at 7:59 am #

            Nikkilee, where I live, we call that talking out of both sides of your mouth.

        • Roadstergal
          April 17, 2017 at 12:29 pm #

          “It has been paradoxical to teach a safe driving course and to have to be teaching about seatbelt use.”

          “It has been paradoxical to teach Stranger Danger and to have to still keep an eye on my kid.”

          “It has been paradoxical to teach high-wire acts and to have to teach how those safety harnesses work.”

          Do you realize how ridiculous you sound?

          • Heidi_storage
            April 21, 2017 at 12:56 pm #

            Excellent examples, though I might amend the second to “It has been paradoxical to teach Stranger Danger and also teach my children to say hi to people we meet.” In both cases, what seem to be mutually exclusive behaviors are just aspects of a larger goal–“Feeding the baby” for breastfeeding and formula prep, and “Appropriately interacting with strangers” for teaching Stranger Danger and courteous greetings.

        • momofone
          April 17, 2017 at 2:39 pm #

          You’ve mentioned being a nurse, and I’m curious reading this comment about whether you see yourself first as a nurse or a lactation consultant.

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 4:00 pm #

            Interesting question. I never thought about it, although I am grateful for a license that permits me to use hands-on techniques in my work.

          • momofone
            April 17, 2017 at 4:04 pm #

            I would think it bears consideration. I’m not a nurse, but I’m fairly certain that there is an expectation that the person who is will work ethically and responsibly within the scope of his or her licensure. I could see how promoting safe and healthy feeding methods would be within that scope, but I don’t see how pushing breastfeeding to the exclusion of formula would be.

          • momofone
            April 18, 2017 at 11:53 am #

            “I am grateful for a license that permits me to use hands-on techniques in my work.”

            What does this even mean?

          • nikkilee
            April 19, 2017 at 12:17 pm #

            I have a license to touch; hands-on is part of my scope of practice.

          • momofone
            April 21, 2017 at 11:41 am #

            Hands-on may be, if it is permitted by the touchee, but I’m curious how pushing one kind of feeding fits into the requirements of your licensure as a nurse.

          • nikkilee
            April 21, 2017 at 3:17 pm #

            Education is different to pushing. I use hands-on when doing craniosacral therapy. Cue: raucous laughter.

          • momofone
            April 21, 2017 at 3:41 pm #

            Education is different. It includes more than one perspective, and you are clearly committed to just one.

          • Azuran
            April 21, 2017 at 3:52 pm #

            Don’t worry. I really doubt that anyone’s opinion of you could get lower at this point.

          • nikkilee
            April 21, 2017 at 4:04 pm #

            What would you say to the many many people I have helped over the years? When the baby’s torticollis resolved right in front of our eyes after CST? Or when the pelvic pain went away? Or when her supply increased? Or when the cause of her nipple pain was removed and breastfeeding became what she wanted it to be?

          • Azuran
            April 21, 2017 at 4:42 pm #

            The same things I would say to people who swear homeopathy cured them.
            Placebo effect it a very powerful thing.

          • nikkilee
            April 22, 2017 at 9:36 am #

            The baby whose torticollis resolved on her mother’s chest during CST had received 2 months of PT plus the mother did the exercises 3 times a day at home every day as prescribed.

            Specific strategies and techniques, that can be replicated, are effective.

            As for placebo effect, that true too for some prescription medications. The placebo effect is a real thing.

            “One problem with the placebo effect is that it can be difficult to distinguish from the actual effects of a real drug during a study. Finding ways to distinguish between the placebo effect and the effect of treatment may help improve the treatment and lower the cost of drug testing. And more study may also lead to ways to use the power of the placebo effect in treating disease.”


          • Azuran
            April 22, 2017 at 10:09 pm #

            Controlling for the placebo effect is not hard, you have a placebo control group.

          • Roadstergal
            April 22, 2017 at 11:18 pm #

            Of course it’s true for prescription medications. That’s why they have blinded trials against either placebo or standard of care (if equipoise doesn’t allow placebo alone). What people who don’t understand science (like you) don’t get is that medication that works has the placebo effect PLUS the real effect. You give only the former.

          • nikkilee
            April 23, 2017 at 10:33 am #

            “And when the identities of Maxalt tablets and placebo pills were switched, patients reported similar pain relief from placebo pills labeled as Maxalt as from Maxalt tablets labeled as a placebo, according to the study published today (Jan. 8) in the journal Science Translational Medicine.”

          • Charybdis
            April 23, 2017 at 11:40 am #

            I’d have confounded the hell out of that one. Maxalt (and the other triptans) never worked for me.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 23, 2017 at 12:00 pm #

            I remember in college I had some free samples of different migraine medications: Imitrex, which my mother uses, Maxalt, and Axert. Imitrex did alright, reduced the pain but didn’t fully get rid of it. Of the other two, one did absolutely nothing, and the other stopped the pain like flipping off a switch once it got absorbed and kicked in.

            I’m kinda sad that I can no longer remember which is which, but it’s rather moot since I rarely get migraines any more.

          • Empliau
            April 23, 2017 at 7:57 pm #

            Me neither. My body hates triptans. Sadly, migraines love me and come to visit frequently.

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 12:38 pm #

            Damn, woman, you are terrible at citations, and it wastes my time to try to find what paper you’re talking about.

            If you’re going to cite a paper, cite a paper. Don’t quote from a NEWS STORY REFERENCING THE PAPER and not from the paper itself, and then offer a journal with no hint of where the paper is. Hey, did you know that journals publish lots of papers? Not just “here’s the one Nikki Lee is thinking of”?

            That shitty news story I found thanks to your quote didn’t cite the paper, either. Link the _paper_, not the ramblings of some woo-meister. J Trans Med has no articles referencing the trademarked name, and only two papers referencing the generic name, neither of which are Jan 8.

            I have a hunch that when I read the paper it will have fuck-all to say about your implied contention that ‘medicine is all just placebo,’ but at least let us look at the damn thing.

          • Azuran
            April 21, 2017 at 5:48 pm #

            The same thing i’d say to people who claim homeopathy cured them: the placebo effect is a powefull thing

          • nikkilee
            April 23, 2017 at 10:32 am #

            Can a 3 month old baby have a condition resolved because of the placebo effect? Can animals?

          • Azuran
            April 23, 2017 at 12:29 pm #

            Do you really think you have me in a corner there?
            Yes, an animal absolutely can be cured by placebo effect. Placebo trials ARE actually done when testing medication for pets.
            The stress of handling to give medication and the increased attention sick pets or special food you give to give the medication will have a physical effect on the animal.
            And humans are generally the ones needed to evaluate a pet’s response to medication and they do think their pet is getting better simply because they are giving medication.

            I have an owner who’s dog has severe hip dysplasia on his left leg. The dog receives a monthly injection to treat it. The injection is given under the skin, on the upper back. A few months ago, the owner started asking us to give the injection on his affected leg, because he thinks it works better when we do it there. He started asking for this every month, and when he forgets to ‘remind’ us to give it on the leg, he claims it’s less effective.
            But here’s the thing: We have NEVER given the dog his shot on the leg. Even when the owner asks us to do so. The owner seriously feels the medication his more of less effective depending on where he thinks we gave the injection.

          • Box of Salt
            April 23, 2017 at 2:50 pm #

            nikkilee “What would you say to the many many people I have helped over the years?”

            Ask someone else to check on them. I doubt anyone is going to tell you to your face that your “treatment” or advice did nothing.

          • nikkilee
            April 23, 2017 at 4:34 pm #

            All the people who come to see me have been referred by others, sometimes other mothers, sometimes other healthcare providers.

          • momofone
            April 23, 2017 at 5:03 pm #

            I would never go back to a healthcare provider who referred me for such woo, and I would make sure they knew why.

          • Box of Salt
            April 23, 2017 at 5:44 pm #

            The referral is irrelevant to whether or not they’re going to be honest to you about it.

            The folks you did not help will end up “lost to follow up” because they’re just not going to come back to you. You as provider will only hear the positive stories, because that’s how human nature works. Unless you do something really harmful, no one wants to be mean to you.

          • Azuran
            April 23, 2017 at 5:56 pm #

            refereed by ‘other mothers’ Wow, much impressive.

            Owners I’ve seen often refer their friends to me as well. But that doesn’t mean they are in any way capable to evaluate how good of a vet I really am.
            Generally, when people refer to me it’s mainly because they liked my personality and has very little with my skills.

          • Mishimoo
            April 24, 2017 at 8:02 pm #

            I referred my vet based on skills, but I used to work for him and saw him only lose one dog (which had around a 25% chance of surviving the op; definite death without operating). He’s just retired, but the head vet nurse likes the new vets, so I’m still taking my pets to that practice.

          • myrewyn
            April 21, 2017 at 12:04 pm #

            Ew. License to touch. I’m uncomfortably reminded of my skeevy pediatrician from when I was a tween. When he noticed my discomfort at undressing he pointed to the wall and told me the certificate hanging there meant he could ask little girls to do anything he wanted. He retired mysteriously a few years later.

          • momofone
            April 21, 2017 at 12:25 pm #

            Ugh. So creepy.

          • Roadstergal
            April 22, 2017 at 11:14 pm #

            If any OB ever told me that they had a ‘license to touch’, I would get another OB in a hurry. That is some creepy shit.

            Also, you have yet to provide any reasonable evidence that breastfeeding has any measurable health advantages for term infants in the developed world.

          • nikkilee
            April 23, 2017 at 10:38 am #

            The Cochrane Collaborative, the AAP, ACOG, the WHO, NAPNAP, ACFP. . . .these organizations are making it all up???

          • Roadstergal
            April 23, 2017 at 8:48 pm #

            They cite a paper on the health advantages the increasingly breastfeed generations in the US have over my almost completely formula-fed generation? Could you link it? Or just tell me what they are. Eg, when smoking rose in the US, lung cancer rose in parallel, offset by a few years, and lung cancer decreased with a similar offset when smoking rates decreased. What’s the health benefit that rose in the US with increasing breastfeeding over the last 40 years?

          • nikkilee
            April 24, 2017 at 10:49 am #

            An excellent question. Thank you.

            Many layers. Here’s one. Smoking increases risk of lung cancer; quit smoking, lung cancer risk goes down. Pretty simple.

            Human health is influenced by many things: infant feeding is only one of them. Today the world is polluted; those chemicals have an impact on our health. Screen time and inactivity have an impact too, as does processed food, and even possibly vaccinations.

            US children have the biggest vaccination schedule in the world, and are also the 33rd sickest in the world when you compare with 179 other countries: “Save the Children, a global nonprofit organization aimed at improving the health of children worldwide, ranked 179 countries based on five indicators: maternal health, children’s well-being, and education, economic, and political status. When taking all of these factors into account, the United States slid to 33rd place worldwide, down two spots in the rankings compared to last year.”

            (Yes I know this is a 2015 report; and that is pretty current because that type of data takes a long time to collect and analyze.)

            If there were just one or two things that had impact on health indicators, then breastfeeding and vaccination should make US children the healthiest, right?

          • MaineJen
            April 24, 2017 at 10:58 am #

            Maternal health, childrens well being, education, economic status, political status. You think, out of that whole, wide-encompassing list, that breastfeeding and vaccination are the biggest problems?

            You actually think we would be better of if we were protected from *fewer* infectious diseases? If women had *fewer* options for feeding their babies?

            You did not answer Roadstergal’s question, by the way. What fantastic health advantages does the current, mostly breastfed generation have over our (born in the 70s) mostly formula-fed generation?

          • Azuran
            April 24, 2017 at 11:22 am #

            You are missing the point, many things have been clearly proven to have an effect: Access to health care, smoking, obesity, education, social status, family income. ETC
            All of those, and many more have very clear effect on the health of population. And this is despite the confounding effect of all the other factors you mentioned.
            Yet, very large variation in breastfeeding rates have not resulted in any measurable effect on human health.
            That means that the effect of breastfeeding is extremely small and practically insignificant in the context of real life.

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 12:27 pm #

            Is this a very long way of saying “the rise in breastfeeding in the US from 80% has not resulted in any measurable health benefits, because any possible theoretical benefits don’t exist or are too small to be detected against the other factors”?

            In that case, why give two damns if a woman breastfeeds or not?

          • nikkilee
            April 24, 2017 at 1:21 pm #

            No. . . because breastfeeding does matter. You can research the difference in baby brain growth depending on what the infant is fed.

            It is a way of saying outcome measures may or may not be easily to analyze. Smoking outcomes are easy to measure; infant and maternal health outcomes are more complicated because there are more influencing factors.

            Formula feeding is environmentally taxing and non-sustainable. It creates trash, and uses non-renewable resources. What will you all do with that one?

          • swbarnes2
            April 24, 2017 at 1:36 pm #

            Nikki, you are still a liar. It really is fundamental to your character.


            “After matching and adjustment for multiple testing, only 1 of the 13 outcomes remained statistically significant: children’s hyperactivity (difference score, –0.84; 95% confidence interval, –1.33 to –0.35) at age 3 years for children who were breastfed for at least 6 months. No statistically significant differences were observed postmatching on any outcome at age 5 years.”

            One significant finding out of 26? And it vanished at age 5? It means its a blip, and this study found NOTHING.

            And you have to be a thorough liar to claim you haven’t seen this study, which also studied cognitive ability and found nothing


            But of course, you are a thorough liar.

          • swbarnes2
            April 24, 2017 at 1:36 pm #

            Nikki, you are still a liar. It really is fundamental to your character.


            “After matching and adjustment for multiple testing, only 1 of the 13 outcomes remained statistically significant: children’s hyperactivity (difference score, –0.84; 95% confidence interval, –1.33 to –0.35) at age 3 years for children who were breastfed for at least 6 months. No statistically significant differences were observed postmatching on any outcome at age 5 years.”

            One significant finding out of 26? And it vanished at age 5? It means its a blip, and this study found NOTHING.

            And you have to be a thorough liar to claim you haven’t seen this study, which also studied cognitive ability and found nothing


            But of course, you are a thorough liar.

          • nikkilee
            April 24, 2017 at 3:57 pm #

            Did you read my published comment? Their statistics were presented in a misleading manner.

            Here’s the authors response to my comment:

            “In our sample, 2.5% (n= 249) of babies were still being fully breastfed at interview and 6.1% (n= 603) were being partially breastfed at interview. The graph should be interpreted as 1 representing the percentage of infants breastfed 1 day or more, 2 as 32 days or more, and 3 as 181 days or more.”

          • swbarnes2
            April 24, 2017 at 6:08 pm #

            An honest person would explain how what you quoted is at all relevant to the soundness of the conclusion I cited above. But this would not of course be the first time that you show that you literally do not know how to respond to the presentation of facts you do not like, and throw up garbage in a desperate attempt to hide from ithem.

            Remember when someone brought up a paper about breastfeeding, and you stole a rebuttal from another site, pretending that you wrote it? And you were so stupid and uncaring about sticking to the facts, it didn’t bother you that the thing you stole was about a totally different paper?

          • kilda
            April 24, 2017 at 1:52 pm #

            >>You can research the difference in baby brain growth depending on what the infant is fed.

            I’m unaware of any study that supports this. If you know of a study that shows differential growth of the infant brain when fed formula vs breastmilk, share it.

            if not, please quit making shit up.

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 4:17 pm #

            Interesting. The EFF kids were lower birthweight and had moms of lower SES than the EBF kids. Maternal IQ was not measured or corrected for. Paternal SES and IQ were not measured or corrected for. Even with those confounders, look at Figure 3. Is that convincing to you? Even if you believe the line fits with no attention paid to the individual points (lol), the UR and LL plots suggest that formula is better than breast at later time points.

            Hey, do you know how to correct for maternal and paternal SES and IQ? The discordant sibling study! What did that study find, Nikki Lee? Siblings, as close as possible in the real world to each other – one fed formula, one fed breastmilk.

          • nikkilee
            April 25, 2017 at 10:07 am #

            In the discordant sibling study” Results from between-family comparisons suggest that both breastfeeding status and duration are associated with beneficial long-term child outcomes. This trend was evident
            for 10 out of the 11 outcomes examined here.”

            “Maternal health behaviors, such as
            cigarette smoking and timely prenatal care, also adhere to the same patterning across
            subgroups with 30% – 31%”. . . . .maybe some sickness could be attributed to smoking in the home?

            ” Interestingly, a slightly smaller percentage of mothers in the discordant sibling sample(43%) said they drank alcohol while pregnant compared to mothers in the full and sibling sample (49%).” Could alcohol use (not explored) have had any impact?

            Also, the authors in this paper, had to, after 6 months of pursuit, reveal their funding sources. They were obligated to do this as their university is a public one. Interesting that there was industry funding for this project.

            Interesting too that the statistical analysis for the outcomes is very detailed. . .yet breastfeeding is either yes or no. So a baby could have been breastfed for 2 weeks, and subsequent babies not at all. . .

          • Daleth
            April 25, 2017 at 11:45 am #

            In the discordant sibling study” Results from between-family comparisons suggest that both breastfeeding status and duration are associated with beneficial long-term child outcomes…”

            I’m puzzled here, Nikilee, because it looks like you don’t understand what you just read. The italicized bit above, with which you kicked off your post, does NOT in any way support your belief that breastfeeding provides long-term health benefits. Maybe I’m misreading you, but it sounds like you think it does. Nope.

            Here’s what that quote means: “results from between-family comparisons suggest X” means “when you look at kids FROM DIFFERENT FAMILIES, it seems like X is true.”

            The whole point of the discordant siblings study was to eliminate the confounding factors that make between-family comparisons INACCURATE–such as different socioeconomic class, and so forth. They eliminated those confounders by comparing kids raised in THE SAME families.

            As for your question, “Could alcohol use (not explored) have had any impact?”…again, I question whether you understood that study? Because if you did, you would know that the answer to that question is “no.” Here’s why: because they were comparing the children of “mothers in the discordant sibling sample,” so for those children, their mothers’ drinking rate was THE SAME. The fact that women *in some other group* had a 49% drinking rate has no effect on the kids *in the discordant group,* and thus no effect on whether the kids *in the discordant group* were similar to or different from their own siblings.

          • nikkilee
            April 25, 2017 at 12:08 pm #

            Right. The mothers served as their own controls. And perhaps the health outcomes of their infants had nothing to do with feeding method?

          • Daleth
            April 25, 2017 at 1:01 pm #

            You are really not understanding how this works. The mothers are not serving as their own controls, because it is not the mothers who are the subjects of the study. The children are the subjects.

            The researchers are studying siblings (i.e., children born to and raised by the same parents) in order to eliminate the usual socioeconomic confounders and selection bias that plague breastfeeding studies. In other words, they designed the study to compare siblings who had been feed differently in order to eliminate other variables–the feeding method was the only variable.

            As to your last question (“perhaps the health outcomes of their infants had nothing to do with feeding method”), if the health outcomes had nothing to do with the feeding method, then that means the feeding method did not affect the children’s health. Which, translated into plain English, means that breastfeeding does not make children healthier than formula feeding.

          • kilda
            April 25, 2017 at 1:43 pm #

            >>”perhaps the health outcomes of their infants had nothing to do with feeding method”

            yes! It’s almost like feeding formula vs breastmilk doesn’t make or break any outcomes for children. You’re starting to catch on, nikki.

          • Roadstergal
            April 25, 2017 at 4:34 pm #

            ” In other words, they designed the study to compare siblings who had been feed differently in order to eliminate other variables–the feeding method was the only variable.”

            To be fair, they didn’t completely eliminate other variables. There is, after all, some reason why they switched. Who knows what it was? Did the economic downturn mean mom had to work to make ends meet – which brings a FF second with a loss of SES? Did mom get a better job with more flexibility, or did dad get a better job with more pay so mom no longer had to work, and so SES went up and in parallel, mom was able to breastfeed? Did one of the children have a health problem from birth that made them unable to BF effectively? In the developed world, you just can’t get around the fact that breastfeeding is positively correlated with SES and negatively correlated with pre-existing health issues. Because the thing about formula is, it works. It’s the ‘rescue.’ It feeds the baby if things go badly with breastfeeding.

            There are certainly health-neutral possibilities – mom did the BF with her first, and for her second, meh, she decides she wants to share feeds and get a little more sleep, or SAH mom did FF with the first but decides to give BF a try with the second, and it goes well. But it’s interesting to note that _some confounders remain that would cast breastmilk in a positive light that has nothing to do with its direct health effects_ – and yet, what was seen was no difference. That’s a powerful message. A message to just not worry about it too much, do what works, and focus on more important things.

          • Roadstergal
            April 25, 2017 at 1:56 pm #

            ” And perhaps the health outcomes of their infants had nothing to do with feeding method?”


          • nikkilee
            April 25, 2017 at 1:42 pm #

            We will not agree on this one study. I think it is poorly done, and know that it was industry funded; you think it is fine.


          • kilda
            April 25, 2017 at 1:44 pm #

            of course you do. Because it doesn’t say what you want it to.

          • Daleth
            April 25, 2017 at 4:46 pm #

            I’m not sure how you can conclude that a study was “poorly done” when you don’t actually understand how it was done or even what the words written in it mean.

            And I’m not trying to be snarky here at all. It’s just that your posts make it clear you don’t understand the study design and you apparently also don’t understand the implications of between-family comparisons, since you wrote about that bit as if it supported your opinion that breastfeeding makes a difference to children’s health, when it actually doesn’t support that opinion at all.

            Shouldn’t you make sure you understand something before you form an opinion about it?

          • Who?
            April 25, 2017 at 5:42 pm #

            But then where would be the time to flog lactivist services and post on the internet?

          • Azuran
            April 25, 2017 at 6:33 pm #

            And you accept other breastfeeding studies? That has to be probably one of, if not THE, best study comparing the effect of breastfeeding and formula feeding.
            But it doesn’t support your biases, so of course you refuse to accept it.
            You are just as bad as anti-vaxxers

          • fiftyfifty1
            April 25, 2017 at 7:06 pm #

            OK. So you want to argue that the study is poorly done. At this point you have to detail why you think so. What are its methodological or analytical weaknesses and how do they invalidate the study’s findings? Go ahead.

          • nikkilee
            April 26, 2017 at 8:44 am #

            For starters, the statistical analyses of the 11 outcomes is extremely detailed.

            “We rely on two independent variables to capture infant feeding practices.
            Breastfeeding status (yes/no) was coded as 0 if the mother did not breastfeed and 1 if she
            breastfed him/her for any length of time. Breastfeeding duration (in weeks) was based on
            a question that asked how many weeks old the child was when the NLSY mother quit
            breastfeeding altogether.”

            There is no discussion at all of exclusivity.

            The discussion about Tables 4 and 5 mention duration in weeks, but nowhere are those data found.

            With the knowledge that the study was funded by industry. . . . .

            If they had spent as much time analyzing exclusivity and duration as they did the outcomes, this could have been an awesome study.

          • momofone
            April 25, 2017 at 10:05 pm #

            Every time I read a comment of yours, I am once again thankful that you will never be my nurse. If you can’t explain, or aren’t willing to, why you think it is poorly done, I would never trust you to answer my questions about medical care. You have no credibility.

          • swbarnes2
            April 25, 2017 at 5:04 pm #

            She can’t understand. She has a fundamental carelessness about honesty, and a fundamental lack of respect for the truth. She literally can’t understand the difference between saying something that supports a claim, and saying something that doesn’t. She tried to rebut a paper once by stealing a rebuttal written somewhere else about an entirely different paper. It didn’t even occur to her to care. She still doesn’t understand why that was dishonest, she still doesn’t understand why looking like a liar is bad. She fundamentally doesn’t get the concept like normal intelligent people do, and never will.

            She is thoroughly dishonest. Rebutting her is good for other people to read, but it is totally lost on her.

          • Daleth
            April 26, 2017 at 9:44 am #

            Wow. That’s so odd. She sounds broken.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 25, 2017 at 7:29 pm #

            But if *any* amount of breastfeeding has real, tangible benefits, those two weeks should translate to a measurable difference, shouldn’t they?

            The kids who got *any* breastmilk should fare better than their siblings who got *none*.

            And yet…no.

          • nikkilee
            April 26, 2017 at 8:26 am #

            No. Breastmilk is not magic fairy dust.

            The medical benefits are dose related.

            However, if I am working with a mother who is able to breastfeed only once or twice a day, I encourage that because breastfeeding is also relationship. That intimate closeness can be special. I learned this from a woman who got pregnant during the data collection phase of her dissertation. As she couldn’t take any leave because her funding wouldn’t cover it, she could breastfeed only twice a day. She loved those two times a day and did that for months. Her choice.

            METHODS: The association between breast-feeding dose and illnesses in the first 6 months of life was analyzed with generalized estimating equations regression for 7092 infants from the National Maternal and Infant Health Survey. Breast-feeding dose (ratio of breast-feedings to other feedings) was categorized as full, most, equal, less, or no breast-feeding.

            RESULTS: Compared with no breast-feeding, full breast-feeding infants had lower odds ratios of diarrhea, cough or wheeze, and vomiting and lower mean ratios of illness months and sick baby medical visits.

            Findings were the same in all socio-economic groups.

            American Journal of Public Health 1999; 89, (1) : 25-30
            Breast-feeding and infant illness: a dose-response relationship?
            J Raisler, C Alexander and P O’Campo

          • Heidi_storage
            April 25, 2017 at 1:52 pm #

            I was unable to look up how the authors determined the SES, since it was apparently based on unpublished work (see the reference). Do you know anything about it? How sophisticated are such determinations? For instance, let’s take two families, similar education levels, with a household income of $80,000. In one, this income is derived from both parents, and the children are sent to daycare and formula-fed. In the other household, the mother stays home with the kids and breastfeeds. Without some differentiation between two such cases, couldn’t you be allowing a lot of confounders to remain within your analysis? Or are SES determinations sophisticated enough to sort out such differences?

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 2:03 pm #

            “You can research the difference in baby brain growth depending on what the infant is fed.”

            Why, yes, we could research this. Why would we want to, however, as we have seen zero real-world difference on the baby whether it’s breast or formula fed? Again, you have to actually see an effect to investigate how it works, and you’ve shown us no effect at all.

            “Formula feeding is environmentally taxing and non-sustainable. It creates trash, and uses non-renewable resources. What will you all do with that one?”

            Having a baby is environmentally taxing and non-sustainable. It creates trash, and uses non-renewable resources.

            Feeding a mom extra calories to breastfeed is environmentally taxing and non-sustainable. It creates trash, and uses non-renewable resources. In fact, most adult humans in general use more environmentally taxing food than room-temp stable, powdered concentrate. Hell, my otherwise-vegetarian friend craved red meat insatiably when she was pregnant and breastfeeding, and red meat has a very high environmental impact. And since moms aren’t 100% return on investment, like every other living creature, more extra calories have to go into her than come out for the baby. If you add in the paraphernalia, gas used to get to LC visits, herbs and supplements that have to be grown and transported, that a lot of women in the developed world need to use to make BF work with a career, with being older, with having first-world health problems, a can of powdered formula is downright green.

            Even if we were in Nikki Lee fantasy-land where breast milk defies every law of thermodynamics and appears magically from nowhere, you feed the baby breastmilk for an infinitesimal portion of their lives. For the rest of it, they’ll be just as environmentally taxing as the rest of us.

          • nikkilee
            April 24, 2017 at 3:44 pm #

            Moms have to be fed no matter what. Moms whose babies are not breastfed are driving to the pediatrician more for sick baby visits. In the old days, before electronic charting, one could compare the thickness of a breastfed baby’s chart with a baby who was not breastfed.

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 3:47 pm #

            “Moms whose babies are not breastfed are driving to the pediatrician more for sick baby visits”

            So you’re saying that in the ’70s, babies had more pediatrician visits compared to today? Babies today are getting way more breastmilk, and WAY more babies are getting nothing but breastmilk in the first few months of life. So where’s the data showing that babies today are seeing the doctor less?

            “In the old days, before electronic charting, one could compare the thickness of a breastfed baby’s chart with a baby who was not breastfed.”

            Where’s the paper where this was done?

          • Charybdis
            April 24, 2017 at 4:15 pm #

            I call bullshit on this. You can have a healthy baby who is formula fed and a sickly one who is breastfed. And vice versa.
            Anecdata: My cousin’s older son was formula fed and has been pretty healthy. A handful of sick visits to the doctor, in addition to the well baby checks. Her younger son, who was breastfed (she even had to “do things” to boost her supply) has been sick, sick, sick. The flu, strep, tonsillitis and ear infections, with the latter three being on some sort of insane rotation. He had tubes put in his ears last summer and just recently he has had his tonsils and adenoids removed. This past winter she had the younger, breastfed one in to the doctor 3 times in one week.
            Clearly, the younger one had not read the “breastfed babies are healthier” BS or he would have gotten his shit together and beat those infections BEFORE he contracted them.

          • momofone
            April 24, 2017 at 4:25 pm #

            Really? My breastfed nephew had 40 (not a typo) sick visits his first year. His mom (and dad) were driving to the pediatrician weekly, sometimes more. Where was the magic?

            Edited to add that not only did he have all those sick visits, but he has life-threatening food allergies, unlike his formula-fed (and sick-less-frequently) siblings.

          • Empress of the Iguana People
            April 24, 2017 at 4:31 pm #

            Nonsense. Between myself, my 2 breast-fed sibs, my formula fed husband and our 3 kids, 2 ff and 1 bf, only I was the sick baby. I was also the only preemie.

          • MaineJen
            April 24, 2017 at 4:36 pm #

            Come off it, nikki. That’s not even remotely based on fact.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 24, 2017 at 5:11 pm #

            Oh honey, no.

            It also discounts a HUGE confounder…
            Parental health beliefs and anxiety.

            There are some parents who will call me if their baby sneezes. I tend to get to know them and their babies well.

            There are parents who call me with “he’s had a fever of 40C for the last 5 days, and is coughing all night and isn’t drinking much, but I don’t want to waste your time” and bring me a dehydrated, hypoxic, septic, floppy toddler.

            I don’t mind seeing well kids 50 times if it means I don’t have to see a really sick kid once.

            Family one will look like they have the sicker kid because they’ll see me 30 times in 3 years, but their kid will be robustly healthy with just a few colds and I get to send them home with reassurance and advice. Meanwhile the family with the kid “who was only sick once” will be the one I actually worry about.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            April 24, 2017 at 5:13 pm #

            Formula fed babies are more likely to go to daycare. That probably accounts for the difference in sickness.

          • Azuran
            April 24, 2017 at 5:18 pm #

            Seriously, I’d say you are grasping at straws, but I think you are WAY passed that.
            Comparing thickness of baby’s chart? What a totally accurate measurement that is.
            Do you have a study that show that baby’s charts are thicker?
            More drives to the pediatrician? I doubt it
            My breastfed brother is the one who had the most hospital appointment, because he was sick all the time.
            I went to the pediatrician twice, for allergy to breastmilk.
            A nurse had to drive home to weight my baby, because I’m breastfeeding her.
            My SIL had to go to the hospital daily for 3 days to weight her baby because she was breastfeeding her.

          • Daleth
            April 25, 2017 at 11:33 am #

            Moms whose babies are not breastfed are driving to the pediatrician more for sick baby visits.

            Funny, my FF twins only had one cold in their first year, and no diarrhea or vomiting.

            And I wonder, if you, NIkilee, actually are seeing EBF moms go to the doctor less, perhaps that’s not because the baby is healthier. Perhaps it’s because mom is very crunchy, so she’s not going for the well-baby visits, not going to get vaccinations, and not going when the baby is sick because instead she”s “treating” the baby with homeopathy or black elderberry tincture or whatever.

            I can tell you my twins went to the doctor at least half a dozen times in their first year–not because they were sick (see above: one cold), but because I followed the recommended well-baby visit and immunization schedule. Their charts, if printed on paper, would probably be thicker than the chart of Crunchy Mom’s baby–but that’s because I showed up on schedule, not because they’re less healthy.

          • Heidi
            April 25, 2017 at 12:27 pm #

            My FF baby is 16 months and had his first sick visit yesterday. But I almost feel like I live there since we’ve probably been there more than a dozen times for weight checks or well baby visits.

          • Sarah
            April 25, 2017 at 12:20 pm #

            Mothers whose babies are formula fed are needing medical help more, yes. Whether this is because of the formula or because of the things that tend to go along with formula feeding, such as being poor, is the $64,000 question, but leaving that aside for the moment, where’s your evidence that they’re driving? What with them being disproportionately low income and all. Do you not think they might be having to use public transport, or walk?Your privilege is showing.

            And incidentally, I do hope neither you nor any client you’ve ever have driven to consultations.

          • Azuran
            April 24, 2017 at 5:11 pm #

            Seriously? Non-sustainable? Well then, better let babies die I guess.
            That is the most stupid argument I ever read. As if those extra 500-800 calories I need to breastfeed (or really, just my normal food) come from 100% sustainable sources that do not create trash, or those additional disposable diapers I use because my breastfeed baby poops ALL THE FREAKING TIME are environnement friendly.

          • maidmarian555
            April 24, 2017 at 5:21 pm #

            Oh God don’t mention disposable nappies, she’ll be singing the praises of elimination communication next…..

          • Azuran
            April 24, 2017 at 9:10 pm #

            I bet she thinks there is no environmental impact for the treatment of all the additional toilet water.

          • Who?
            April 24, 2017 at 6:45 pm #

            Show the research about the brain growth.

            Can you reliably pick the breastfed babies out of a group?

            Or out of a group of adults, pick the breastfed ones?

            Surely if it was so wonderful, that would be easy.

            Humans, living the way we wealthy westerners live at the moment, are generally unsustainable. Feeding a baby a bottle will make not a jot of difference to that, since the alternative is feeding the mother a little more.

            Was it you who thought breastmilk was made out of thin air?

          • Heidi
            April 24, 2017 at 10:00 pm #

            Oh, and your bags of organic marshmallows are sustainable?

            Can’t say I believe you about the chart thing either. In my world, breastfed babies get chronic ear infections, hand foot mouth, colds, RSV, etc. Formula feed babies do too but I haven’t noticed a difference at all between the two sets. So there’s my anecdotal evidence! My child had his first sick visit today at 16 months. I must have chosen the good formula!

          • Who?
            April 24, 2017 at 6:53 pm #

            Surely ‘a license to ask to touch on each occasion you think it necessar in the course of your scope of practice’?

        • Ken S., As Seen On Watch Lists
          April 22, 2017 at 11:53 pm #

          In other words, you’re ignorant about anything beyond the specific fraud you perpetrate on your victims. Your skillset is limited to the scam and only the scam, because you don’t need to know anything about actually helping babies and mothers in order to defraud them and take their money. It’s vermin like you who gladly charge hundreds and thousands of dollars to lead human beings to their graves.

    • moto_librarian
      April 17, 2017 at 9:38 am #

      Maybe you should try engaging on a piece that isn’t almost two years old. Or did you think that we would just let your bullshit slide?

    • Roadstergal
      April 17, 2017 at 12:34 pm #

      Hi, Nikkie Lee!

      You’ve had a lot of time to ponder my question. You know, the one where all of the chronic issues that lactivists say that breastfeeding prevents are more common in the more recent, more heavily breast-fed generations vs the very highly formula-fed generation of the ’70s.

      Until you do address that, I don’t give two meconium smears about any hypothetical advantages to breast milk, because they clearly don’t play out in the real world.

      • nikkilee
        April 17, 2017 at 2:18 pm #

        Breastfeeding is only one factor of many that have an influence on infant health.

        For infants, the protection from insulin dependent diabetes, leukemia and lymphoma, and SIDS is valuable.

        • Roadstergal
          April 17, 2017 at 2:31 pm #

          Ah, so you have data to support your claims? Let’s start with Type I diabetes, since that’s where you started. What is the incidence in my generation vs a more recent, more breastfed generation, in the US?

          • nikkilee
            April 17, 2017 at 3:58 pm #

            Trends are going up each year. Does this have to do with more folks with diabetes giving birth than ever before? The over use of antibiotics? The impact of vaccines on the gut microbiome: there is no research that looks at this. There are so many more factors having an influence on humans than there were 30 years ago: for one thing, everything is now polluted. Breastfeeding is clearly not enough by itself to reduce incidence about diabetes.although for mothers, there is a reduced incidence of Type 2.

          • Heidi
            April 17, 2017 at 4:03 pm #

            I’ve never come across a study about type 2 diabetes that actually weeded out women who had lactation failure as a reason for not breastfeeding. I’m at increased risk for type 2 diabetes – I had gestational diabetes during pregnancy and both my grandfathers had type 2. Like many GDM women, I was a lactation failure. Women with GDM are more likely to have lactation failure and we are more likely to develop type 2.

          • Azuran
            April 17, 2017 at 4:09 pm #

            OMG did you just bring up vaccines? I didn’t think you could get more science illiterate.
            Hey, know what else has never been tested? The effect of kissing your baby on his guts microbiome. We should obviously stop kissing our babies, it might give them type 1 diabetes.

          • KeeperOfTheBooks
            May 16, 2017 at 9:51 pm #

            Oh, Lor’. Don’t start that. I once read a particularly asinine article explaining that when breastfeeding moms kiss their babies, their breastmilk magically recognizes the germs on the kid’s skin and creates antibodies against them.

          • Azuran
            May 17, 2017 at 4:09 pm #

            If this was even remotely possible, and ignoring the fact that it wouldn’t work since antibodies can’t go on the skin, This would be terrible as it would attack the normal bacterial flora of the baby.

          • Nick Sanders
            April 17, 2017 at 4:11 pm #

            How the fuck would a hypodermic injection affect the gut microbiome?

          • Sarah
            April 19, 2017 at 7:05 am #

            Because of placenta. Obv.

          • kilda
            April 19, 2017 at 7:49 am #

            no, it’s because of the evil spirits associated with vaccinations. oops, I mean, toxins.

          • Dr Kitty
            April 17, 2017 at 4:12 pm #

            Confounding nikkilee.
            Type 2 DM, PCOS and insulin resistance are associated with reduced milk supply, therefore women with T2DM breastfeed less successfully.
            Correlation, not causation.

          • Roadstergal
            April 17, 2017 at 4:35 pm #

            I asked a simple question. I’m waiting for a simple answer. What is all of this increase in breastfeeding giving us? Show us an answer that isn’t ‘too little to measure, if it exists at all.’

          • Dr Kitty
            April 19, 2017 at 8:10 am #

            Gut microbiome…

            I wonder if H.Pylori counts.
            I mean we’ve spent the last 30 years eradicating it with antibiotics and proton pump inhibitors, and all the people who haven’t suffered and died with peptic ulcers are counted as a win.

            Surely if CS causes terrible consequences to the gut microbiome then antacids and antibiotics must be doing much worse things to us all?

          • nikkilee
            May 15, 2017 at 12:50 pm #

            There is so much being published on this now. . .I invite you to check out this topic of gut microbiome and health.

          • Roadstergal
            May 15, 2017 at 1:15 pm #

            Yes, there’s a lot being published right now, and we discussed at length below how little you understand any of it.

            I’m beginning to think you’re a badly done bot that they’re just trying to get to pass the Turing test.

          • moto_librarian
            May 15, 2017 at 1:33 pm #

            Yes, much has been published, but none of it is conclusive.

        • MaineJen
          April 17, 2017 at 3:13 pm #

          Again, with the claim that breastfeeding prevents leukemia?

    • Nikalix
      April 20, 2017 at 1:32 pm #

      Funny that the only ones who think the baby died from contaminated baby formula are the parents.

      No one else, including everyone who tested the formula and other bottles from the same batch and found nothing, or even the lawyer representing the family, believe the kid died from it.

      So not only your “rare occurrence” is rare, it did not even occur.

      • nikkilee
        April 20, 2017 at 5:07 pm #

        Tell it to the CDC.

        • Nikalix
          April 20, 2017 at 6:07 pm #

          No need to tell them anything as your story has nothing to do with contaminated baby formula.

          Either put forth an actual case of contamination or just admit that you are grasping at straws.

        • Heidi
          April 20, 2017 at 6:50 pm #

          Foodsafetynews.Com is a bunch of hooey. It’s not too be mistaken for where one can find reliable info about real contamination and recalls. I am on the email list and not once have I seen a formula recall. Plenty of salmonella in organic garlic powder and listeria in organic frozen dinners, though!

          • nikkilee
            April 20, 2017 at 7:52 pm #




   (Enfamil Gentlease),

            Powdered infant formula has to be prepared carefully, as it can become contaminated in the home. That’s in addition to spores found in it.

            “7 of 9 market purchased powdered infant formula
            samples contained spores of clostridum.”
            Barash, Hsia Arnon J Pediatr 2010;156:402-8

          • Heidi
            April 20, 2017 at 8:39 pm #

            You know how you said you weren’t listening to people? You’re doing it again. You already shared the one story that had no facts in it. Parenting magazine isn’t exactly a super scientific source and I’m not even going to click it on it. Mostly because the website has a ton of pop up ads. I already gave you the damn link to the WHO so I don’t need you to reshare it. And if you noticed on that CDC link, it said to sterilize all breastfeeding parts. The last thing said no neurotoxic spores were found and this study was done a decade ago. I would guess there’s a good chance they’ve made progress in making PIF even safer.

            Cleaning bottles with dish detergent and hot water, using clean dry hands when scooping the powder, being sure to keep the container closed otherwise, and using clean tap water and throwing out room temperature bottles before two hours will serve most babies well in the developed world. I’m not against people taking whatever precautions they feel necessary, especially ones with babies that may be very vulnerable. But it’s clear, you just want to prove you’re right.

          • Roadstergal
            April 24, 2017 at 7:33 pm #

            *looks up your citation*

            “No neurotoxigenic clostridia were isolated.”

    • Azuran
      April 15, 2017 at 11:28 am #

      If the only complication you want to look at is death, then yea, it’s rare, although it’s 100% preventable. So ANY death due to breastfeeding failure is unacceptable.
      If you look at ALL the possible complications, it’s really obvious that something needs to be done. Virtually everyone knows a baby who had some complication of breastfeeding. Both me and my brother where hospitalized for jaundice at birth.

      I gave birth almost a month ago. The staff was EXTREMELY supportive of breastfeeding, they helped a lot and gave a lot of helpful advice. But, on the second night, my baby was inconsolable. I didn’t have milk yet.
      What kind of advice did you think I got after I spent 1h30 constantly feeding a crying baby?:
      -expressing 0,5ml of colostrum is A LOT
      -Your baby’s stomach is super small, it doesn’t need more than that.
      -The second night is always hard, that’s normal.
      Someone did note that her lips where dry, but they didn’t offer any kind of solution.

      So that’s when I started supplementing, She gulped down 20 ml like a calf and fell asleep. For the next 48h that I spend in the hospital, she would drink around 20ml of formula after every single feed. It took 4 days for my milk to come in, and even after my milk came in, it took another week before I had enough to exclusively breastfeed her.

      And despite the supplementation, when we left the hospital, she had lost 7% of her weight. It’s really not a stretch to imagine that without supplementation, it’s very likely she would have lost over 10% and possibly developed jaundice.

      And yet, the only advice I got on my supplementation was that it wasn’t needed. NO ONE was there to help me to make sure I knew what I was doing. It’s only thanks to the Fed is Best foundation that I was able to recognize that my baby was hungry and that I knew how to properly combo feed her.

      And now I am exclusively breastfeeding, all thanks to fed is best and skepticalOB. Because what they offered me was real information and that’s what support is all about.

    • swbarnes2
      April 15, 2017 at 2:27 pm #

      You are a plagerizer which makes you a liar.

  4. Laurel Orr
    March 6, 2017 at 2:31 am #

    To say that advocates for nursing are lying??? For what purpose? They’re not getting a commission for each baby that gets fed natures formula! Synthetic formula companies are more likely to try and boost sales by putting BS like this on the Internet for the gullible to eat up and spew at others!

    • swbarnes2
      March 6, 2017 at 2:59 am #

      In a “baby friendly” hospitals, there are strong pressures to not supplement. Better to hustle mother and starving baby out the door, and be able to call them “exclusively breastfeeding”, even if there is every reason to think that baby didn’t get more than drops, then to lower their % of exclusively breastfeeding mothers.

      See the first line under item 6: there are quotas to be reached here. You can’t reach them with a liberal policy of supplementing

      And sure, formula companies are trying to sell product. Medela is also trying to sell pumps and nursing accessories, I bet you aren’t foaming at the mouth about that.

      • Matt S.
        March 6, 2017 at 2:41 pm #

        This is the truth. The “quality metrics” are overriding common sense.

      • Dr Kitty
        April 17, 2017 at 7:21 pm #


        I said I was in too much pain post #2 CS to be sent home with just paracetamol and diclofenac.

        I left them with 3 options:

        1) send me home “bottle feeding” with opioids, and a formal complaint that I had been forced to stop BF due to inadequate analgesia ( and the understanding that I would BF at home and screw their advice).

        2) send me home BF with opioids and document I was fully aware of the risks.

        3) I refused to leave until my pain was properly controlled with simple analgesia, probably another week or so…

        Three guesses as to what they chose.

        Yeah, I went home with a weeks’ worth of opioids and “EBF” in my file, because I was not there to make friends.

        • AnnaPDE
          April 17, 2017 at 8:54 pm #

          They documented the risks? Pretty responsible.
          My hospital just happily gave me the opioids to take home, with the pharmacist making jokes about which one has the highest street value.

    • Amazed
      March 6, 2017 at 3:31 am #

      Go on, go on. Let the world see the mental capacity of lactivists. Such a horrrrrrrrrible thing, synthetic stuff, isn’t it? I feel for you. I fear things that I can’t understand either.

    • Sarah
      March 6, 2017 at 4:47 am #

      That rather depends on whether the advocate for nursing is getting paid for it or not. Some are, some do it for free. The former clearly have a monetary incentive to push a particular view.

    • Empress of the Iguana People
      March 6, 2017 at 9:39 am #

      Synthetic milk is keeping my baby and I alive. Because my particular case of depression includes total repulsion of *anyone* touching my breast and the thought of breastfeeding makes me suicidal.

      Not that you’re likely to believe me, Judgey McJudgypants.Synthetic milk indeed.

    • Roadstergal
      March 6, 2017 at 10:14 am #

      Yes, because before modern formula companies, no babies were fed anything but breast milk.

      Oh, wait, they were, because delayed lactation, maternal death in childbirth, inability to produce sufficient milk, and mom simply not wanting to do it have been happening since recorded history. Kids got cow milk, goat milk, donkey milk, honey, gin, pre-chewed food, etc before modern formula milk was a thing.

      Laurel Orr is just annoyed that modern formula is the safest and healthiest alternative to breastmilk that has ever existed, to the point that the two best-controlled trials of BM vs F have found little to no difference for term infants in the developed world.

  5. Charlotte Dugan
    February 7, 2017 at 7:07 pm #

    This is the biggest load of bullshit I have seen. Breastmilk is designed for human infants so they can grow and develop.
    Yes some woman can find it hard if she is not given the right advice or support to breastfeed her infant. Breastmilk has so many benefits and trying to say that what science has told as ‘wrong’ and that breastfeeding advocates are lying is the pot calling the kettle black here! You are lying and trying to shame people for breastfeeding.
    Breastmilk is made by humans to feed humans. Formula isn’t sterile and one of the ingredient is cow milk which is meant for cows!
    Yes some women do need to top up on feeds if their supply is a little low or their milk is ‘coming in’ a little late after birth.
    What a shameful and wrong piece of bullshit I have ever read. Go do your research and come back when you’ve learnt a thing or two about breastmilk and breastfeeding.

    • Amy Tuteur, MD
      February 7, 2017 at 7:11 pm #

      Pregnancy is designed to give birth to human infants, but 20% of pregnancies end in miscarriage. Why on earth would anyone think that breastfeeding would be perfect? Only someone ignorant of basic human reproductive physiology would make such a nonsensical claim.

      Sorry, the fact that you breastfed doesn’t make you a better mother than anyone else, no matter how desperately you want to believe it.

      • The Computer Ate My Nym
        February 7, 2017 at 8:07 pm #

        The 20% number only includes clinically evident pregnancies. Early miscarriages, i.e. “chemical pregnancies” are much more common. I’ve seen numbers as high as 80%, though that may be an over estimate since I think it comes from fertility clinic data (where women with higher risk of miscarriage are likely to be.)

    • The Computer Ate My Nym
      February 7, 2017 at 8:09 pm #

      Breast milk isn’t sterile, at least not by the time it goes in the baby. Formula may or may not contain cow’s milk. Your research doesn’t seem to have been very effective in providing you with useful and accurate information.

    • Nick Sanders
      February 7, 2017 at 8:11 pm #

      Breastmilk is designed

      By whom?

  6. deedwan
    June 28, 2016 at 3:34 pm #

    Well from the comments I’ve read, no one has brought God into the equation, yet I certainly believe He is the creator and designer of the human body. Obviously if someone is not producing enough breast milk, that is another story, and so then supplementation needs to happen. I think really before getting pregnant and then breastfeeding mom’s ought to look at making sure they are supplementing very carefully…even working with a very knowledgeable naturopath (in an ideal world, right) so that you have optimum nutrients and the most supportive diet.
    There are things to know, books to read, or consultants…I’d rather spend my money that way than on formulas! There is NO WAY if a mother is healthy that breast feeding is not superior to formula. That being said…no one should condemn a mother who can’t go that route.
    So it should be fairly obvious that drugged mothers should be very carefully monitored when breast feeding, so they don’t fall asleep and the baby falls and dies. Come on.

    • corblimeybot
      June 28, 2016 at 4:03 pm #

      You’re awful.

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 5:38 pm #

        well, I’m sorry you feel that way. But you are certainly entitled to your opinion. I think disparaging breast feeding which was obviously how we were designed is awful. But a mother who can not go that route should never be made to feel she is less of a mother. There can be exceptions for varying reasons.

        • Who?
          June 28, 2016 at 6:37 pm #

          Most of us with a few decades under our belts would like a quiet word with the ‘designer’-I don’t think longevity was part of the specs. We do now have science and medicine to help with looking after our bodies and repairing them when things go wrong. And thank goodness for that.

          No one disparages breastfeeding. The idea that breast is best, and should be the automatic default regardless of all other circumstances, deserves to be disparaged. Feed the baby.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 7:29 pm #

            Sin is the problem…but no one likes to acknowledge that issue…but that’s for another discussion. And then good for you that you can take pills, I’m glad that’s working for you.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:05 pm #

            And absolutely…feed the baby, that is the priority.

      • Nick Sanders
        June 29, 2016 at 1:28 am #

        That’s putting it mildly.

    • LaMont
      June 28, 2016 at 4:06 pm #

      A few things: an individual’s personal faith doesn’t really affect scientific consensus and facts. Invoking god’s hand in creating humanity is victim-blaming at worst, and purely irrelevant at best. If you think the human body is designed in a perfect way (by God), then I do hope you’re consistent with other, non-reproduction items that can go wrong – do you advise only alternative/natural/whatever-you-think-respects-god methods for treating or preventing cancer, infectious disease, etc?

      Spending money on a book to educate yourself is nice, but it won’t feed a baby – formula will.

      Being “drugged” (so… deviating from god’s will?) isn’t the only reason a woman just post-labor might be exhausted to the point of falling asleep while holding a baby.

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 5:37 pm #

        God and science are not against each other. The only reason I can think that a mother’s milk is not totally superior to man made formula is because perhaps the mothers health is not ideal…which is not surprising in an ever increasingly toxic world.
        When I say spending money on a book about breast feeding so that you learn how to optimize breast feeding, to bring in the needed amount of milk, to learn ways to adapt if the baby is struggling etc. As I said, if a person can not go this route then use formula…but there are plenty of people who are willing to learn and not give up at the first challenge or difficulty. There is a lot to learn since women were moved more towards formula, there is not as much passing down of information from generations on the things needed to know to be successful at breast feeding.
        And you read into my comment about a mother being drugged. There was no condemnation about a mom needing some pain relief or whatever but don’t leave her unsupervised with the baby if she could easily drop off and lose control of the baby! That’s not her fault.

        • LaMont
          June 28, 2016 at 6:10 pm #

          Yeah, your magical thinking (regardless of your broader religious beliefs or belief in god) is in conflict with science. The world isn’t more toxic now than it has been in the past, we’ve almost eliminated polio and have already eliminated smallpox, just for starters! The world is amazing today! Sanitation and vaccines and antibiotics oh my!

          No one is saying that it is categorically *better* for women to “give up” (judge much? yikes!) on breastfeeding, it’s the “breastmilk is superior” that we take issue with. We don’t want to hate on women trying to breastfeed, but if they do so while risking their children’s deaths, that *is* bad.

          Invoking “design” in the context of a medical discussion is inappropriate. Wildly so. Any doctor telling a patient about “design” should be reprimanded rather severely – religious beliefs should not interact with medical care.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 7:55 pm #

            Sanitation no doubt was and is a great boon to society and health.
            And I believe we were given an immune system by our Designer. Hence why it’s so helpful to understand how to support and strengthen it. Injecting toxic cocktails isn’t it. There is plenty of evidence that shows that vaccines cause serious injury and death.
            And obviously, (or maybe not, judging the responses on here) no one should starve their baby. So if breastfeeding is just not a possible way to go, once again (and again) I agree that formula is then the way to go.
            Medical care…well, I believe our medical care is great for an emergency. Terrible accident, broken bones, life threatening injuries or needing a few stitches. It’s great for that. And it can be helpful in the interim while a person searches for better alternatives if dealing with a long term illness.
            Obviously some people will just need the drugs because there is so much going on. And thank God they are there when needed. But so much of what people are on medication for can be greatly improved, if not all together resolved by diet and nutrition.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 8:01 pm #

            Are you by chance familiar with Duchenne muscular dystrophy? Basically it affords parents and family the opportunity to watch their sons’ muscles waste away, until they watch them die. I think it qualifies as a “long term illness.” There is no cure, and the treatments available are woefully inadequate. Do tell us what “better alternatives” you would suggest. What foods would you suggest to replace the vanishing dystrophin? And I would love to hear how sin figures into this genetic nightmare, but as you said, that’s probably for another discussion.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:15 pm #

            I have heard of it, and I just had a dear friend die with permanent progressive MS. She did much better eliminating grains and sugars. But not every disease has been unlocked yet, this is why I said thank God that the medications are there when needed. The diseases I was more referring to are diabetes, heart disease, cancers etc.
            And just quickly, sin is the cause for all suffering…whatever it may be. This is a sin sick world. And just to be clear, I’m not blaming the child because we are born with a nature that is bent towards sin since the fall of man.
            But it’s also in ways that may not be as obvious (or maybe it is)…there most definitely are corporations, very powerful corporation or other types of bodies (government and private) that suppress cures. Because they can’t patent it and make obscene profits and corner the market.
            There is quite a history of this happening. People killed, reputations destroyed, lives ruined all because of greed and control.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 8:18 pm #

            Oh please.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 8:20 pm #

            Sin may be what you believe causes suffering, but that is entirely your perspective; it is not fact.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:28 pm #

            Yes, well, that’s because it make absolute sense to me and I haven’t been brain washed by the theory of evolution spoon feeding. Which has a lot of problems…actually atheists require far more faith than I do.
            But…just have to add…prophecy truly is being fulfilled before our very eyes…for those who have eyes to see and ears to hear.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 8:29 pm #

            That’s one way to look at it.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:43 pm #

            Well, most people have only been taught one way to look at things…and they believe it without ever really testing it to know if it is true.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 8:45 pm #

            That’s exactly the impression I’ve gotten of you.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:55 pm #

            Then I guess that’s because you’ve assumed I’ve always believed the way I do now. I assure you that is not the case. I’ve been on the other side. I’ve learned in reality we have inherited lies. And most people don’t want to see it. They like what is comfortable and familiar…it’s what they trust. But what if the things you have trusted were not true?
            That has happened to me, and I see it with many, many people.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 10:35 pm #

            There’s nothing comfortable and familiar about being an atheist in the US.

          • Amy Tuteur, MD
            June 28, 2016 at 8:39 pm #

            Why should there be any disease at all if God is such a great designer?

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 8:49 pm #

            Because of sin! Adam and Eve ate the forbidden fruit in the Garden, so therefore all mankind is stained with “Original Sin”. Except Mary, mother of Jesus. We then add our own sin burden to the “Original Sin”. If Adam and Eve had listened, we wouldn’t be in the state we are.

            Of course, being omniscient, you’d have thought God would have seen it coming.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 9:10 pm #

            Mmmm, fruit. Give me my sin again!

          • demodocus
            June 29, 2016 at 4:14 pm #

            If you eat enough fruit, will it cleanse your colon? ’cause my apple fiend discovered the peaches and I found the unsanctioned remains of 3 of them on the porch. :/
            Oh, the diapers will be fun.

          • Monkey Professor for a Head
            June 29, 2016 at 5:17 pm #

            I got some apples the other day, and minimonkey loves them. 3 dirty nappies yesterday 🙁

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:36 pm #

            Mary was a sinner just like the rest of us. Only Jesus was without sin. And God already had a plan of salvation in place for that possibility.
            God has never taken away our free choice.

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 11:41 pm #

            No, Mary was born without Original Sin. She was con eived in the normal way, meaning sex was involved. She did not, by the grace of God, have the “stain” of Original Sin,; this is the Immaculate Conception.

            The Holy Spirit caused Mary to conceive Jesus, this is the Virgin Birth.

            They are not the same thing.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:59 pm #

            Yes, I’m aware this is catholic doctrine…it’s not biblical however.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 11:43 pm #

            Jesus was totally a sinner.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:31 am #

            No, you are getting confused with yourself.

          • guest
            June 29, 2016 at 10:00 am #

            As an atheist, I cannot sin. There is no such thing in my worldview.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:29 pm #

            God does not eradicate the consequences of our choices…imagine a world where there were no consequences for our choices…

          • MaineJen
            June 28, 2016 at 10:35 pm #

            I’m sorry. Eliminating grains and sugars made her MS better?

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:26 am #

            So, you believe we have an immune system, at least that’s a start. Next you should learn how it works.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:38 am #

            I know enough not to poison it with chemicals and synthetic drugs. I’d rather just directly use the plant they are making a synthetic version of…but they can’t patent and control it that way.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 2:12 am #

            Vaccines have absolutely nothing to do with synthetic versions of plant chemicals.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:17 am #

            No, vaccines have other toxic chemicals and unclean ingredients I have no interest in injecting into my body.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 2:24 am #

            Oh, how precious.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:35 am #

            Oh sweetie, I’m sure it’s you that is just precious…

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 12:10 pm #

            Bless your heart.

          • Charybdis
            June 29, 2016 at 9:28 am #

            Maybe Kosher vaccines? Or Halal vaccines?

            What “unclean” ingredients are you referring to?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:41 am #

            While it’s been…interesting here, dealing with all of you skeptics. I’m out. You choose your way, and I shall choose the way I believe leads to the best health…but making informed decisions and educating myself. Bye now.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 2:11 am #

            making informed decisions and educating myself.

            That is an excellent idea. I recommend you start right away, you need to make up for lost time.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:18 am #

            I never have stopped, and you never have started.

          • guest
            June 29, 2016 at 9:59 am #

            Exactly how many times are you going to tease us with your imminent departure before actually going away?

          • Linden
            June 29, 2016 at 10:51 am #

            If only Ezekiel’s idiot parents trusted their son’s God-given immune system a little less, and vaccinated him.

          • rosewater1
            June 29, 2016 at 12:37 pm #

            Gee, and I guess my mother, who’s had a stroke, has other heart issues, a bad knee, vertigo, and other issues, just held the door for everyone else when immune systems were handed out. Or does she just not believe hard enough?

            And before you throw nutrition into the mix, getting her to eat anything is a challenge.

            Guess God put her on the bad list, hmm?

            You have NO idea how entitled and offensive you are. None. Nor do you seem to care.

            And please don’t give me any sympathy or prayers. I’m a Christian, I believe in God. I’ll take it up with him myself. I don’t want your sanctimony.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:01 pm #

            Oh, and I have to disagree with you. We have bees dying (and that’s really not good…because if they go, so do we) because of insecticides used on crops. We have more people than ever, younger than ever with chronic illness, allergies (and I’m talking life threatening allergies). I was a camp nurse and so many of the kids were on medications and had epi pens. That was certainly not the case when I was a kid. The real, natural food isn’t the problem…it’s how it is being treated.
            Fukishima…you might recall. That in and of itself has made the world more toxic…the ocean is dying.
            And we aren’t winning the war on cancer.

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 8:42 pm #

            But oddly enough, there is new evidence that exclusive breastfeeding causes an increase in allergies, because potential allergens are not being introduced in the 4-6 month range because Exclusive Breastfeeding! Baby doesn’t need anything but the breastmilk for a year! And mom should not be eating any potential allergens because those can get into the breastmilk and cause problems for the baby.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 8:51 pm #

            Right, but not every mom is aware of the problem with GMO crops and pesticides that get into her system and into her milk. Why are so many becoming so much more allergic…to everything???What has changed? Our food because of how it is farmed is devoid of nutrients, most of us have many deficiencies. Mental health issues have sky rocketed. Why? Did you know that Schizophrenia can be treated with Niacin? B3. In fact, Schizophrenia and Pellegra are both caused by B3 deficiencies.
   is an organization that treats mental health issues with nutrition, because they have discovered many mental health issues are actually symptoms of deficiency (and also sometimes toxicity). Panic attacks, anxiety, depression, bi-polar are being successfully treated with nutrition.
            We are literally starving for nutrients. This is why disease is so rampant now at younger and younger ages…while people pass up real food and buy and give their family food like substances, that come with extensive labels in boxes, bags and cans. Cans can present problems of their own because of the BPA lining used. It’s really sad how many people are still completely unaware of what is going on, and scoff because they have no idea what they don’t know.

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm #

            You have GOT to be kidding. Truehope is the company that the Stephan family – remember Ezekiel, who died as a toddler? his parents were just sentenced? THEY and THEIR products are what you tout?
            Forgive me, I am bloody incoherent. I can barely type. We have a Truehope defender here. DNFTT.

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 9:17 pm #

            Jesus, Mary and Joseph. The family who tried to cure their toddler son with supplements, herbs and other bullshit while he was dying of meningitis? Meningitis is excruciatingly painful and the fact that they used herbs, horseradish, apple cider vinegar and other useless, worthless “natural remedies” and then blamed the EMT’s who arrived at the very end because they didn’t have “proper equipment”? THOSE PEOPLE???!??!??

            I. Can’t. Even.

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 9:23 pm #

            Yes indeedy. I googled so as to be sure – and it took me a LOOOOONG time to type the above, between the headdesks and the ragestroke. That wasn’t a small earthquake here in SoCal, that was me. Headdesking. I want to use of them, and deedwan, some of the choice things the Scots recently said of Trump ….

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 9:33 pm #

            Is that what that was? ;P

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 9:34 pm #

            Hulk smash. Wish I knew how to gif.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:34 pm #

            Definitely a needless tragedy. Some people do go too far and don’t know when to get to an ER. But don’t trash the truth because of this couples gross error.

          • swbarnes2
            June 28, 2016 at 11:31 pm #

            “Some people” being the naturopaths you all think we should be trusting our health to?

            This is a question from their licensing exam. See the part where it doesn’t say “Send the dangerously sick child to the ER?” But says “Use shaken water to treat a child who can’t breathe”?

            THIS IS THEIR STANDARD OF CARE. This is the standard of care YOU are recommending. FOR CHILDREN.

            If this is the exam, how could a properly trained naturopath who trusts their education have done anything differently? If not being able to breathe isn’t an emergency, what is?

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:38 pm #

            I never said anything about recommending a naturopath for children, but I’m not against it either. Obviously just like with MDs you need to find out if they are on the same page as you for the needs of your child. MDs have killed plenty of children as well, remember that. But I said for the mother before getting pregnant. Wow. You all want to have me saying things I never said. As for me, if my child were having difficulty breathing, I would not waste any time getting to the ER.

          • swbarnes2
            June 28, 2016 at 11:57 pm #

            So naturopathic treatment was good enough for Ezekial, and the posters on this board, but not good enough for YOUR child? You are FINE with the naturopathic standard of treatment for a child who can’t breathe being shaken water?
            I’m not putting anything in your mouth, I am just explaining the ramifactions of your claims. When you say that everyone should go to a naturopath, you are telling people that that standard of care and training is GOOD and desirable.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:09 am #

            Okay, shall I try again…first of all, I was recommending a naturopath for women who wanted to optimize their health before pregnancy. Why? Because they have education in vitamins, minerals, herbs etc. This is not part of an MDs training. But there are many MDs that have crossed over and are both.
            And please tell me where I said everyone should should see a naturopath. But I do think everyone should take time to really educate themselves on their options.
            And as I said before there are MDs that have killed children and people. So what is your point? These parents failed to grasp how serious this situation was getting and did not act appropriately. I have a lot of faith in natural medicine, but if someone is struggling to breathe, as I said and will repeat, I would waste no time getting to the ER.
            I’m not for advocating that you let anybody else do your thinking for you. Not an MD, and not a Naturopath. Not a pastor nor a priest. I give that example because a lot of people never read the Bible for themselves, but just rely on their pastor and their church for their information. How then do you know if what you are being taught is true? Or if it is just the traditions of your church. I’m just using that as an example, because it’s the same with taking care of your health. Educate yourself, learn what your options are, so you can make an informed decision on how you want to proceed and what is best for your child. That’s what I do.

          • swbarnes2
            June 29, 2016 at 12:31 am #

            The “education” that naturopths have in “herbs” is horseshit. They advocate using homeopathy for a child who can’t breathe, remember? They give herbs to Ezekial. THAT is naturopathic care. Naturopath standard of care, as demonstrated by their test, is NOT to send a child struggling to breathe to the ER, but that IS the standard that you are recommending.
            And no, it’s not just the parents who misunderstood the situation, it was the naturopath, the kind that you think are such great health care providers. Of course the fact that the parents made a living selling horseshit contributed.
            Maybe if they hadn’t fancied themselves “educated” in their own horeshit, they would have gotten medicine for their child.
            If they’d trusted the people who were ACTUALLY educated about medicine, their child would have lived. Instead, they preferred to live in a fantasy world where they were as educated as doctors.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:57 am #

            This is where mainstream medicine *can* have a leg up…which is in getting a diagnosis. Not always though, because western doctors make lots of mistakes as well…and people die. Or people suffer for years because their real illness has been misdiagnosed again and again. It happens.
            Doctors, whether naturopathic or MDs are not God. So errors do happen. Should you choose to dig into it, you would find plenty of people who have had no success with western medicine but then turn to natural medicine and do. And I’m sure there are some that go the other way around as well. It’s good to have options. But the result for that little boy was tragic and very sad, and needless.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 1:47 am #

            I’m really interested in your caveats. Must supplement, but the right sort, of the right brand. Must not get help, from an actual doctor, until the right time comes, and you’re a fool if you don’t know when that is. Must not eat gmos, must eat this or that. If we did this long enough, there would turn out to be certain foods that are ‘obviously’ right or ‘clearly’ bad.

            So there’s always an out. It’s never that your regime is wrong, it’s that someone did it wrong. Not that it wasn’t explained properly, but someone failed to ‘do their research’.

            Zero responsibility to you If it fails for someone, and all the credit to you if they do happen to improve.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:28 am #

            I don’t run to a doctor for every little sniffle…do you? Some people do. They get a hangnail and need to make a doctor’s appointment. I have no interest on being on medications because I don’t really trust them, so if it’s something I can manage with diet, lifestyle changes and supplements that’s what I will do. My dog had these episodes where his gut was squealing, literally in the middle of the night, and he was in distress, so I’d run him into the emergency vet and they couldn’t really give me a satisfactory answer…this happened a few times and finally I said, I see a different vet every time because this always happens in the middle of the night, and I want to know what is going on. Finally she said we believe your dog has acid reflux but with out scoping him, which would be very invasive, we don’t know for sure, so just put him on a quarter tablet of prilosec for the rest of his life. No way, that drug has side effects, I immediately researched the problem and grains were the problem, so I made his food for him and then finally grain free options started coming out. Why put him on a drug when I can make changes to improve his health in a better way??? I’m not sure what is so perplexing about this.
            I think avoiding or limiting gmos is a good idea…there is not nearly enough long term evidence to tell us it’s safe. And it’s a pandora’s box that once opened we may never be able get reverse. Making gmo salmon and releasing them into the wild??? Insane in my opinion.
            And yes, since I am spending money on food and supplements I want to know I’m getting the best for my money. Whacky concept for some I guess. This is my health, my body so I want to be sure I’m not putting ineffective or possibly harmful things into it. That’s a real head scratcher isn’t it? smh

          • Linden
            June 29, 2016 at 10:46 am #

            You’re here talking about gmo salmon and dog acid reflux, and touting the worldview of the idiots who killed their child due to hubris and ignorance. You are astoundingly tone deaf and uncaring.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 9:13 pm #

            To be fair, it’s hard to be aware of a problem that does not exist. Comsumption of GMO crops pose zero risks to human health. Pesticides are a poison, but it’s the dose that makes it poisonous, and we have strict regulations. Chemophobia doesn’t fly here.

            I am sorry that you have been bamboozled by lies and lunacy. You might have used your faith to do good in this world, but you have been lead too far astray.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:32 pm #

            I haven’t been bamboozled. My mom died from chemo. I was her caregiver and that was the route she wanted to go…and it killed her…painfully.
            Well, I guess all those studies about organ disruption in animals that were tested with GM crops are just lunacy too. Smh. I mean it’s fine to disagree…you all are just so ugly about it.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 10:39 pm #

            None of this addresses my comment or proves anything whatsoever. Your mother died. I’m sorry for that. It’s likely her death would have been different, at least, had she refused science-based medical care. But if what you want is a chance at a cure, or the longest extension of life, science-based treatment remains the best and only proven course. As with anything, it doesn’t work the way it’s supposed to every time. But it has a far better track record than alternative medicine.

            You are the one who is ugly here, blaming women’s failure to breastfeed on “sins” they have committed and diet. It doesn’t work like that, but you feel the need to place the blame on them anyway. Pathetic and sick.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:50 pm #

            You are stringing together different responses to different questions and now saying I am blaming women’s failure to breastfeed on sins they have committed. No. Never said that. And as for the bit about diet. Perhaps you failed to catch that most of us have deficiencies. I had increasing anxiety (which I thought due to hormones and “the change”), had horrendous cycles with terrible cramps and vomiting, difficulty getting to sleep and staying asleep…I never felt rested, mood swings, blood clots, restless legs and heart arrhythmia. I at times felt like I was going to have a heart attack. I tried hormone creams which helped mildly for a bit, but then stumbled onto Magnesium deficiency….which incidentally helps to regulate hormones. It took several months of taking it and B vitamins (and as I have learned more, I’ve added more) but I don’t have those issues anymore.
            And in everything I’ve read they estimate that 80% of us are magnesium deficient. I realized it can’t just be magnesium either. So I’m not blaming the mothers! Our soil is is deficient. They started raising the alarm bells about that back in the 1930’s saying it was becoming a big problem. Just to give an illustration. If we were to compare the nutrition of a carrot from 200 years ago to a carrot today, it might take 10 carrots or more to compare to the nutrition in one carrot 200 years ago.
            So I’m sorry if you have misunderstood what I was trying to say. I was not blaming the mother for being deficient.

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 10:54 pm #

            Please cite your source(s). Credible ones only.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 11:42 pm #

            Why would most of us have deficiencies, then that would mean breastmilk also has deficiencies. And that most of us are poorly designed. Great job, god!

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:34 am #

            We have deficiencies because the soil is deficient…it has been over farmed, and they just put more pesticides and chemicals in it to make things grow, but they are not nutrient dense as they should be. The land needs to rest. I never said we were poorly designed. It’s actually a miracle we do as well as we do with all the toxicity and deficiency.

          • guest
            June 29, 2016 at 9:57 am #


          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:24 am #

            With pesticides, it’s not just the dose, we are using them to poison things other than humans, so it’s often possible to find or develop something with targeted toxicity. It will kill the pests, and leave us unharmed.

          • guest
            June 29, 2016 at 9:56 am #

            Yes, that’s true as well.

          • Heidi
            June 28, 2016 at 9:27 pm #

            Niacin does not cure schizophrenia. My grandfather ate sardines everyday, a very rich source of niacin, and still suffered!

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 9:31 pm #

            But it wasn’t Truehope Niacin. That’s the MAGIC niacin.

            *facepalms into headdesk* *Repeatedly*

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:26 pm #

            Any Niacin will do as long as it isn’t time released…that is not good.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:25 pm #

            You need proper dosing…if you are interested read the book called Niacin by Dr. Abram Hoffer. It’s very interesting.

          • Heidi
            June 28, 2016 at 10:28 pm #

            He has been thoroughly debunked. My grandfather is dead because he was old, despite not megadosing on vitamins!

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:39 pm #

            LOL…okay, Heidi…have it your way. Really, it’s no skin off of my nose. Take your drugs, eat your gmos and take your chemo and whatever else you want.

          • Heidi
            June 28, 2016 at 10:59 pm #

            It isn’t my way. Scientists tried to repeat the results of the study multiple times and they couldn’t! If niacin worked, then study after study would yield the same result.

            I don’t have cancer, thankfully. What an awful thing to say. I’m also not on any prescription medication, if that was what you were implying, nor do I currently take any drugs (or herbs, supplement or vitamins). Fortunately, I don’t have a need for them currently. I don’t take a figurative crap on those that do need them, though.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:06 pm #

            Right, because they were using a time released niacin. That is mentioned in the book.
            And I’m not trying to down anyone that wants to use those things…just saying everyone here is, as you put it, taking a figurative crap, on a natural approach…so if it suits you and others better then use what works for you. I know people that will eat at McDonalds, drink diet soda, take their Rx, (all of which have chemicals and risks and or (side) effects) but you mention using lavender on a burn and they are like…”I have to ask my doctor”. That’s fine, it’s great that there are option for people who prefer different approaches.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:12 pm #

            And how many people that have healed cancer by diet and nutrition, or people who have overcome depression and other things, people who have reversed Parkinson’s have the people here basically crapped on? What everybody here is doing is saying it’s hooey, lunacy and so on. People who were sent home to die because there was nothing else mainstream medicine could do. Or people with seizures who had such terrible effects from the medications they didn’t know which was worse…the seizures or the drugs, and same for depression…some of the depression meds have made people homicidal and/or suicidal. So while everyone here is saying it can’t be done…people are doing it, have done it, and are now living healthier lives as a result of educating themselves and making big lifestyle changes.
            No one ever said it works for everyone…we aren’t all number 2 pencils, so it takes time to try out and find out what does.

          • Heidi
            June 28, 2016 at 11:31 pm #

            As far as I know no one has healed cancer by diet or reversed Parkinson’s. I don’t know anyone who actually knows anyone that has. Sure, I can google it and find websites that claim to sell the cure in their book and/or through their affiliate links but I imagine if I had found a true way to cure a terminal illness I was inflicted with, I would give out my knowledge for free.

            I have witnessed someone not enjoy the side effects of their depression medication and chase down any herb, supplement or vitamin that was supposed to help and then it didn’t. In the end, he realized he was better off with his prescribed anti-depressants. I hope one day science can find a medicine for him that makes him feel at peace and happy.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:43 pm #

            Do you know who Dr. John Grey is…Men are from Mars, Women are from Venus? He reversed Parkinson’s in himself. You can watch a video on his site about it. And that’s too bad you don’t know anyone who has healed cancer by diet and nutrition. There are loads of them out there. And you are funny. You I guess would have no problem paying thousands of dollars for the standard medical care (my Mom’s chemo infusions cost in the range of 30K a pop, thankfully she had good insurance) but purchasing a book and learning how to take charge of your own health is just too much for you?
            It cost money to print books, but a lot of them do have free articles on their sites and videos too.

            And I hope that for your friend too…

          • Heidi
            June 29, 2016 at 12:14 am #

            Or no one wanted to give him anymore money for his crappy, sexist drivel and he had to cash in on something else.

            They charge for their e-books, they have affiliate links because in the end, they aren’t giving anything away for free. They aren’t giving it out for free because it doesn’t actually work. They are cons who want to take desperate people’s money. No, I will not give these people money!

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:27 am #

            Wow, well, he wasn’t charging for the video, he just shared his experience and what worked for him. So people could just research on their own about these things. That’s what people generally do who are into natural medicine. They spend time checking into things for themselves to see if it’s the route they want to go. I’m not telling you to give him any money, Heidi, lol. But L-dopa which is the standard treatment for Parkinson’s only works so long, before you have to keep increasing the dosage and then it no longer works at all and you are worse off because of how that drug works it.
            Like I said, you do what you want to do. I’m not here to force or convince you…just answer questions and give a different point of view. Who knew that would be so challenging to people.

          • Heidi
            June 29, 2016 at 12:30 am #

            Yeah, who knew that at a place with Skeptical in the name, we’d be skeptical!

            I just visited his site. Yeah, he ain’t giving away the supposed cure which involves Mars Venus Super Food Shake. And an ad interrupts every few seconds to purchase his e-book! You have been duped.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:48 am #

            Right because you expected him to be able to outline the whole thing in a short video he was supposed to outline his whole protocol…this is why people write books, so they can go into in depth explanation. Did you hear him mention Marcuna Pirins (not sure of the spelling) that is a natural plant that you can take to stop the tremors. Was just reading about it today. He didn’t charge for that info.
            He also credited other doctors for figuring out supplements you can take so that your brain doesn’t habituate to the L-dopa. Then he explains how it may be possible to decrease the L-dopa and just keep taking the supplements but still have the Parkinson’s under control….and then hopefully not even needing to take the supplements anymore.
            Yeah, he’s really trying to screw you over, Hiedi, you better watch out. He does talk about a good diet to support your body so that hopefully you don’t need all the supplements all the time.
            Then he starts explaining what happens in the brain when you are taking the L-dopa and what happens with the thyroid, but he tells people right there in the video what they can take (although I’m sure it’s not comprehensive, because there is a lot of information and education that goes with it.) I’m 6 minutes into the video and so far he hasn’t mentioned his book. He’s talking about dopamine inhibition…and what other problems arise out of that. Then he discusses going to Mexico for treatments with amino acids, but that the symptoms came back after 3 months. But that it was very expensive. So he wanted to figure out how to get more amino acids into his brain, so he formulated something to do that. Yes, what a terrible person, what a quack! Sheesh…well, be skeptical. I have no problem with that, but at least bother to educate yourself before you disparage people. I’m wondering if you even watched the same video. He’s now talking about Jigsaw (that’s the brand name) B vitamins which are not his…he’s giving options. He’s giving the names of the supplements and the dosages to take…for free.

          • Heidi
            June 29, 2016 at 9:38 am #

            Supplements he sells on his site. You support True Hope, the people who killed their own child because of their refusal to get their child vaccinated and then further refused to take him to a real medical doctor. That’s all anyone needs to know about your self-education.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:44 pm #

            Oh, and I also know another person who was having early onset of Parkinson’s and got on a serious diet and supplemental regime and arrested it. His name is Jon Sherman. And he started a website to help people.

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 9:46 pm #

            GMO’s are tasty. They are also what makes it possible to have more disease-resistant crops which reduce the amount of pesticides, herbicides and fungicides used in agriculture. Hybridization and grafting are also used to help increase crop production and yields.

            A lot of the “natural at all costs” folks don’t seem to realize that their “natural” remedies contain high amounts of the things they bash “science” for. Hormone replacement therapy? Have some Black Cohosh or some soy! It’s natural! Phytoestrogens that are not regulated or standardized, just take them willy-nilly and don’t think about it. It’s natural, and therefore somehow better. Use a bottleful of castor oil to “naturally” induce your labor….you won’t have to have the evil pitocin!

            It is all a load of hooey.

          • MaineJen
            June 28, 2016 at 10:41 pm #

            NO. You do NOT get to claim that serious mental illness can be cured by vitamins. You’ve obviously never seen the result of an untreated mental illness, or you wouldn’t be making outrageous claims like that.

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 10:52 pm #

            Well. Truehope claims that their product works to improve (I imagine they are careful about the word cure): ADD/ADHD, autism, anxiety, bipolar disorder, depression, fatigue, and stress. One product does all that. Amazing that it couldn’t cure Ezekiel …..

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:19 am #

            Wait, are the selling that bread recipe from the Book of Ezekiel? The one intended as a punishment?

            I wonder if they bake it of a fire of human shit, like the Biblical version calls for?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:24 am #

            I have a friend who’s adult daughter was diagnosed with bi-polar. I had posted some info about True hope and unbeknownst to me they checked it out. She later private messaged me thanking me for posting that because it is helping her daughter.
            And there are many people it has helped. The drugs for these conditions can be very scary indeed. Some people are able to gradually transition off of those drugs and get fully on the supplements.
            Your comment about Ezekiel was uncalled for.

          • Empliau
            June 29, 2016 at 1:46 am #

            Perhaps. I am so angry that those fools let their son die a painful and unnecessary death, that what I mean as mordant irony may be too bitter. I feel nothing but sorrow for the loss of his innocent life. His grandfather founded Truehope, his father worked for it IIRC. And you show up here and say this so-called supplement can cure so many ills. How anyone with a soul and a vestige of sanity can defend these people is simply beyond me. Further, you imply that suffering and illness are some bizarre version of either God’s judgement or bad nutrition. I think you have vexed me beyond the usual parachuting numpty.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:53 am #

            Do you get as angry about all the vaccine injuries and deaths that happen…or just Ezekiel? Do you get angry about the children who die from prescribed drugs? Or just this situation? How about all the innocent babies torn out of their mother’s wombs?
            These people made a terrible mistake, and they will have to live with that the rest of their lives.
            That you question if I have a soul or vestige of sanity because I know that supplement has helped people it absolutely idiotic. And I can’t help how you nitwits want to twist what I have said, no matter how plainly I’ve tried to state it. Believe what you want…but if you are so vexed deary, perhaps you have a pill in your medicine cabinet that you can take and make it all go away. Idiot.

          • Charybdis
            June 29, 2016 at 9:22 am #

            Your faith in the people who not only market the snake oil, but attempted to use it, along with other useless remedies, to treat a young child with MENINGITIS and wound up killing him as a result is uncalled for.

            If natural is always freaking better than medical science, then why did Ezekiel die? It sure as hell wasn’t because the ambulance didn’t have the “right” supplies. Or is this the corollary to “Babies die in hospitals too”? Something like: “Some people are too far gone for the wonderful, miraculous natural, God-given remedies to help/save”?

          • Linden
            June 29, 2016 at 10:41 am #

            Wait, you are touting the company and mindset that killed a little boy, guaranteed that he was in agony and terror for long long hours before his death, and we’re just supposed to let that slide?? An avoidable death.

            Have you no guilt? Have you no shame?

            My husband suffered from meningitis this year. It was horrifying to see. I had no trouble deciding to call the ambulance, because I’m not an idiot believer in sugar pills and I’m not filled with the monstrous hubris that makes you think you know better than doctors.

          • corblimeybot
            June 29, 2016 at 11:15 am #

            Your comments defending the ideology that killed Ezekiel are uncalled for.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:55 pm #

            For pity sake…don’t believe me, then. Or just perhaps try researching it for yourself. I didn’t say every type but that they were having success with anxiety, depression, bi-polar, panic attacks etc.
            And I never said anything about leaving it untreated.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:03 am #

            problem with GMO crops and pesticides that get into her system and into her milk

            Citation needed.

            Our food because of how it is farmed is devoid of nutrients

            Citation needed.

            most of us have many deficiencies

            Citation needed.

            Mental health issues have sky rocketed.

            Citation needed.

            Did you know that Schizophrenia can be treated with Niacin? B3. In fact, Schizophrenia and Pellegra are both caused by B3 deficiencies.

            Go fuck yourself, you lying shitweasel.

   is an organization that treats mental health issues with nutrition, because they have discovered many mental health issues are actually symptoms of deficiency (and also sometimes toxicity). Panic attacks, anxiety, depression, bi-polar are being successfully treated with nutrition.

            I wasn’t aware one could have a lithium deficiency.

            And I tired of copying on a tablet, so I’m just gonna say I count 4, maybe 5, more claims needing citations.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:13 am #

            Look it up for yourself, pal. Choose to know or not…your choice.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:17 am #

            Burden of proof, “pal”.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:20 am #

            Yeah, the piranhas here love being skeptical…and I will let them be. The evidence is out there. I’m not jumping through hoops for you people anymore. You don’t want to know that’s your business. I leave you to it.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:32 am #

            Not my fault you won’t actually defend your claims.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:29 am #

            If people were actually open to look into these things, I would, but to do so on this thread is a colossal waste of time.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:11 am #


    • Heidi
      June 28, 2016 at 5:08 pm #

      So full of crap. I am healthy. Still don’t produce enough breast milk. Therefore breastfeeding is NOT superior to formula because my baby would starve to death.

      Maybe you don’t think you “condemned” anyone, but I feel pretty condemned right now myself. If you weren’t about condemning women, you would have said none of this.

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 7:23 pm #

        Well, I guess only if you are looking to be offended. So many are today…it’s like the new national past time.
        I’m sorry the breast feeding didn’t work out for you.
        And by that criteria (not having adequate supply) then yes, for you formula is the way to go.
        Oh, and there is so much variance on what people consider healthy as well.

        • LaMont
          June 28, 2016 at 7:34 pm #

          Ah, yes, one really must be a True Scotsman to be really healthy. I often have those problems.

        • Heidi
          June 28, 2016 at 10:17 pm #

          Um, no, I avoid zealous breast-feeding websites at all costs. You came here and went blah, blah, blah. It seems the national pastime is to think you know everything about everything because you did some “research.” I see from your other posts you know the cause of bees declining (and if you really did your research you’d know their population is growing now), all about nutrition, when it’s okay and not okay to breastfeed, how to cure all the mental disease, how to feed the world without any pesticides or GMOs, and all about immunology. I mean, you pretty much know more than anyone! You must be God!

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:23 pm #

            Yes, well I never said I was a Ph.D in all these subjects but yes, I do read about them and educate myself. And it seems those who don’t get offended. It happens to be of great interest to me, simply because I know we are fearfully and wonderfully made. No need to be bitter and sarcastic.

          • Heidi
            June 28, 2016 at 10:27 pm #

            I’m not being sarcastic. You really think you know a lot more than you do.

            Bitter is not what I am. What a cliche insult!

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:38 pm #

            Okay, then I guess that’s just your personality. So be it.

          • Monkey Professor for a Head
            June 29, 2016 at 3:58 am #

            What criteria do you use to tell you whether a treatment works or not?

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 4:44 am #

            If the person gets better, the treatment has worked.

            If the person doesn’t get better, deedwan knows they described their symptoms wrongly which means through no fault of the ‘prescriber’ the wrong treatment was ‘prescribed’.

            So long as the sick person is accurate and correct in their explanation of their symptoms, the treatment always works. Therefore, if it doesn’t, the patient is in the wrong.

        • Linden
          June 29, 2016 at 10:26 am #

          Yes, how dare we be insulted when our illnesses or the inability of our bodies to work in an optimum fashion are called the wages of sin.
          I have some news for you: you will get old, you will get ill and you will die, just like the rest of us. Pop any supplement you like, irrigate your colon, drink liquefied kale. It is not going to matter. You’re going to end up just like the sinners.

        • corblimeybot
          June 29, 2016 at 10:46 am #

          So you showed up just to say a bunch of self-righteous nasty crap, and now you’re try to wiggle out of responsibility for your actions? You don’t like being called out on being mean to other people, so you’re blaming the people you were mean to?

      • MaineJen
        June 28, 2016 at 10:47 pm #

        WHereas I ate McDonalds once a week, and made plenty of breast milk! Go figure. 😉

      • demodocus
        June 29, 2016 at 9:58 am #

        and i’m fat, old, and have a poor diet and insufficient exercize and i make enough milk for twins

        • guest
          June 29, 2016 at 10:02 am #

          I made enough for triplets, and I didn’t exercise (sports injuries + bedrest), ate like crap because I was too hungry to make good choices, and I live in a polluted urban environment. I’m also an atheist, and therefore an affront to god. Rivers of milk.

        • Heidi
          June 29, 2016 at 11:21 am #

          Oh, I’m sure I’m doing something horribly unhealthy according to Doodoowad. I eat wheat, or I’m severely deficient in some vitamin or mineral or I have heavy metal toxicity or there’s round-up pulsing through my veins or I’m taxing my liver because I don’t drink organic green juice or I have chronic Lyme or leaky gut or all of it!

          • demodocus
            June 29, 2016 at 3:54 pm #

            Aren’t we all, because the soil is overfarmed or something? Not sure what that one thinks we could do about it, mind

          • Heidi
            June 29, 2016 at 5:37 pm #

            She said we’re supposed to quit growing things….so I’m sure she’s doing her part by not eating or even taking supplements or herbs that grew from the ground.

    • moto_librarian
      June 28, 2016 at 5:11 pm #

      In an ideal world, naturopaths would be outlawed from masquerading as healthcare providers. You pretty much lost me the second you started spouting off about god though.

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 7:27 pm #

        Well, if you are dialed into the pharmaceutical solutions then I guess you would believe that. I know many who think that way. But the funny thing is that properly prescribed drugs, and properly taken…is one of the top killers. Number 3 or 4.
        As for me, I personally have loved learning how the body systems are supposed to function and how natural medicine supports them for better health…without (side) effects or death. I truly see God’s hand in that He has supplied what we need, if we are willing.

        • Charybdis
          June 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm #

          Seriously? Properly prescribed drugs, properly taken is a top cause of death? Riiiiggght.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:52 pm #

            Yes, research it for yourself. And I said probably the 3rd or 4th top cause of death. That and medical accidents.

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 2:35 am #

            You didn’t address the whole “insulin” issue. You think type I diabetics should try kicking the habit?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:38 am #

            I’m referring to type 2, but there are things to do that can reduce the amount of insulin needed even for type 1

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 2:39 am #

            Oh do share! You invent a new pancreas?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:41 am #

            Tell me why I should go to the trouble?
            You can search these things yourself.

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 2:42 am #

            Because I’ve never heard of anything that can replace insulin for a type I diabetic that isn’t evil western medicine. (besides prayer that kills children)

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:45 am #

            Is that supposed to be a coherent reply?
            And if you are a type 1 it’s worthwhile to see what
            your options are. I haven’t seen anything that promises to get you off of insulin completely…but just things that can help reduce the amount needed.

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 2:47 am #

            Again, do share this mystical magic secret. The only thing that I’ve ever heard of, beyond prayer (which doesn’t work) is not eating. You see, type I diabetic do not have functioning beta cells to make insulin. Which makes it hard to make insulin.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:51 am #

            Here is an excerpt…what can it hurt to research and try it out…
            Let’s take a look at the latest preclinical study on the topic, published last month in the Canadian Journal of Physiology and Pharmacology[1]. An active fraction of flaxseed, which researchers named Linun usitassimum active fraction (LU6), was found to generate a wide range of benefits in a type 1 diabetes animal model, including the following:

            Improved glucose utilization in the liver
            Supported normalized glycogenesis (glucose forming activity) in the liver and muscle tissue
            Reduced pancreatic and intestinal glucosidase inhibitory activity, which translates into lower post-meal blood sugar elevations
            Even more remarkable was the observation that this flaxseed compound normalized plasma insulin and C-peptide levels (C peptide is not C-reactive protein, rather it is a direct indicator of how much insulin is being produced by the beta cells in the body. Learn more), an indication that beta cell function was effectively restored. The researchers described the truly amazing results as follows:

            Normalization of plasma insulin and C-peptide levels were observed in diabetic mice, indicating endogenous insulin secretion after the treatment with LU6. The histochemical and immunohistochemical analysis on pancreatic islets suggests the role of LU6 fraction in islet regeneration and insulin secretion as evident in increase functional pancreatic islets producing insulin. Furthermore, significant insulin producing islet formation was also observed in in vitro PANC-1 cells after LU6 treatment, indicating the cellular aggregates to be newly formed islets. This suggests the potential of LU6 fraction in the formation of new islets in vitro, as well as in vivo. Thus, LU6 can be used as a nutraceutical-based first-line treatment for diabetes. [emphasis added]

            Keep in mind that this is not the first time that flaxseed has been found to improve blood sugar disorders. We have a few studies on already indexed on the topic that you can view here: Flaxseed and Diabetes.

            Furthermore, we have found a broad range of natural substances experimentally confirmed to stimulate beta cell regeneration, 10 of which are listed below:

            Arginine: a 2007 study found that the amino acid L-arginine is capable of stimulating the genesis of beta cells in an animal model of alloxan-induced diabetes.[2]
            Avocado: A 2007 study found that avocado seed extract reduced blood sugar in diabetic rats. Researchers observed a restorative and protective effect on pancreatic islet cells in the treated group.[3]
            Berberine: A 2009 study found that this plant compound, commonly found in herbs such as barberry and goldenseal, induces beta cell regeneration in diabetic rats, which lends explanation for why it has been used for 1400 years in China to treat diabetes.[4]
            Chard: A 2000 study found that chard extract given to diabetic rats stimulates the recovery of injured beta cells.[5]
            Corn Silk: A 2009 study found that corn silk reduces blood sugar and stimulates beta cell regeneration in type 1 diabetic rats.[6]
            Curcumin (from Turmeric): A 2010 study found that curcumin stimulates beta cell regeneration in type 1 diabetic rats.[7] Additionally, a 2008 study found that curcumin preserves pancreatic islet cell survival and transplantation efficiency.[8]
            Genistein (from soy, red clover): A 2010 study found that genistein induces pancreatic beta-cell proliferation through activation of multiple signaling pathways and prevents insulin-deficient diabetes in mice.[9]
            Honey: A 2010 human study found that long-term consumption of honey might have positive effects on the metabolic derangements of type 1 diabetes, including possible beta cell regeneration as indicating by increases in fasting C-peptide levels.[10]
            Nigella Sativa (black seed): A 2003 animal study found that black seed consumption lead to partial regeneration/proliferation of the beta-cells.[11] A 2010 human study also found that the consumption of one gram of black seed a day for up to 12 weeks had a broad range of beneficial effects in diabetics, including increasing beta cell function.[12]
            Stevia: A 2011 human study found that stevia has anti-diabetic properties, including revitalizing damaged beta cells, and compares favorably with the drug glibenclamide but without the adverse effects.[13]

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 3:07 am #

            All of these are *possible*, *potential* therapies that *could* be used in the future. The Stevia stuff is for Type II btw. I could tell even before looking it up (which I did) because it was comparing it to glibenclamide which is a Type II drug. I haven’t yet gone through *all* your studies, but they’re all aimed at type IIs. This may come as a shock, but many type IIs also have essentially “burn out” on their beta cells from going into overdrive to try and keep up with their insulin resistance. It’s not the total autoimmune destruction that people with type I have.

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 3:10 am #

            Holy fuck, diabesity? Really? You called the section on diabetes on the website diabesity? You seem to want to be taken seriously and then do stuff like that – I am confuzzled.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 3:01 am #

            How is it not all at your fingertips?

            Weren’t you storming off in a huff?

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 2:43 am #

            Oh beeteedubs, I did once have a naturopath decide that he could treat a massive lymphatic malformation with homeopathy and cold water. Of course, he thought the lymphatic malformation was swelling or had something to do with the mother’s diet, no matter how many times I explain how it developed early in gestation and was in no way swelling in the way he thought it was nor could it be reduced by cold compresses.

            Super educated. Totes.

        • guest
          June 28, 2016 at 9:07 pm #

          I truly see god’s hand in the Zika virus, and in brain eating amoebas.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:52 pm #

            Probably manufactured. Seriously, but I know that will be too much for you.

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 11:39 pm #

            Yeah, manufactured – by god.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:48 pm #

            Um, are you aware that AIDS was manufactured?


          • Charybdis
            June 29, 2016 at 12:14 am #

            Are you aware that your willful ignorance is appalling?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:28 am #

            In what way do you believe I am being willfully ignorant?

          • guest
            June 29, 2016 at 9:47 am #

            I am aware that nutjobs think it was, yes.

          • MaineJen
            June 29, 2016 at 5:43 pm #

            Oh dude…that is napalm-grade conspiracy theory. You are far, far down the rabbit hole. Yikes.

        • MaineJen
          June 28, 2016 at 10:31 pm #

          …I honestly can’t tell if you’re serious, or if you’re having us on.

          I dare you to tell a type 1 diabetic to ditch those pharmaceuticals and try a power cleanse.

        • Nick Sanders
          June 29, 2016 at 12:54 am #

          I’m guessing you aren’t aware that “naturopathic” remedies, and herbal medicine in general, is completely unregulated, and often highly contaminated. There no standardization of the levels of active ingredients, so one bottle might have dangerously high levels of dtimulants or other toxic compounds, while the bottle right next to it is almost barren. And that’s assuming it’s actually what’s on the label, rather than grass or some other herb, or even illegally added prescription drugs.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:06 am #

            I am aware that that can be the case. However there are supplement companies out there that are pharmaceutical grade supplements. which means they are tested to ensure they have the right dosages and quality every time. Pure Encapsulations is one such company, and I really benefit from their supplements. I also look for organic and products that have been tested for heavy metals etc.
            Mike Adams from natural news has written about this extensively and has tested many supplements in his lab and has shared the results.
            I wouldn’t be getting my supplements at Wal-mart. I research the companies I deal with to see what their standards are. And I’m sure you are aware that there have been prescription meds that have killed and injured people. And it’s even been discovered that the trials were fudged so they could push through their drugs even though they knew there were serious problems with it. Causing liver failure, or fatal heart attacks etc. And often times they were slow pulling it from the market because it was a cash cow. They make obscene profits on their drugs and vaccines and that is most important to them…not the life changing injuries that happen and the deaths. They are happy to settle out of court because they’ve made so much money.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 1:15 am #

            Mike Adams is a charlatan of the worst breed.

            And the profit from vaccines is slim to none, while the benefits are priceless.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:48 am #

            unsubscribe. Thank you

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 2:09 am #

            Unsubscribe to what? And are you saying you are or I should?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 2:15 am #

            LOL…that is too funny. In the email I received notifying me of your post it seemed to state there was an option to unsubscribe from this thread…It said to reply to the email and unsubscribe…lol, I was not expecting it to post here. And I was referring to myself wanting to unsubscribe.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 2:16 am #

            Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 1:36 am #

            So God is into supplements but not medicine? And supplement companies (the right ones, of course, the ones you know all about, not the ones ignorant fools buy supplements from) are not motivated by money or profit but by wanting to help others?

            Tell that to the gravestone of Ezekial Stephans. His parents are still flogging their snake oil even after relying on it killed their child.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:47 am #

            yeah, because MDs never harm or kill anyone right?
            It’s the 4th top leading cause of death.
            I don’t talk to gravestones. And I’m not sure if you are tying to suggest that because it’s a plant derived supplement people should be giving it for free.
            Some drugs cost hundreds of dollars just for the month and are only an option if you can afford it and have the insurance to cover it. Supplements can be expensive too, but putting real, organic whole foods in your body is another type of medicine as well.
            Anyway, I’ve had enough of you scoffers.
            I’m wondering how much time you’ve actually ever spent researching any of it yourself…I’m guessing not 5 minutes. See ya.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 1:49 am #

            Well you’ve got right the amount of time I’ve spent ‘doing my research’. Good job, I’ll take the credit. That’s how it works, isn’t it?

            Can you stick the flounce?

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 1:55 am #

            Yeah, I could tell from your replies that was about it…maybe even generous. Well, that’s what passes as well informed these days. Cheerio.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 1:56 am #

            So that’s a ‘no’.

          • Charybdis
            June 29, 2016 at 9:11 am #

            Deedwan was touting their company, TrueHope, a little further downthread.

          • sapphiremind
            June 29, 2016 at 3:14 am #

            *raises hand and jumps up and down* oo oo me! Pick me! I went into liver failure from a natural medicine! Green tea extract! Not an overdose. Low dose! (quarter to one half dose) Almost died even. It was impressive! I turned colors.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 3:20 am #

            You must have taken the Wrong One-if only you’d had deedwan to tell you the Right One.

            Because of course that will be the answer-it always is. If nacheral doesn’t work, it’s because your naturopath recommended the wrong one, probably because you, the patient, did something wrong.

          • Madtowngirl
            June 29, 2016 at 12:54 pm #

            Having actually worked in the pharmaceutical industry, I can tell you are dead wrong in many of your assumptions about how it works. When trial results are “fudged,” as you refer to it, (we call it scientific misconduct) there are very serious consequences – losing your job, blacklisting from the industry, prison, significant loss of profits/market share, and so on. Not to mention the massive FDA fines, which contrary to popular belief, are no drop in the bucket. One major drug company received $2 billion in fines a few years ago for failure to disclose adverse effects when their reps were marketing to doctors and patients. They had to drop research and production of some promising medicines because of the financial hit, which cost a lot of people their jobs. The far reaching consequences are why companies like the I worked for go to extreme lengths to show accurate documentation. Recalls are not cheap, either, and it’s not just the loss of product we’re talking about here. An extensive amount of time goes into what went wrong.

            Their profits are no more “obscene” than any other industry. A huge amount of money gets poured into development of drugs that never make it to market. Vaccines are not blockbuster drugs – they don’t make huge profits. Furthermore, of course they make profits – no one is going to invest the immense amount of time and money it takes to produce a drug if there isn’t gain in it. I know people with agendas love to portray the industry as an evil monster, but it is no better or worse than any other industry. Remember, the people that work at these places also get sick, just like their friends and families. They don’t want to take anything dangerous, either.

    • demodocus
      June 28, 2016 at 5:19 pm #

      God is kind of crap at design or is no one nearsighted where you’re from? At my church, no one from the CNM to the bishop’s mother says boo whether you’re feeding baby formula or breastmilk from the tap.

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 7:21 pm #

        Well, I’m sure He will straighten out your opinion in the future…but good luck with that. And honestly, I really don’t base anything off of what some bishop thinks…most of them have no idea who God is.

        • LaMont
          June 28, 2016 at 7:32 pm #

          Ah, so bishops should berate women *more*! Got it! 🙂

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 7:43 pm #

            Bishops should actually read the Bible and learn of who God is and have a personal relationship rather than some man made religion. So I have no idea how you come to the conclusion they should “berate women more”. Idiotic. Bishops are just generally playing at religion.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 7:45 pm #

            Ah, I see your confusion now…perhaps you failed to notice that I capitalized He as in God…would straighten out demodocus’ opinion that “God is crap at design”…
            I have no idea who the CNM is…and obviously I don’t care about the Bishop’s mother’s opinion on breast feeding, lol

          • Charybdis
            June 28, 2016 at 9:01 pm #

            CNM = Certified Nurse Midwife.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:19 pm #

            Thank you.

          • demodocus
            June 29, 2016 at 9:53 am #

            This bishop is a woman. She’s conservative but alright overall. DH is Lutheran, I’m Congregationalist, more or less.

    • Amy Tuteur, MD
      June 28, 2016 at 7:30 pm #

      30% of Americans are nearsighted. How does your insistence that God is an excellent designer cope with that fact, or was he distracted when he was designing eyes?

      • deedwan
        June 28, 2016 at 7:32 pm #

        As one who is nearsighted, I can share with you that when I cleansed and took supplements, my vision improved and I needed to get new glasses. Diet is a big problemo…we are behind the curve learning that.

        • Amy Tuteur, MD
          June 28, 2016 at 8:37 pm #

          Why should anyone be nearsighted at all if God is such an awesome designer? Why difference would diet make? If God is omniscient shouldn’t he have designed everything to work perfectly regardless of diet?

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:18 pm #

            No, because then people could live reckless lives and have no consequences. Sin is part of that problem.
            I mean you could ask the same thing and say why shouldn’t we be able to eat cakes, candy, and ice cream all day every day and not get diabetes, heart disease etc.

          • MaineJen
            June 28, 2016 at 10:45 pm #

            I’m curious about what you mean by “sin.” The definition tends to vary by particular type of religion. Are you saying that people get sick because they themselves commit sins? Or just to pay for the general sins of mankind?

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:52 pm #

            Sin, biblically speaking is the transgression of the Law. God’s law.
            Death was never supposed to happen. But after sin, Adam and Eve, had to leave the garden so they would not eat from the Tree of Life.
            Before sin happened, there was no death, no disease, no suffering.

          • Nick Sanders
            June 29, 2016 at 12:34 am #

            Adam and Eve never happened.

          • deedwan
            June 29, 2016 at 12:49 am #

            Adam and Eve did…Adam and Steve never did.

          • Linden
            June 29, 2016 at 5:38 am #

            So heterosexual couples are responsible for the fall. Homosexuals weren’t there, and are blameless.
            Maybe we should define marriage as only being between a man and a man, or a woman and a woman then. :-p

          • Mishimoo
            June 29, 2016 at 5:42 am #

            Funny you should say that! I personally find it interesting that when looking at the Greek New Testament and reading the story of Jesus and the Centurion, he uses a term for the person he has come to ask Jesus to heal which translates to male lover (based on context) and Jesus still heals him. In fact, Jesus makes a positive comment on the centurion’s faith. That’s it, that’s all. No “Go away and sin no more” like in so many other stories.

          • MaineJen
            June 29, 2016 at 5:38 pm #

            Oh no you did not

          • Nick Sanders
            July 7, 2016 at 12:06 am #

            Hmm, seems this one got lost in the shuffle. I didn’t see it until now.

            Regardless, Genesis is not a literal description of history, and even if it were, it wouldn’t be an argument against homosexuality. Not that that is in any way relevant to this argument.

          • Mishimoo
            June 29, 2016 at 5:36 am #

            Oh, this type usually believe something along the lines of “The LORD is longsuffering, and of great mercy, forgiving iniquity and transgression, and by no means clearing the guilty, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation.” (Numbers 14:18 KJV) but they’re not normally willing to admit it because they’re generally trying to convert people while they’re arguing, and who wants to worship a deity like that? Much easier to try and make people feel uncomfortable about sin instead.

          • Charybdis
            June 29, 2016 at 11:41 am #

            It depends on if you are speaking about the Old Testament Angry Desert God or the New Testament Kinder More Forgiving God.

          • Daleth
            June 29, 2016 at 11:55 am #

            It depends on if you are speaking about the Old Testament Angry Desert God or the New Testament Kinder More Forgiving God.

            In other words, “Original” or “New and Improved”?

          • momofone
            June 28, 2016 at 10:46 pm #

            How do you explain the situations that don’t fit your framework? People who do everything “right” and still get sick, or children who inherit or develop godawful diseases? Are they just being reckless during cell division?

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 10:47 pm #

            These religious nutjobs seem never to have read the book of Job.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:00 pm #

            I have read the book of Job. And yes, sometimes we are just tested and tried.

          • swbarnes2
            March 6, 2017 at 3:02 am #

            Of course. And you are telling us that Job’s wives and children failed. You live in a world where your God kills children, and you love him for doing that.

            You make moral people sick.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:01 pm #

            I never claimed that it was the case for every situation, did I? Scripturally speaking there are different examples, which I won’t go into here…mainly because I think it would be a waste of time as no one is really interested.

          • momofone
            June 29, 2016 at 7:32 am #

            And probably because you know you’d be skewered. You make great sweeping claims, but have no credible backup. I believe one of the greatest gifts of God is reason, and I can’t see evidence of it in your comments.

          • BeatriceC
            June 29, 2016 at 2:45 am #

            Like this one?


            (This is what my kids have)

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 3:11 am #

            Brace yourself for deedwan to tell you this happened because of your failure to do whatever xyz he/she knows about. Mind you, it will be said more in sadness than in anger, because not everyone has his/her special way of knowing about stuff. Which is of course down to people’s ignorance, which is indeed to be sad about.

            And when he/she finds you were brought up in a god-fearing household, it is with all regret you will be informed that it was the wrong kind of worship being engaged in, again no one’s fault, but, all the same, here is the outcome…if only the god-botherers at your house had known The Truth!!!!

            People like deedwan give religion and quackery a bad name. Considering the history of both religion and quackery, that takes some doing.

            Hope things are on the upswing with you.

          • BeatriceC
            June 29, 2016 at 3:42 am #

            Oh, I’m sure I’m in for a treat. He doesn’t seem to be able to stick the flounce. And things are doing okay. OK has what is hopefully his last court date on Thursday, MK is doing ever so slightly better on the meds they put him on (gained 5 pounds!), and things are going swimmingly with my ex-husband. We are actually talking about flying him out here in August to meet his kids for the first time in 14 years. MrC and I are still having some rocky times, but we are working through it. I don’t expect this to be an easy fix, but with time and effort, we can do it. We’ve come a long way in the last month, and while we still have a long way to go, it looks doable now.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 3:57 am #

            Glad you are getting some clear air, and the two boys are respectively going in good directions.

            On a less positive note, I’m dying for deedwan’s response to you, which is sure to be both hateful and unhelpful. Soooo predictable.

          • BeatriceC
            June 29, 2016 at 4:01 am #

            It’s good for a game of nutjob bingo, at the very least.

          • Who?
            June 29, 2016 at 4:02 am #

            Silver linings indeed!

          • Linden
            June 29, 2016 at 5:34 am #

            So all ill people are sinners, got it.
            Oh sorry, EVERYONE is a sinner.
            Those stillborn babies, obviously so very sinny…
            My friend who lost her baby, like, the biggest sinner of all.
            How disgusting is your theology?

        • guest
          June 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm #


          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:14 pm #

            Really isn’t. I had no idea that would happen. But I couldn’t figure out what was wrong, just that my glasses had become somewhat difficult to see out of…I kept looking for scratches and cleaned them repeatedly to no avail, so went in to have my eyes checked. Was delightfully surprised!

          • guest
            June 28, 2016 at 10:28 pm #

            Correlation is not causation, dear.

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 10:44 pm #

            Yeah, I don’t know how old you are, but my eyesight has significantly improved. Nearsighted + presbyopia = better vision, in my case. No cleansing and no supplements. Your anecdote proves nothing.

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 10:58 pm #

            It’s the only thing that changed. Even the doc was surprised. But you are right…it isn’t proof. But it’s not exactly a news flash that vitamins and anti oxidants improve eye health.

          • Empliau
            June 28, 2016 at 11:07 pm #

            You didn’t age? The hell with Truehope – if time went by and you didn’t age, YOU have the one true secret! (This is sarcasm, btw.)

          • deedwan
            June 28, 2016 at 11:14 pm #

            I will leave you too it. You are enjoying where you are, so I leave you to it.

        • momofone
          June 28, 2016 at 10:45 pm #

          I am nearsighted too. I got older, and my vision improved to more normal limits of nearsightedness. I didn’t even have to do a cleanse!

        • Nick Sanders
          June 29, 2016 at 12:29 am #

          Post hoc fallacy. Also, 1 is a useless sample size.

        • Linden
          June 29, 2016 at 5:30 am #

          That’s just utter nonsense. Nearsightedness can appear to improve slightly with age, but as the years roll on, your eyes will have reduced accommodation. You also still need glasses. You obviously didn’t cleanse and supplement enough!

    • guest
      June 28, 2016 at 9:06 pm #

      Ha ha ha ha ha!

    • Nick Sanders
      June 29, 2016 at 12:28 am #

      very knowledgeable naturopath

      There’s no such thing.

      As far as God goes, until He consents to empirical testing, He is never going to be a part of medical treatment.

      • deedwan
        June 29, 2016 at 12:29 am #

        Well, I guess you told me, huh.

    • Megan
      June 29, 2016 at 10:28 am #

      This can’t be for real…

    • Madtowngirl
      June 29, 2016 at 12:35 pm #

      So God is the designer and creator of the human body, but God is incapable of making sure all women can produce breast milk?

      If God created our brains, which can in turn produce life saving technology and medicine, why should we avoid it and go to a naturopath? I have literally never heard such an argument in all of the sermons I’ve listened to.

    • Heidi_storage
      March 6, 2017 at 8:52 am #

      Look, if we didn’t live in a fallen world, supplementation of any kind wouldn’t be necessary. And the fact is that no one really knows what “optimum nutrients” are–beyond folic acid supplementation for women who are or trying to be pregnant, the evidence doesn’t really show benefit for any given substance. DHA, various vitamins, and herbal remedies have not lived up to their hype. (I won’t include homeopathic “remedies,” because they’re just water or alcohol.)

    • AnnaPDE
      April 16, 2017 at 8:41 pm #

      My whispering unicorn ghost has told me that your God is made up. Maybe that’s why I don’t go to naturopaths?

      • deedwan
        May 9, 2017 at 8:24 pm #

        If you don’t want to see a naturopath that’s fine, but don’t rule out seeing a good psychiatrist about that whispering unicorn ghost.

        • AnnaPDE
          May 9, 2017 at 8:34 pm #

          How dare you blaspheme and sow doubt about my unicorn ghost. It’s obviously real and the source of all knowledge, indeed of the world as such. All the books written by its true believers say so.

          • deedwan
            May 14, 2017 at 7:39 pm #

            Christian people by and large have done a tremendous amount of good in the world. You may delight in mocking believers, but they are often the first ones out to give aid to people in third world countries…to help dig wells so they can have clean water, to build schools, to build churches, to build hospitals, to even suffer imprisonment and torture for their beliefs.
            This nation was founded on many of the principles found in the Bible, and have done well governing us and making us one of the greatest and most free nations in the world. But of course there are the people who are under great delusion who want to dismantle it and be a socialist nation like Venezuela or Greece perhaps, or Sweden…now the rape capital of Europe if not the world. People who are so deluded they now believe there are some 60 plus different genders, who want to say it’s awkward and insulting to some to celebrate Mother’s Day so no one should be able too.
            Who literally believe that if they feel like it they can change their gender, despite their biology and have come up with the ludicrous argument that gender is a social construct. A lot of mental illness and delusion out there…and you know what, the Bible said it would happen! Score again for the Bible. It says that because they did not love the truth they will be given over to strong delusion. And that is exactly what we are seeing….but you can keep whispering to your unicorn ghost if you like.

          • Dr Kitty
            May 14, 2017 at 8:01 pm #

            “Sweden is the rape capital of the world”

            You do know that their high rate of reported sexual assault is both because Swedish women are prepared to report assault and because of how Sweden reports it, don’t you?

            In, for example, the USA, if a woman is gang-raped at a fraternity (like, this case it is reported as a single rape.

            In Sweden, every single rape or sexual assault is recorded separately. If, during a rape, a woman is taped twice by a single assailant, Sweden records both episodes as separate rapes. Multiple assaults by multiple parties- all documented as separate crimes.

            So, in the case I linked to, with five defendants, the USA will record it as one rape. Sweden would have recorded it as at least five.

            In other words, lies, damn lies, and statistics.

            The rest of what you said is frankly not worth responding to, but certain elements of the above line apply.

          • AnnaPDE
            May 16, 2017 at 9:00 pm #

            What Christian people do in terms of good and charity has exactly nothing to do with bringing their god-related beliefs into the equation when it comes to medical evaluations. Doing so would show total incompetence — just as you are exhibiting.
            And just while we’re at the topic of your ignorance: The whole point of your nation, and why people went there to found it in the first place, was to be able to practise one’s own religion as they wished instead of getting persecuted for not following their ruler’s beliefs. What you are trying to do is the exact opposite of your country’s founding principles, and it makes the US a worse place for everyone.
            Which is why I’m quite glad to live in a place where religion is actually treated as a private issue — including by the very people who do good things motivated by their beliefs. Your long-discredited claims about “rape capital” and other things notwithstanding (ever heard of improved reporting?). Let’s not even go into your stupid rant bit about not being able to deal with non-binary people’s existence.

            In a nutshell — your ideas and beliefs about a god have no more validity for anyone apart from yourself than my randomly invoked ghost unicorn. In particular, both are completely unsuitable as the basis for policy decisions — and anytime you’re trying to justify anything with “but the Bible says”, you’re sounding exactly like someone referring to their whispering unicorn.

    • yentavegan
      May 16, 2017 at 9:25 pm #

      We want so desperately to believe that a loving creator would assure us that we women can produce the bountiful breastmilk our babies need. If only we ate right, lived clean and trusted enough and had faith enough. But we do not live in a world of wishes and dreams. This world is filled with contradictions and heartache. We can fulfil our personal mission while still being consumers of modern medicine and technology.

    • KeeperOfTheBooks
      May 16, 2017 at 9:48 pm #

      Well, I also believe that God is the creator and designer of the human body, but I also believe that, along with diabetes/childhood cancer/bad eyesight/deafness/thousands of other bad things, one of the effects of original sin is to cause some women’s bodies to not work as they were designed to…and that’s okay. Those who have bodies who grow and nourish their babies well are in no way superior to those of us whose bodies seem quite determined to kill their kids early on. It’s just what to expect in this world. The point is, as Gandalf said and as my DH points out to me when I start to get depressed over my inability to birth or feed my babies, “All we have to decide is what to do with the time that is given us.” I could, and have, spent weeks and months sobbing because I was convinced that I was worthless as a Catholic mother because my body wouldn’t do What It Was Supposed To (TM). However, I think that a lot more good comes out of my taking a deep breath, admitting that I’m sad about these things, and then feeding my C-section kids a bottle of formula before taking them to the library and the park than crying about what might have been.

      • deedwan
        May 20, 2017 at 9:40 pm #

        Absolutely…you have figured out how to adapt.

      • demodocus
        May 21, 2017 at 7:43 am #

        I love that your husband comforts you with the wisdom of Gandolf.

        • KeeperOfTheBooks
          May 23, 2017 at 11:30 pm #

          He’s just plain awesome like that. (And in many other ways, I should add.) 🙂

  7. Stephanie
    June 28, 2016 at 12:46 am #

    All the lactation folks I have seen and when I was in the hospital, they taught parents to count wet and dirty diapers and seek medical assistance of they don’t meet the quota.

    Co-sleeping should only be practiced using the Safe Sleep 7. I’ve never seen any issues of mom is breastfeeding on demand, no pillows or blankets near baby, baby is healthy, baby is on his back lightly dressed and not swaddled, mom never smoked, mom is aware – not overly exhausted or on awareness-changing medication and isn’t obese.

    • NoLongerCrunching
      June 28, 2016 at 6:58 am #

      Well if you’ve not seen it, it must not exist.

    • Heidi
      June 28, 2016 at 5:14 pm #

      Even if those rules are followed, studies show that infants who bedshare are more likely to breathe in more carbon dioxide. They can overheat still, just from body heat of their parents, but also they can end up breathing in the carbon dioxide a parent is breathing out instead of getting as much oxygen. Of course, it’s safer to bedshare with those rules in place, but it still isn’t safest practice.

  8. danmeek
    May 16, 2016 at 6:31 am #

    So the risk of hypernatremia, an easily treated condition, is 2.5 per 10,000 live births in the Oddie (2001) study you cite. Meanwhile, the risk of necrotising enterocolitis (NEC) is 7.2 per 10,000 live births (Llanos 2002; Mayaan-Metzger 2004). In both Mayaan-Metzger (2004) and Stout (2008) none of the full-term babies with NEC were exclusively breast-fed, and the same pattern is present in all the pre-term studies. Post-surgical survival rates were around 60-75% in the clinical studies. So from where do you get the idea that breastfeeding is more dangerous than formula feeding in the developed world?

  9. Jessica
    March 17, 2016 at 9:04 pm #

    This is ridiculous. What are your credentials? You are going to tell me my hospital, pediatrician, OBGYN and lactation consultant are all wrong? You are a dangerous person spreading misinformaton to mothers.

    • Who?
      March 17, 2016 at 9:17 pm #

      Highlighting the real things that can go wrong when the act of breastfeeding is prioritised over the act of feeding a baby isn’t ridiculous.

  10. diana
    January 31, 2016 at 7:59 pm #

    wow Amy you probably feel so bad that you didn’t bf your kids if you have any, this is load of horse shit! shame on you, how much were you payed for this by formula company !

  11. E
    June 7, 2015 at 11:04 am #

    Dr. Amy,

    I’ve been curious to know how you feel about breastfeeding while smoking marijuana. This happened last year in my home city not long after I had given birth to my daughter.

    The mother had smoked marijuana throughout her pregnancy for anxiety. She gave birth two months pre-mature and insisted on providing pumped breastmilk to her baby now in the NICU, while continuing to smoke marijuana. Since this happened locally for me, it was a hot topic amongst my friends. Most of my friends, educated women in their thirties, argued that the mother had done the right thing. There seems to be a huge defense of both breastfeeding and marijuana use. Both are seen as natural and therefore without harm.

    I am curious as to your thoughts as I’ve heard very little on the topic.


  12. Rosalind Dalefield
    June 6, 2015 at 5:25 am #

    I notice that breastfeeding fanatics use a similar argument to natural childbirth fanatics; that ‘very few’ women are unable to do it. There is a subtle eugenicist tone to that. They appear to think that the babies of women who cannot breastfeed can just die, in the same way that the babies of women who cannot give birth without obstetric assistance can just die. I find that attitude completely repugnant and disgusting.
    Here’s a good one for you Dr. Amy. I was recently told on Facebook that I would not have had a perineal tear with my third child had I not had episiotomies with my first and second. Well, the reason I had to have episiotomies with my first and second was because they were both forceps deliveries. I suppose the person who blamed my vaginal tear on previous episiotomies thought I should have just let the first two babies die or be severely brain-damaged, just so I could avoid a perineal tear with the third!

  13. MaryJBullock
    June 6, 2015 at 1:34 am #

    nowRead this skepticalob… Here’s a Blog

  14. Daleth
    June 4, 2015 at 12:24 pm #

    Babies are also dying because some practitioners–including, apparently, some DOCTORS–are attending extremely dangerous births. Such as this BREECH VBAC, which ended in the death of the baby. Of course, since this guy is a doctor, he’s actually getting some consequences:

    • Azuran
      June 4, 2015 at 4:41 pm #

      I love the part where he blames the mother, saying the baby died because she did not push when he told her to.

      • Daleth
        June 5, 2015 at 9:51 am #

        What a monstrous human being. I’m kind of glad he’s sailing into his disciplinary hearing without a lawyer. He will get what he deserves.

  15. Brittney
    June 3, 2015 at 4:36 pm #

    Hahaha wow. Paid off by formula pushers? Wow. Done with this site. Good try. I’ve seen the real studies.

    • NoLongerCrunching
      June 3, 2015 at 4:38 pm #

      I know this may be hard to believe Brittney, but people who hold a different opinion that you are not always being paid off by industry.

      • Brittney
        June 3, 2015 at 4:41 pm #

        Irrelevant. This whole article is opinions. None of it is supported by science at all. Either the author is paid off, or an opinionated yet uneducated internet “troll”

        • NoLongerCrunching
          June 3, 2015 at 4:45 pm #

          What in particular do you find not to be factual?