Dr. Jack Newman, how dare you?

51933713 - vicious word on keyboard button

To Dr. Jack Newman, pediatrician and professional lactivist:

Dr. Newman,

How dare you?

I just read your execrable piece on Huffington Post and I’m angry. The title is Do Mothers Really Have The Choice To Breastfeed? but it’s the subtitle that’s the greatest outrage: “Breastfeeding is not just about breast milk. It is a relationship.”

[pullquote align=”right” cite=”” link=”” color=”” class=”” size=””]How dare you imply that a woman who breastfeeds has better relationship with her baby than a woman who bottle feeds?[/pullquote]

How dare you imply that a woman who breastfeeds has a different and better relationship with her baby than a woman who bottle feeds?

When did you ever breastfeed a baby?

For that matter, did you ever mother a child?

What precisely qualifies you to opine on what breastfeeding means to women and babies?

Wait, what? Doctor knows best? Where have I heard that before? Oh, right, from lots of other men telling women just how they ought to use their reproductive organs.

I am a mother of four adult children. From the moment each was born I loved him or her more than life itself and I still do. To this day, I would cut off my right arm to spare any of them pain. I love them for who they are and how I fed them has NOTHING to do with my feelings for them.

How dare you imply that I would love them less had I not breastfed them?

How dare you imply that I would have a different, inferior, relationship with them had I not breastfed them?

Do you think I love my children more than my friends who bottle fed or became mothers through adoption love theirs?

Do you understand just how vicious your statement is or do you simply not care how it impacts women and babies?

Let’s be honest. We’ve read the same research and we both know that the scientific evidence shows that benefits of breastfeeding in first world countries are trivial. We both know that the outlandish claims of lactivists are based on research that is weak, conflicting and riddled with confounders. We both know that breast milk isn’t magic, merely one of two excellent ways to nourish and infant.

But I know what it’s like to breastfeed and you haven’t a clue. That’s why I know that your claim that women who don’t breastfeed haven’t been given the choice to do so is ugly and untrue.

You write:

Often, in fact, mothers do not seem to have the right to breastfeed and are forced, by health professionals, judges and child protective agencies to bottle feed.

Often? Really? I’ve cared for thousands of women and I’ve never seen a single one forced by a health professional, judge or child protective agency to bottle feed against her will. You’ve made an empirical claim; where’s your empirical evidence?

From our experience with many thousands of mothers having come to our breastfeeding clinic during the past 32 years, I can say that in many such cases, with a little good help, the mother could carry on breastfeeding exclusively.

This may come as a shock to you, but women who come to your breastfeeding clinic WANT to breastfeed. They are not in any way representative of women who DON’T want to breastfeed or lack the socio-economic advantages that make breastfeeding easier for privileged women.

You simply ignore those women, a substantial proportion of mothers.

You insult your neonatology colleagues by implying that neonatal hypernatremic dehydration, malnutrition, hypoglycemia, and hyperbilirubinemia either don’t exist or aren’t dangerous even though we all know they can lead to brain damage and death; preventing them is of critical importance.

You treat women as if they are nothing more than cows, reducing them to the milk their breasts might produce, without any regard to their pain, needs and desires … and then you insult them on top of that.

Women have the right to control their own bodies. It is no more your business whether a woman breastfeeds than whether she terminates a pregnancy. She doesn’t have to justify herself to you and you have no way to know what motivates her unless she tells you.

Don’t you dare imply that women who bottle feed are lesser mothers than those who breastfeed. You’ve never breastfed; you’ve never been a mother. You have no idea what you are talking about.

1,894 Responses to “Dr. Jack Newman, how dare you?”

  1. Amazed
    October 18, 2016 at 8:23 am #

    OK, I take a leave (kind of) and when I come back, I see people trying AGAIN to make the boob tyrant see sense? For real?

    You’re wasting your time people! Anna Perch is too busy admiring the perks that come with her pair of working boobs to develop things like reading comprehension, respect for others or – God forbid – empathy. The only thing she’s good at is stuffing her boobs in her kid(s) faces and reciting empty words of how things should be in ideal circumstances. I am not going to forget how this piece of nastiness dismissed a PPD sufferer’s account as whining, all the while being busy whining that people here were nasty to her enlightened self.

    It’s hopeless. Don’t give the asshole the attention she craves.

    • corblimeybot
      October 18, 2016 at 8:44 am #

      YEP. I respect anyone who’s able to comport themselves civilly when talking to Anna Perch, because it’s not possible for me. Not after she called Keeper of the Books a whiner for simply describing her own situation, after she was rotten to Erin on a few occasions with no provocation (other than Anna’s own ungenerous soul), and how she dismissed my own breastfeeding-fueled suicide ideation as no big deal, it’s just an ANECDOTE (disregarding that my own doctor knew what was causing the problem, and had seen it before.)

      Like Ouiser would say, she’s a pig from hell.

    • Maud Pie
      October 18, 2016 at 9:16 am #

      Quite right, and I would add to her offenses her packing her posts with insinuations, dog whistles, loaded terminology, and self-congratulations that unmistakably signal her contempt for formula users, and then disingenuously denying that she presented such a message. And blaming us for “stereotyping” lactavists! It’s disturbing that someone could be so persistent in gaslighting and so committed to feigning guilelessness after being repeatedly called out on it. She’s like a kid who gets caught with a chocolate smeared face and still insists, years later, in a tone of moral outrage, “you didn’t see me eat the cake so how dare you blame me!”

  2. Anna Perch
    October 16, 2016 at 8:09 pm #

    What is the end game here? What is the point in spreading misinformation and creating derision?
    Even if Lactivists are what you say they are (highly questionable), then how is poor behavior on your part a solution of any kind?
    If you think that it is important for parents to make informed decisions about how to feed their children based on accurate information AND you believe that that Baby Friendly Hospital Initiative opposes that idea, then why not review the BFHI policy recommendations and suggest improved policy?
    OTOH, if the game here is to prove that formula is, essentially, equal to breastmilk, then you have chosen a much bigger (impossible) task.
    Still, I ask, if the game is to show that formula is on par with breastmilk, how does deriding Lactivists move your cause in the right direction?
    It seems to me that you represent the qualities that you attribute to Lactivists.
    I challenge each of you to take the high road and respond to this comment with curiosity and empathy rather than belligerence.

    • momofone
      October 16, 2016 at 8:12 pm #

      “What is the end game here?”

      I wonder the same thing. What are you hoping to accomplish?

      • Anna Perch
        October 16, 2016 at 8:20 pm #

        Actually, I was dared! [But perhaps you should hang around. Many of us like sport here. Just don’t say you weren’t warned.]

        • momofone
          October 16, 2016 at 10:40 pm #

          That fits my perception of you. Thirteen or so, reacting vs. acting. And getting huge payoff in stirring the pot.

          • Anna Perch
            October 16, 2016 at 10:49 pm #

            I’m guessing you mean preconceived notion.

          • momofone
            October 16, 2016 at 10:51 pm #

            No, I said what I mean.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 7:37 am #

            Obviously, you have not been reading what I’ve typed.

          • momofone
            October 17, 2016 at 7:55 am #

            Perhaps the issue is more that you have not been reading what you’ve typed.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 7:57 am #

            That fits my perception of you. Adolescent, reacting vs. acting. And getting huge payoff in stirring the pot.

          • momofone
            October 17, 2016 at 8:00 am #

            How original, and not surprising. And along those lines, I am done. Good day.

          • Who?
            October 17, 2016 at 8:26 am #

            Let’s hope she’ll mimic you again.

          • corblimeybot
            October 17, 2016 at 9:04 am #

            You’re doing that thing again. You’re using terms that you’ve heard others use meaningfully, and hoping they’ll make you sound like you know what you’re talking about. Unfortunately, it’s not working.

          • Nick Sanders
            October 17, 2016 at 3:03 pm #

            I think it’s a bit more general than that. She doesn’t seem to do much reading at all.

          • Box of Salt
            October 17, 2016 at 10:31 am #

            Anna Perch, you have not been thinking about how others might perceive what you type.

          • October 17, 2016 at 4:20 pm #

            Oh no, he’s been reading what you’ve typed. That’s the problem.

          • Box of Salt
            October 16, 2016 at 10:52 pm #

            No, Anna Perch, and yes, I’m speaking for momofone.

            How could she have a “preconceived notion” about a fellow blog commenter?

            This (as I read her comment) is how she has perceived your comments.

            Why don’t you get that the words you use matter?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 7:37 am #

            Seriously? You are trying to explain to me that “words matter” on a forum where definitions of words are invented and used?

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 11:32 am #

            You’re good at deflecting. The original question is – how can someone who doesn’t know you from Adam have a ‘preconceived notion’ about you?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 11:58 am #

            This has already been addressed, multiple times.

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 12:05 pm #

            No, it actually hasn’t.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:14 pm #

            Yes, it has, nah nah boo boo.

          • Box of Salt
            October 17, 2016 at 12:23 pm #

            Anna Perch “Yes, it has, nah nah boo boo.”

            This is a new low for you.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:33 pm #

            I’m just trying to fit in. 😉

          • Charybdis
            October 17, 2016 at 12:36 pm #

            She didn’t even get that right. It’s “nanny, nanny, boo, boo! Stick your head in doo doo!”

            If she can’t even get childish taunting right… It’s just sad.

          • Maud Pie
            October 17, 2016 at 12:56 pm #

            But where is your proof that that was a childish taunt? You’re just imposing your stereotype of what a childish taunt is. And you’re being mean.

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

            No, YOU’RE a childish taunt!

          • October 17, 2016 at 4:20 pm #

            Lactivist vs breast feeder.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 6:33 pm #

            Apologist vs formula feeder.

        • Sarah
          October 17, 2016 at 2:18 am #

          You were also urged to back up what you claim, but shockingly it would seem that hasn’t resonated quite so thoroughly with you. Still, your ducking provides plenty of lolz, so there’s that.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 11:10 am #

            I bet that you are regretting the dare, eh?

          • Sarah
            October 17, 2016 at 12:49 pm #

            Not in the slightest, I’m rather enjoying watching you squirm and squeal. I’m just wondering if you’re going to do everything else I say, too. My fellow commentators and I could have rather a lot of fun with that.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 1:00 pm #

            OK then.

          • Sarah
            October 20, 2016 at 4:25 am #

            Wriggle wriggle.

          • Nick Sanders
            October 17, 2016 at 3:02 pm #

            I dare you to put your money where your mouth is, then.

    • Erin
      October 17, 2016 at 6:31 am #

      Having reviewed the policy behind the BFHI, I think that some of it is dubious and some of it is down right dangerous.

      – Breast milk is readily available. There is nothing to buy and it needs no preparation or storage.
      – Breastfeeding is simple, with no equipment or preparation needed.

      Women deserve better than being told that. We all know it’s not the truth for all women. Perhaps you’re right when you say that with proper coaching and support, more women than currently do could meet their breastfeeding goals but that’s not how the BFHI is selling it.

      Telling women it’s easy is fundamentally wrong. It might be for some women and certainly it from a biological standpoint it was for me, despite a traumatic birth, an emcs after a long labour, despite being dehydrated and exhausted, despite having no skin to skin for over 12 hours, despite a baby in NICU and a full on mental breakdown, by day 3 the stuff was pouring out of me but my experience doesn’t match up with anyone else I know. The Birth Trauma group I’m a part of is full of women who tried pretty much everything and still couldn’t produce enough milk.

      Offer non-medication methods of pain relief [in labour] before offering pain medications. These nonmedication methods include:

      – Labour support
      – Walking and moving around
      – Massage
      – Warm water
      – Verbal and physical reassurances
      – Quiet environment with no bright lights and as few people as possible
      – Labouring and giving birth positioning a position of the mother’s choice.

      Women should not have to fight for proper pain relief because it may or may not harm their breastfeeding relationship. There are lots of studies which suggest that painful labours increase the chance of post natal depression and plenty of studies which chart the potential harm post natal depression can do to infant development. There has to be a middle ground.

      Rooming in absolutely should be an option but I know I wasn’t in a fit state to look after my son by myself at points during my hospital stay and there wasn’t an alternative. There should always be an alternative.

      – Reduced infection rates, reduced use of artificial feeds, and reduced need for nursery space all save the hospital money.

      Aren’t good enough reasons to withhold that alternative.

      That’s just three of the things which bothers me about the way they’re implementing the policy. There is no one size fits all when it comes to the relationship between Mother and newborn. There are too many different factors to take into account and the BFHI doesn’t do that. It tries to shoehorn women into boxes, telling them they’re hurting their baby when they don’t fit and given the link between Maternal Mental health and child development, I think that’s criminal.

      If we believe that Breastmilk is liquid gold (I don’t but I accept that others do), how does making women who can not breastfeed for whatever reason feel bad about themselves help with the outcomes for that child? I’d argue it has the opposite effect, not only did they not breastfeed but they’re at higher risk of suffering from post natal depression with it’s associated risks for the baby.

      There has to be a better way to encourage breastfeeding in women who want to, to support them in every way possible whilst they want that support but to also acknowledge that some women just won’t be able to breastfeed in a way which doesn’t do psychological harm to them.

      • Roadstergal
        October 17, 2016 at 10:58 am #

        I know Anna will just ignore this, but I really appreciate you writing it and hope that a lot of lurkers get to see it.
        The only thing I could possibly add is that BFHI and all of the ‘just one drop’ lactivism and ‘nipple confusion’ fear-mongering takes combo-feeding off of the table.

        • Anna Perch
          October 17, 2016 at 12:19 pm #

          How am I supposed to address Erin’s concerns when they do not appear to be directly related to the BFHI?
          And, Road, your bias is showing.

      • Anna Perch
        October 17, 2016 at 11:06 am #

        Really? The BFHI is dangerous? That makes no sense.

        • Erin
          October 17, 2016 at 11:29 am #

          The quotes I have included in my previous post above come directly from BFHI guidance on training Maternity staff to implement the policies.

          and yes, I believe that forced rooming in when women are exhausted and drugged up is dangerous. It might be fine in 99 percent of cases but we should care about the 1 percent too. Here, there is no choice unless your baby is in NICU and in most hospitals you can’t have someone with you overnight. I want options for women, not the removal of the ability to room in but the acceptance that for some women in some situations there needs to be an alternative.

          and yes, I believe that telling women that breastfeeding is easy is both untrue and dangerous when done across the board. There are plenty of studies which back up the fact that women who want to breastfeed and fail are more at risk of postnatal depression. That potentially is dangerous both for the mother and for the baby and some of those women either need more preparation (as you yourself pointed out) or acknowledgement of the fact that it’s not simple, it’s not always readily available and sometimes there isn’t a fix.

          The 10 steps themselves seem innocent enough, what midwives and other maternity staff are being taught (by design) is something else entirely and based on your previous posts, you should be concerned too.

          They’re letting women down every time they tell someone ante-natally that:

          “- Breast milk is readily available. There is nothing to buy and it needs no preparation or storage.
          – Breastfeeding is simple, with no equipment or preparation needed.”

          You’ve spent the last day or so arguing with people about preparation for breastfeeding and yet you still think it’s okay for staff implementing those policies to push women away from doing the self same preparation you think is important…

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:01 pm #

            I missed the bit about forced rooming in, which number? Breastfeeding is easy, which number? Ah, I see now, “The 10 steps themselves seem innocent enough” the steps you posted do not state anything about your concerns.

          • Erin
            October 17, 2016 at 1:54 pm #

            Oh so you take step 3 at face value too do you?

            “Inform all pregnant women about the benefits and management of breastfeeding.”

            I don’t see any risks of formula mentioned there. In fact I don’t see any risks of formula anywhere in the 10 steps and yet they get brought up all the time. They’re definitely all over the training guides referred to in step 2. In fact I’d say it’s at least equal weight formula risks to breastfeeding benefits.

            Or can we agree that what the 10 steps say isn’t quite the whole picture and nor is it intended to be the whole picture.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

            “it’s at least equal weight formula risks to breastfeeding benefits.” I’m not sure what you mean by this.
            Baby Friendly USA has a detailed pdf on the 10 Steps, if you are interested.

        • Acricket
          October 17, 2016 at 11:40 am #

          GTFO. How disrespectful can you be? Erin succinctly laid out 3 points and you cant be bothered to address the content of her reply? You are the definition of pathetic. What a joke

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 11:57 am #

            Seriously? Did you bother to address the content of any of my replies?Does that make you a pathetic joke?

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 12:08 pm #

            I did. Let us know what you think of that paper.

          • Acricket
            October 17, 2016 at 12:10 pm #

            Yeah seriously. You have no content to address. Our endgame here at this site has been blatantly explained to you multiple times, through both plain words and through actions. People offer well thought out explanations and provide links to studies backing up our stances. You return fire with empty one liners, deflection, and even denialism. When you provide actual content to address then you can call me a joke.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:13 pm #

            I think you might be thinking of a different thread? I have provided plenty of content. And, yes, most of it was met with empty one liners, deflection and even denialism.
            You are the one who defined what a joke is.

        • Roadstergal
          October 17, 2016 at 11:42 am #

          Journal of Perinatology (2014) 34, 275–279

          Read it and get back to us. It’s just over four pages, surely you can knock that right out.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:11 pm #

            This really isn’t proving your point. The abstract says that “One or more factors that increase the risk of bed sharing were present in all cases.” I am in favor, as is the BFHI, of weighing risks. I far as I can tell, the risk factors were not factored in.

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 12:12 pm #

            Did you read the whole paper, or just the abstract? How do you think that the BFHI-driven situation of not having a well-baby nursery affects the cases reported?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 12:24 pm #

            I have never read in the BFHI that mothers who are not capable of caring for their infant should be room sharing without a capable adult present. Please back up that claim.
            If individual hospitals are making irresponsible decisions I don’t see how it is appropriate to scapegoat the BFHI. Many hospitals have implemented the BFHI responsibly.

          • Roadstergal
            October 17, 2016 at 12:47 pm #

            What percentage of BFHI hospitals retained their well-baby nursery? The BFHI specifically says that women and babies should room in 24 hours a day. No comments about contraindications to doing so.

            “without a capable adult present” So you think hospitals can staff a nurse 24/7 with every dyad? Otherwise, you’re asking for a woman to bring her own competent care provider (and no, even if this is a magical world where there’s automatically a partner in the picture, even if he/she doesn’t have to work, even if he/she doesn’t have to care for other children, even if he/she isn’t also exhausted from the ordeal – even in this ideal world, the partner isn’t necessarily a trained doctor/nurse). You read that paper, right? You saw how many baby deaths and near-deaths occurred when there were other adults present in the room, and when mom was awake?

            Well-baby nurseries exist for a reason, and the BFHI explicitly recommends against them by saying that 24/7 rooming in is critical for breastfeeding and should be the general practice, with no notes of the dangers thereof (and taking as read the unproven assertion that this rooming-in will increase breastfeeding rates).

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

            “24/7 rooming in is critical for breastfeeding ” hyperbole. This is getting tiresome. Try to be more honest.

          • Irène Delse
            October 17, 2016 at 1:24 pm #

            Hyperbole? You haven’t been reading this blog for long, do you? Here, one of the most recent mentions of BFHI by Dr. Tuteur: when the American Academy of Pediatrics acknowledges that this initiative hurts babies and mothers:
            http://www.skepticalob.com/2016/08/american-academy-of-pediatrics-acknowledges-that-baby-friendly-hospital-initiative-kills-babies.html

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 6:53 pm #

            Um, that tell me that on this page, blogs are not evidence.

          • Charybdis
            October 17, 2016 at 8:04 pm #

            No, blogs in and of themselves are not evidence. The statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics that acknowledges that the BFHI hurts/is detrimental to babies and mothers, however, IS evidence. Citable evidence.

            The personal experiences of many of us here, while they are anecdotal, they do help paint a picture of the draconian measures pushed as gospel by the lactivist apologists. You MUST have immediate skin-to-skin with your baby, you MUST initiate breastfeeding within one hour of delivery, you MUST room-in as it is the best way to continue skin-to-skin, feeding on demand and learn your baby’s cues. They expect 80+% compliance/capitulation to get and maintain the BFHI certification and that is a hell of a lot of women who are not given a choice of where to house their baby while they are in the hospital. The nursery is not mandatory, but it should be kept as an option.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:09 pm #

            “The statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics that acknowledges that the BFHI hurts/is detrimental to babies and mothers, however, IS evidence.” WTH?! More out of context or partial quotes?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:27 pm #

            4th. “Protect the system from a two-tiered outcome such as one where mothers who are breastfeeding are rooming-in with their babies and babies who are being formula fed are in a nursery. Many of the steps and sub-steps apply to all mothers and full term healthy babies who receive maternity care in the facility, not just those who are breastfeeding. “

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 2:30 pm #

            Hmm. I’ve seen them. Road “No comments about contraindications to doing so.” It’s as if you want to live in denial and have no interest in learning about the topic you are discussing.

          • MaineJen
            October 17, 2016 at 4:31 pm #

            Look around here long enough and you’ll hear many stories about infants being left in a room with moms who are clearly unable to care for them alone.

            And…if the well baby nursery is closed, where are these babies supposed to go?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 6:32 pm #

            You are missing my point. Why are those hospitals choosing to leave moms in a room when they are not capable of caring for their infants? I’m not questioning IF it happens. I’m asking WHY it is happening. Hospitals that use the BFHI as an excuse to put moms and infants in harms way should be held accountable.

          • Erin
            October 17, 2016 at 7:40 pm #

            Finally something we agree on!

            I think it was always going to happen though. Even the WHO training guidance talks of saving the hospitals money by getting rid of nurseries and needing less staff.

            I shouldn’t have been left with my son that first night, I was delusional, exhausted (hadn’t slept since Thursday night and it was now Tuesday night) and traumatized (had a pretty terrible c-section experience) but they still told my husband he had to leave. “Luckily” he’s fine and so I am (mostly) but it could easily have gone the other way. However it’s hard to hold them accountable for the “could haves”, especially as we have nationalised health care.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:11 pm #

            “WHO training guidance talks of saving the hospitals money by getting rid of nurseries and needing less staff.” I doubt it, mostly because there is so much misinformation here. However, I am not aware of what exactly is being contorted, so I’ll check.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:16 pm #

            I guess it is no surprise that the first UNICEF staffing quote that I found says the exact opposite of your allegation of reduced staff. “Staffing levels for each facility providing maternal and newborn care need to be planned in such a way that services can be provided on a continuous basis, 24 hours a day, seven days a week. Team work is essential. In first- level and second-level referral hospitals, teams should be multidisciplinary and include specialized obstetric and paediatric staff in order to manage maternal and neonatal complications. “

          • Erin
            October 18, 2016 at 6:57 am #

            “Reduced infection rates, reduced use of artificial feeds, and reduced need for nursery space all save the hospital money. ”

            Is a direct quote from the “Breastfeeding Promotion and Support in a Baby-friendly Hospital, a 20-hour course for maternity staff” authored on behalf of WHO and UNICEF.

            “More mother-to-baby care and
            feeding and fewer fussy babies
            [less staff time for baby care and
            feeding- staff freed for other
            duties]
            More mother-to-mother care and
            assistance
            [less staff time for mother care –
            staff freed for other duties]”

            Is from a table selling the benefits in cash terms of the scheme. Those benefits also include less money spent on anesthesia.

            “Less staff time needed”

            From a French UNICEF training document.

            I’m pretty sure I could find more.

            Also

            “Staffing levels for each facility providing maternal and newborn care need to be planned in such a way that services can be provided on a continuous basis, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.”

            I don’t think anyone is denying that there are midwives/Doctors and everyone else you need to deliver a baby in a maternity hospital or other BFHI site available 24/7 which is all that quote says.

            “The second one, “Reassign staff from the normal newborn nursery and/or formula room to provide mother/baby care and education on the rooming-in wards.””

            I’m not in the US but here that’s a little hard because they got rid of the nurseries a long time ago.

            “Third quote implies that mother-baby separation is still an issue. ” Examine routine procedures that “require” infant to be taken to nursery and define which
            procedures can be done in mother’s room.””

            Again, not relevant here as for a long time all examinations including hearing tests etc are done on the ward.

            So it basically comes back to my original issue, one size doesn’t fit all when it comes to maternity care. Trying to impose a system across the world with all the cultural differences and disparities in health care is problematic.

            I also have an issue with this.

            “A natural birth experience is a significant prerequisite for successful breastfeeding. Therefore, mother-friendly care is a compulsory part of BFHI-certification.”

            (The bumpy road to implementing the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative in Austria: a qualitative study.(Research)(Report), International Breastfeeding Journal, Jan 20, Vol.10, p.3 [Peer Reviewed Journal)

            (It’s an interesting study btw, worth reading if you can get access especially the bits about the attitudes of the staff based on their length of work experience, their own personal experiences of breastfeeding/formula feeding, inter-department arguments and also their concerns about extra work in some areas, especially facilitating skin to skin in theater after a c-section).

            Not because I’ll never have a natural experience but because it’s limiting when it comes to choice.

            In my birth trauma group there are loads of women who want elective sections because of the trauma and in many cases the physical damage they endured previously and they’re having to fight for them. Mother-friendly should be about listening to the Mother and some Mothers want interventions including maternal request sections whether or not they’re medically indicated.

            They tried to tell me I couldn’t have a general anesthetic because of the BFHI… it got rather heated and ended with a written apology from the hospital but I shouldn’t have to argue my case based on breastfeeding regardless of whether or not I intend to feed my baby that way. If anything it’s probably less likely to make me (or any other woman who has to fight for her choices to be respected) breastfeed.

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:19 pm #

            The second one, “Reassign staff from the normal newborn nursery and/or formula room to provide mother/baby care and education on the rooming-in wards.”

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:24 pm #

            Third quote implies that mother-baby separation is still an issue. ” Examine routine procedures that “require” infant to be taken to nursery and define which
            procedures can be done in mother’s room.”

          • Charybdis
            October 17, 2016 at 7:52 pm #

            The hospitals have fallen victim to the lactivist apologist ideology. The lactivist apologists have succeeded in making their extreme views on breastfeeding into policy.

            The Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) is a global program that was launched by the World Health Organization (WHO) and the United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) in 1991 to encourage and recognize hospitals and birthing centers that offer an optimal level of care for infant feeding and mother/baby bonding. It recognizes and awards birthing facilities who successfully implement the Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding (i) and the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes (ii). The BFHI assists hospitals in giving all mothers the information, confidence, and skills necessary to successfully initiate and continue breastfeeding their babies or feeding formula safely, and gives special recognition to hospitals that have done so.

            Becoming a Baby-Friendly facility is a comprehensive, detailed and thorough journey toward excellence in providing evidence-based, maternity care with the goal of achieving optimal infant feeding outcomes and mother/baby bonding. It compels facilities to examine, challenge and modify longstanding policies and procedures. It requires training and skill building among all levels of staff. It entails implementing audit processes to assure quality in all aspects of maternity care operations. The journey is exciting, challenging, and worth it! It creates opportunities to develop high performance work teams and build leadership skills among staff, promotes employee pride, enhances patient satisfaction and improves health outcomes.

            i.The Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding, Protecting, Promoting and Supporting Breast-feeding: The Special Role of Maternity Services. Geneva: WHO, 1989.

            ii. International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes. Geneva: WHO, 1981.

            Step 4: Help mothers initiate breastfeeding within one hour of birth.
            This Step is now interpreted as:
            Place infants in skin-to-skin contact with their mothers immediately following birth for at
            least an hour and encourage mothers to recognize when their infants are ready to
            breastfeed, offering help if needed.
            This Step applies to all infants, regardless of feeding method.
            4.1 Guideline: All mothers should be given their infants to hold with uninterrupted and continuous
            skin-to-skin contact immediately after birth and until the completion of the first feeding, unless
            there are documented medically justifiable reasons for delayed contact or interruption. Routine
            procedures (e.g. assessments, Apgar scores, etc.) should be done with the infant skin-to-skin
            with the mother. Procedures requiring separation of the mother and infant (bathing, for
            example) should be delayed until after this initial period of skin-to-skin contact and should be
            conducted, whenever feasible, at the mother’s bedside. Additionally, skin-to-skin contact should
            be encouraged throughout the hospital stay.
            4.1.1 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers in the postpartum unit who
            have had normal vaginal births, at least 80% will confirm that their infants were placed
            in skin-to-skin contact with them immediately after birth and that skin-to-skin contact
            continued uninterrupted until the completion of the first feeding (or for at least one
            hour if not breastfeeding), unless there were documented medically justifiable reasons
            for delayed contact.
            4.1.2 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers in the postpartum unit who
            have had normal vaginal births, at least 80% will confirm that they were encouraged to
            look for signs that their infants were ready to feed during this first period of contact and
            offered help if needed. (The infant should not be forced to feed, but rather, supported
            to do so when ready.)
            4.1.3 Criterion for evaluation: Observations of vaginal births, if necessary to confirm
            adherence to Step 4, show that (regardless of the mother’s feeding intentions) at least
            80% of infants are placed skin-to-skin with their mothers within 5 minutes after birth
            and are held continuously skin-to-skin until completion of the first feeding, or for at
            least one hour if not breastfeeding, unless there were documented medically justifiable
            reasons for delayed contact.
            4.1.4 Criterion for evaluation: Observations of vaginal births, if necessary to confirm
            adherence to Step 4, show that (regardless of the mother’s feeding intentions) at least
            80% of mothers are shown how to recognize the signs that their infants are ready to
            feed and offered help, or there are documented justifiable reasons for not following
            these procedures.
            4.2 Guideline: After cesarean birth, mothers and their infants should be placed in continuous,
            uninterrupted skin-to-skin contact as soon as the mother is responsive and alert, with the same
            staff support identified above regarding feeding cues, unless separation is medically indicated.

            4.2.1 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers in the postpartum unit who
            have had cesarean births of a healthy infant, at least 80% will confirm that their infants
            were placed in skin-to-skin contact with them as soon as the mother was responsive and
            alert and that skin-to-skin contact continued uninterrupted until completion of the first
            feeding (or at least one hour if not breastfeeding), unless there were documented
            medically justifiable reasons for delayed contact.
            4.2.2 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers who have had cesarean births of a healthy infant, at least 80% will confirm that they were
            encouraged to look for signs that their infants were ready to feed during this first period
            of contact and offered help if needed. (The infant should not be forced to feed, but
            rather, supported to do so when ready.)
            4.2.3 Criterion for evaluation: Observations of cesarean births and recovery, if necessary hers in the postpartum unit who
            Guideline: In the event that a mother and/or infant are separated for documented medical
            reasons, skin-to-skin contact will be initiated as soon as the mother and infant are reunited.
            4.3.1 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers who gave birth either vaginally
            or via cesarean, at least 80% will confirm that in the event of medically-indicated
            separation, skin-to-skin contact was initiated when they were reunited with their
            infants.

            Step 6: Give infants no food or drink other than breast milk, unless
            medically indicated.
            Exclusive breast milk feeding shall be the feeding method expected from birth to discharge.
            Each facility should track its rate of formula supplementation of breastfed infants. Facilities should strive
            to reach the Healthy People 2020 goal for exclusive breastfeeding. The rate of supplementation for nonmedical
            reasons should be analyzed and compared to the annual rate of supplementation of breastfed
            infants reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Immunization Survey
            data for the geographic region in which the facility is located. In addition, a year-by-year reduction in
            non-medically indicated supplementation is expected in Baby-Friendly designated facilities.
            6.1 Guideline: When a mother specifically states that she has no plans to breastfeed or requests
            that her breastfeeding infant be given a breast milk substitute, the health care staff should first
            Title: Guidelines and Evaluation Criteria Revision date: 06/30/16
            File name: GEC2016 Page 18 of 32
            © 2010, 2016 Baby-Friendly USA, Inc.
            Baby-Friendly® (“Baby-Friendly”) is a registered certification mark owned by Baby-Friendly USA, Inc.
            explore the reasons for this request, address the concerns raised, and educate her about the
            possible consequences to the health of her infant and the success of breastfeeding. If the
            mother still requests a breast milk substitute, her request should be granted and the process
            and the informed decision should be documented. Any other decisions to give breastfeeding
            infants food or drink other than breast milk should be for acceptable medical reasons and
            require a written order documenting when and why the supplement is indicated. (See Appendix
            B.)
            6.1.1 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers who are breastfeeding, at least
            80% will report that:
             to the best of their knowledge, their infants have received no food or drink other
            than breast milk while in the facility, or
             that formula has been given for a medically acceptable reason, or
             that formula has been given in response to a parental request.
            6.1.2 Criterion for evaluation: Of breastfeeding mothers whose infants have been given food
            or drink other than breast milk, at least 80% of those who have no acceptable medical
            reason will report that the health care staff explored the reasons for and the possible
            negative consequences of the mother’s decisions.
            6.1.3 Criterion for evaluation: Of infants who have been given food or drink other than breast
            milk, at least 80% will have the reasons for supplementation and evidence of parental
            counseling (in the event of parental choice) clearly documented in the medical record.
            6.1.4 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers who have decided to feed
            formula, at least 80% will report that the staff discussed with them the various feeding
            options and helped them to decide what was suitable in their situations.
            6.1.5 Criterion for evaluation: Of mothers with infants in special care who have decided to
            feed formula, at least 80% will report that staff have talked with them about the risks
            and benefits of the various feeding options, including feeding expressed breast milk.
            6.1.6 Criterion for evaluation: Observations in the postpartum unit/rooms and any well-baby
            observation areas show that at least 80% of breastfed infants are being fed only breast
            milk, or documentation indicates that there are acceptable medical reasons or fully
            informed choices for formula feeding.

            Step 7: Practice rooming in – allow mothers and infants to remain
            together 24 hours a day.
            7.1 Guideline: The facility should provide rooming-in 24 hours a day as the standard for motherbaby
            care for healthy term infants, regardless of feeding choice. When a mother requests that
            her infant be cared for in the nursery, the health care staff should explore the reasons for the
            request and should encourage and educate the mother about the advantages of having her
            infant stay with her in the same room 24 hours a day. If the mother still requests that the infant
            be cared for in the nursery, the process and informed decision should be documented. In
            addition, the medical and nursing staff should conduct newborn procedures at the mother’s
            bedside whenever possible and should avoid frequent separations and absences of the newborn
            from the mother for more than one hour in a 24-hour period. If the infant is kept in the nursery
            for documented medical reasons, the mother should be provided access to feed her infant at
            any time.
            7.1.1 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers with vaginal births, at least 80%
            will report that their infants were not separated from them before starting rooming-in,
            unless there are documented medical reasons for separation.
            7.1.2 Criterion for evaluation: Of randomly selected mothers with healthy term infants, at
            least 80% will report that since they came to their room after birth (or since they were
            able to respond to their infants in the case of cesarean birth), their infants have stayed
            with them in the same room day and night except for up to one hour per 24-hour period
            for facility procedures, unless there are documented justifiable reasons for a longer
            separation.
            7.1.3 Criterion for evaluation: Observations in the postpartum unit and any well-baby
            observation areas and discussions with mothers and staff confirm that at least 80% of
            the mothers and infants are rooming-in or have documented justifiable reasons for
            separation.
            Step 8: Encourage breastfeeding on demand.
            This step applies to all infants, regardless of feeding method, and is now interpreted as:
            Encourage feeding on cue.
            8.1 Guideline: Health care professionals should help all mothers, regardless of feeding choice: 1)
            understand that no restrictions should be placed on the frequency or length of feeding, 2)
            understand that newborns usually feed a minimum of 8 times in 24 hours, 3) recognize cues that infants use to signal readiness to begin and end feeds, and 4) understand that physical contact
            and nourishment are both important.

            Identify acceptable
            medical reasons for
            supplementation of
            breastfed babies
            according to national and
            international authorities.
            Session 12: If the baby cannot feed at the breast
             Learning to hand express
             Use of milk from another mother
             Feeding expressed breast milk to the baby

            Describe strategies that
            protect breastfeeding as a
            public health goal.
            Session 14: Protecting breastfeeding
             The effect of marketing on infant feeding practices
             The International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes
             How health workers can protect families from marketing
             Donations in emergency situations
             The role of breastfeeding in emergencies
             How to respond to marketing practices

            With the overwhelming push to obtain and maintain BFHI certification, many hospitals are closing well baby nurseries and this FORCES 24 hour rooming in. Some hospitals won’t let a support person stay overnight with the mother and sometimes the mother might not be able to have a support person with her because of other children at home that need the other parent to stay with them, the mother may be a single mother, may be in another state/country that her family, etc. So if there is no safe place where a mother can send her baby so she can rest, sleep and recover from a taxing physical endeavor, then rooming in is no longer an “option”, it is mandatory. Nurses will *sometimes* take the baby to the nursing station for a couple of hours and keep an eye on them, but how safe is that? If they have to leave the station, do they take the baby with them or do they leave it there in the hallway?

          • Anna Perch
            October 17, 2016 at 9:10 pm #

            The BFHI is not based on ideology, it is based on evidence.

          • N
            October 18, 2016 at 7:23 am #

            Because they just don’t have any nurseries anymore? Where should they put all those babies if not with their mothers. I myself had to go to ICU shortly after giving birth to my 3rd one. Of course Baby could not come with me. But he could not stay with the midwifes at the maternity unit either as they are not equipped anymore to look after babies around the clock. So they sent him to NICU even if he didn’t need any intensive care. I’m sure if a nursery even a small one had been there they could have kept him there and my husband and whole family could have visited him and cared for him more then they could with NICU rules.

          • Anna Perch
            October 18, 2016 at 10:20 am #

            Just curious, what state or country?

          • rg
            October 13, 2017 at 10:13 pm #

            I’ve seen it asked numerous times but you give no answer without a well baby nursery where should a baby be placed if the mother is unable to care for them in the room?

        • Juana
          October 17, 2016 at 11:58 am #

          Erin told you at length what bothers her (and not only her) about the BFHI, which is what you mentioned in your post directly above.
          And that’s all you have to add to the discussion? A one-liner?

          • KeeperOfTheBooks
            October 17, 2016 at 8:31 pm #

            Well, my most recent delivery was in a BFH. Due to a medication interaction and overall exhaustion, I was hallucinating on my second night there–like, literally thinking that things were happening that weren’t. Nonetheless, I was expected to take care of my baby. Why? Because it would be non-baby-friendly to have my baby assigned a caregiver who, y’know, wasn’t outright hallucinating. There was no well-baby nursery because if there was, moms might want to *gasp* send their kids there rather than practice the 24 hour rooming-in expected in a BFH.
            Very, very bad things could have happened that night. It was sheer dumb luck that they didn’t.

        • MaineJen
          October 18, 2016 at 9:30 am #

          Yes. It is dangerous to do away with a well baby nursery and have a blanket policy of “24 hour rooming in, no exceptions, no regard for the mom’s actual wishes or her physical well being.” That may not be what is written in the word of the policy, but it is certainly what is being practiced at all too many centers, with disastrous results. Why is this so hard to understand?

          • Anna Perch
            October 18, 2016 at 10:21 am #

            There is no mandatory 24 hour rooming in with no exceptions. Why do you keep asserting this silliness.

          • MaineJen
            October 18, 2016 at 10:22 am #

            I would love to know what the alternative is when there is no well baby nursery.

    • Nick Sanders
      October 17, 2016 at 2:59 pm #

      The end game is freedom for women from a system built on shaming and control. It is for them to have agency over their bodies and to be able to perform an action that is in no way harmful to their child, if they so choose, without being bullied about it and made to feel inferior. It’s making sure infants are fed takes priority over the method of feeding them. It’s about ending a sexist system that reduces women to their reproductive organs, confines them to the home, and excludes men from childrearing just as excludes women from everything except child rearing.

      We haven’t behaved poorly. You just see any disagreement with your position as hostility. You barged in demanding respect, while offering neither respect nor evidence, and we naturally took that badly.

    • October 17, 2016 at 4:18 pm #

      Spreading misinformation?

      Like…”Anna Perch, tell us more about this accurate information you have.”

  3. corblimeybot
    October 10, 2016 at 8:31 pm #

    Anna Perch is back, so I thought I could refresh everyone on what a shitty person she is.

    Here she is calling Keeper of the Books a whiner:

    https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/8213856be4c081ecaf058842a82669056676482d4bf0b0112c143a8defc70e50.jpg

    • demodocus
      October 11, 2016 at 8:51 am #

      An irony that the goldfish is more than willing to play semantics with apology and apologist but not lactivist and bf supporter.

    • KeeperOfTheBooks
      October 15, 2016 at 9:19 pm #

      Goodness. And to think I’d missed that.
      I suppose I can add “sharing the difficulties you had with nursing despite your best efforts=whining” to the list of nonsense I’ve heard from lactivists.
      Oh, dear me, Random Person (who’s already proven herself a nasty piece of work, at that) On The Interwebs thinks poorly of me. Whatever shall I do?
      I know: I’ll “clink” my wine glass with DS’s bottle of evil, poisonous formula tonight, toasting another month of his growing, thriving, and surpassing his milestones while I don’t let life-threatening infections go untreated in the name of the almighty boob-juice. Then I’ll order my SIL, who’s expecting, some of the awesome nipple ointment that worked splendidly both for me and for several friends, cos she wants to breastfeed and I’d like that to work out well for her if possible. No doubt, as one of those Evil Formula Feeders, I’m supposed to adulterate the ointment with lemon juice or something in order to sabotage SIL’s breastfeeding, but I’ll have to give that a miss as I’m rather busy this evening. Ah, well. Guess my check from the formula companies will be a bit short this month!

    • Irène Delse
      October 16, 2016 at 2:46 pm #

      And she’s as bad at understanding science as ever. When someone with an actual science degree corrects one of her misconceptions, she thinks it’s clever to blurt out: “You’re funny”. Anyone with a glimmer of a self-awareness would have gotten the hint that she’s out of her depth, by now.

      • momofone
        October 17, 2016 at 8:07 am #

        Self-awareness does not appear to be her forte.

  4. Charybdis
    September 22, 2016 at 10:16 pm #

    OT: Thanks to Anna, we’re gonna break Disqus on this thread, then she’ll claim we are silencing her. Just wait and see.

    • OttawaAlison
      September 23, 2016 at 5:30 am #

      She came on here, distorted people’s answers, wrote dozens and dozens of posts in a comment section that generally has a different view, accused a woman of whining when that woman chose to share her experience.

      Anna – if you think you’re doing this for some higher purpose that woman who formula feed their babies and their babies need to be saved from the clutches of big formula and redeemed by using breast milk, that’s one thing.

      Realistically supplementing with something other than breast milk from the breast has been happening at least since humans began farming in the Fertile Crescent. Heck there are mentions of wet nursing in Hammurabi’s code. None of this is new. Not everyone can breastfeed for physiological / psychological reasons and it’s frustrating when advocates forget about these women (including me). Gaslight us and tell us why we ended up formula feeding (having our narratives ridiculed and dismissed and the replaced by the usual narratives that are approved by advocates).

      I too care deeply about baby’s health and preventing stillbirth and infant death, I had a full-term stillbirth. I belong to many groups where people had stillbirths/lost infants, it’s absolutely terrible and devastating. Formula to me though was what helped my living child gain weight and thrive. There was a peace that came over me seeing my daughter fed. She was happier too. She’s 10 now, is very healthy and thriving. She’s a very talented artist and athletic with her parent’s aptitude for math. I made an individual health decision with IBCLCs and my GP tha supplementing was the best thing for us and it was.

    • Heidi
      September 23, 2016 at 11:49 am #

      I’m hoping she’s done with us. She’s screamed hypocrite, accused us of silencing her, told us we don’t get her point, accused us of being mean and vicious when really she’s attempted to gaslight us, never even gave a second thought when some us tried to explain how her brand of lactivism (and that’s really saying something because I think lactivism is bad enough but I think if Jack Newman saw her behavior supposedly defending him he’d be appalled) is damaging and hurtful, has refused to actually give any evidence to her claims, denied stuff she has clearly stated before, and says she doesn’t care what any individual baby eats. Well, okay, if you don’t care what any individual baby eats then *why* is this your life’s cause?! My guess is because she feels so inadequate otherwise and maybe breastfeeding worked for her this is sadly all she thinks she has. I can’t say I like her in the least, but I’m not keen on seeing anyone suffer. I hope one day she’s a happier person.

      • Charybdis
        September 23, 2016 at 12:41 pm #

        You are nicer than I am. At best, I would be neutral towards her. Not for, not against, just neutral. However, she has proven herself to be a petty, cruel, ignorant, gaslighting person and I not-so-secretly hope she lives a lonely, Ebeneezer Scrooge-type existence, except I don’t think she has any redeeming qualities and that the Ghosts of Christmas Past, Present and Future would have nothing to show her so she could even begin to possibly change her ways.

        Nope. I kind of hope she dies alone, buried in hoarded house and gnawed on by her 75 cats.**

        **This is my vicious, vindictive streak out to play. I’m still fed up with life ATM.

        • Heidi
          September 23, 2016 at 12:47 pm #

          Nah, I doubt I’m a nicer person. And I’m leaning towards the fact she may not have any redeeming qualities, but I hate that she has to be so miserable that she attempts (and probably succeeds sometimes, unfortunately) to really damage and hurt others.

      • October 11, 2016 at 6:24 pm #

        Right. She asked me about not calling myself a lactivist and said it had to do with it being a negative term.

        Um, no. As long as the end result is a fed baby, I don’t give a damn.

  5. Anna Perch
    September 22, 2016 at 1:08 pm #

    “You have no idea what you are talking about.” So long and thanks for all the fish!

    • Wren
      September 22, 2016 at 1:09 pm #

      Yes, you have no idea what you are talking about.

    • Roadstergal
      September 22, 2016 at 1:14 pm #

      Three days – no evidence, no citations, no specifics, just a lot of blather. You could have spent those three days reading a paper – just one paper! – that you think supports your assertions, and provide that to us. That’s what we call ‘adults having a reasonable discussion.’

      • Heidi
        September 22, 2016 at 1:23 pm #

        Or she could have spent that time writing her congressman about how WIC doesn’t provide enough extra calories for exclusively breastfeeding mothers, or how we need reformed maternal and paternal leave, or even asked mothers who formula feed in a non-judging way why they chose formula over breastfeeding if she still chooses to believe in made up risks.

        • OttawaAlison
          September 22, 2016 at 2:13 pm #

          I suspect she’s in the UK due to using turn of phrase like “you lot”.

          • Wren
            September 22, 2016 at 4:34 pm #

            I don’t want her to be here though.

          • Box of Salt
            September 23, 2016 at 1:05 pm #

            quite possibly UK based on the timing of her posts, both here and over at SBM (I notice these thing as I am on the US Pacific Coast, and often on line at odd times)

      • Old Lady
        September 22, 2016 at 11:07 pm #

        She is just a troll so we would never get anything else. I have to admit she’s quite good at it considering the amount of response she got.

    • rosewater1
      September 22, 2016 at 1:37 pm #

      Oh if only you meant that. And why drag Douglas Adams into this?

    • OttawaAlison
      September 22, 2016 at 2:11 pm #

      Could this be an alias of a lactivist with the same first name as me (however spelled differently)?

      • moto_librarian
        September 22, 2016 at 3:11 pm #

        Quite possibly.

      • Heidi
        September 22, 2016 at 3:32 pm #

        Oh my, I hadn’t heard of that person, their crappy book, and their awful website until now. I mean her initials do match the initials of that awful website. Either way, this/these person/s is/are miserable.

        • OttawaAlison
          September 22, 2016 at 4:21 pm #

          Yup, it is sad. But apparently to them we’re defensive science denialists. They do their mental gymnastics and incorporate a vicious sort of gas lighting and sanctimony to try and be “right” all the time and put others down for shits and giggles. Funnily enough I didn’t even notice The AP thing, but yes, am now side-eying things even more.

          • Heidi
            September 22, 2016 at 4:33 pm #

            Heh, Anna Perch commented over at the AP, “You are amazing, AP!” I so want it to be the same person now.

      • Sarah
        September 25, 2016 at 11:48 am #

        I actually don’t think so. She appears to have retired, around 18 months ago. For reasons I shan’t go into, I reckon her not especially supportive husband made her get a job once the youngest was at school.

        Also, TAP tends more towards the bibliography salad approach. Ms Perch appears not to.

  6. Heidi
    September 22, 2016 at 8:47 am #

    I figured out what Anna Perch has been saying! ***Breastfeeding matters MORE THAN breastfeeding itself!*** Breastfeeding adherence leads to maternal suicide – that’s fine! Sure a dead woman can’t breastfeed but at least she didn’t quit while she was alive, and her mental health professionals told her of all the made up risks of formula. Breastfeeding adherence leads to a dead baby, that’s fine, too! No, you can’t breastfeed a dead infant but at least everyone gave that woman breastfeeding “support.”

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      September 22, 2016 at 11:17 am #

      Note that in the science-based medicine blog linked below, she said something like, “Your problem is that you think breastfeeding is about nourishment.”

      I think that sums up the attitude nicely. It’s not about feeding your baby, it’s about *sparkles*

      • Heidi
        September 22, 2016 at 11:26 am #

        Sparkles makes sense.

      • Roadstergal
        September 22, 2016 at 12:45 pm #

        It’s funny how lactivists end up talking themselves around to the actual point of attachment theory, which is that warm cuddles promote attachment even if the feeding is happening elsewhere.

        Then they fall over themselves trying to explain that cuddles don’t count if a mouth isn’t on a nipple.

        • Tori
          September 22, 2016 at 7:07 pm #

          Bottles are too easy, we need to prove our worth by making life as hard as possible for ourselves.. Also breastfeeding is easy and convenient, I want it both ways…

      • MaineJen
        September 22, 2016 at 12:47 pm #

        Yeah…I remember that comment standing out for me, too. That’s Olympic-level mental gymnastics.

      • Wren
        September 22, 2016 at 4:37 pm #

        Oh, I tried to read that. It was making me crazy! Even if mammalian breast milk did develop from a specialised immune gland, how was that meaningful today? I mean, it’s interesting and all, but it doesn’t change what breastfeeding does in modern mammals, including us. She seemed to believe it actually made some real difference in the value of breastfeeding.

      • Charybdis
        September 22, 2016 at 8:50 pm #

        I’ll bite. What the hell is it about, then?

        • The Bofa on the Sofa
          September 22, 2016 at 8:59 pm #

          I assume it’s “bonding” or something like that. Sparkles

  7. Heidi
    September 21, 2016 at 10:25 am #

    Little orange fishy has already left her doodies all over an article at Science Based Medicine a few weeks ago. I’m getting really over her telling us we are just seeing her through our “bias” and we are being prejudice. A pediatrician said this:

    “As a pediatrician, I abhor those who try to make non-breastfeeding moms feel like crap because they aren’t breast feeding. I hope all moms try to breastfeed but breastfeeding is never a certain thing, and the mom’s who’ve tried to breastfeed but just couldn’t (as well as those mom’s who know it won’t fit in with their back-to-work schedule–some jobs are very incompatible with pumping breast milk no matter what the laws say) don’t need a bunch of sanctimonious people making them feel like they’ve somehow failed/hurt their child–which they have not. The only time I will get angry with parents of a newborn is if they aren’t feeding either breast milk or formula and are instead doing something truly dangerous (actually pretty much everything else at this age is truly dangerous), like making their own formula (you can find “recipes” for this on the internet, of course) or goat’s milk or powdered goats milk.” Littly fishy’s response is, “If you were my children’s pediatrician, I would find a different one. Supporting breastfeeding is a necessary trait for me. Clearly, you have a prejudice against breastfeeding supporters. Crossing your fingers and hoping for the best is not good enough for me.”

    It is clear as day that fishy here believes trying to make mom’s feel like crap IS breastfeeding support.

    https://www.sciencebasedmedicine.org/efforts-to-encourage-breastfeeding-like-the-baby-friendly-hospital-initiative-bfhi-may-have-unintended-consequences/

    • corblimeybot
      September 21, 2016 at 10:36 am #

      That pediatrician sounds a lot like my daughter’s pediatricians. They were pro-breastfeeding, but never had a bad word to say about combo or formula feeding. If the baby was doing fine, they were happy. Thank God for their support of my child’s health over ideology.

      • moto_librarian
        September 21, 2016 at 10:38 am #

        I remember taking our second in for his one-week visit. She knew about my difficulties with breastfeeding the first time, and asked if I had seen a lactation consultant. I told her what the hospital IBCLC had said and confessed that I just couldn’t handle the thought of dealing with a nightmarish pumping routine again for primary lactation failure. She was awesome about it, reminding me how healthy our then 3 year-old was.

      • Heidi
        September 21, 2016 at 10:41 am #

        My doctor just makes sure I am feeding my baby breast milk and/or infant formula. Until about 7 months, he would get 8 oz. a day because that is the max I can make. Since baby’s weight and iron levels are good and he’s never had any digestive issues, there’s been nothing to discuss! I would find it very bizarre if he tried to offer up “breastfeeding support” when I wasn’t asking for it. If I came in an appointment severely depressed or anxious because I was distraught that my breasts can’t produce more milk, then of course I’d hope he’d support my mental health and not breastfeeding because why would you support me in something that I probably can never do?!

        • Heidi
          September 21, 2016 at 10:44 am #

          *My son’s doctor (aka pediatrician), not exactly my doctor.

        • corblimeybot
          September 21, 2016 at 10:54 am #

          Yes, exactly right. It’s inappropriate for them to offer unsolicited “support”. Anna would probably support mandatory harassment of new mothers. She’d love dealing with the people at my local WIC offices.

          I suspect that my kid’s ped practice has internal disagreement going on about breastfeeding, actually. The “guide to your newborn” book the practice hands out bordered on breastfeeding propaganda, and included a list of “approved formula” if you don’t breastfeed. Their lactation consultant was so horrible, she traumatized me.

          But the nurses, and the pediatricians my kid sees? They were NOT like that. They never brought it up beyond, “is she eating well?”. They didn’t care what formula we used. Every time I’d be apologetic about combo feeding, they’d say something like, “She’s doing fine, and it helps take pressure off you”.

          So I’ve always been curious what the deal is there.

          • Heidi
            September 21, 2016 at 11:08 am #

            I’m thankful formula feeding was required in the hospital so if the LCs there were anti-formula ones, they couldn’t say anything mean to me about it. He had low blood sugar. I know the lactivists like to claim low blood sugar is natural, that hospitals force formula the second they are born, but that is definitely NOT the case. We didn’t get formula until the second day, I was given the option of NICU with IV dextrose if I really wanted (hell no!), his blood sugar was taken over a dozen times I guess, they tried SNS (baby HATED it) and they tried syringe feeding and neither of those would get enough formula in him to get his glucose up to a satisfactory level. I’ve looked at my hospitals website and I see no indication they are “baby friendly.” The hospital’s LCs may have been perfectly reasonable LCs who simply wanted to help women who wanted to breastfeed and who could reasonably and I think that is absolutely fine. If they weren’t though, I’m glad I was spared the judgment and fear-mongering. I have a feeling if I did make enough milk, I still wouldn’t have been in love with breastfeeding and would have supplemented to preserve my sanity.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:20 am #

            “I know the lactivists like to claim low blood sugar is natural”

            Well… yeah, an underfed baby lacking blood sugar is natural. “I fell from a second-story window – naturally, I broke my arm.” It sure isn’t _good_!

          • Heidi
            September 21, 2016 at 11:22 am #

            So you know take yourself to a chiropractor Kate Tietje-style and/or see what essential oils Dr. Axe claims heal broken bones! Orrr squirt some boob juice on it!

      • The Bofa on the Sofa
        September 21, 2016 at 10:56 am #

        I contend that MOST pediatricians are like that. Ours certainly was. He was pro-breastfeeding, with “Breastfeeding welcome here” stickers all over and stuff, but when we mentioned combo feeding for daycare and stuff, he was fine and talked about his preferences if we were to do that.

        Didn’t bat an eye, didn’t try to talk us out of it. Treated us like responsible adults, who knew what was going to work best for our family.

        • Maud Pie
          September 21, 2016 at 11:26 am #

          At one of the early well-baby visits the pediatrician asked if I was breastfeeding, by immediately brushed aside the question by saying “it doesn’t matter, she’s obviously thriving,”. This visit, along with similar contacts with pediatric nurses and a pediatric endocrinologist, help me see that the professionals whose job was to support care of my baby had no issue with formula. It was the LC, whose job was to support breastfeeding, who objected to formula.

          • Azuran
            September 21, 2016 at 11:38 am #

            Really, why don’t they just stop it with the LC and just start having baby feeding consultant, who are able to provide support and information to breastfeeding mothers, formula feeding mother and everything in between?

          • Maud Pie
            September 21, 2016 at 11:49 am #

            Absolutely! And they would have to adhere to medical and professional ethics, starting with acting in their clients’ best interests instead of proselytizing their own agendas.

    • moto_librarian
      September 21, 2016 at 10:36 am #

      Well, now we know why she won’t share her sources here. She cited Alison Steube, et al., and had her ass handed to her by the author of the post. Anna also doesn’t understand that since breastmilk is a bodily fluid, its composition will change when a woman’s immune system is fighting off any type of infection or virus, instead attributing it to the mystical communication between mother and child.

      • Maud Pie
        September 21, 2016 at 11:46 am #

        It’s funny how in the science-based med discussion, she rattled off a lot of bogus arguments (evincing ignorance of science and especially evolution) and, in moto’s words, had her ass handed to her. That totally explains why she’s evading science here and instead is struggling to make this a cultural issue about prejudice against lactavism. As if criticizing and debunking an ideology is somehow akin to racial and ethnic prejudice.

    • momofone
      September 21, 2016 at 12:15 pm #

      She clearly doesn’t understand that supporting one option does not mean denigrating the other. Black and white; no other options.

    • Roadstergal
      September 21, 2016 at 12:43 pm #

      Thanks for the link! I took a looksee through that SBM thread, and she has indeed been thoroughly and soundly educated with many links to, and explanations of, good quality science. She just plain Dun Wanna Hear It.

      She doesn’t understand evolution or immunology, FWIW. She only understands that if breastfeeding doesn’t make her a better person, she’s got nothing else.

      • Heidi
        September 21, 2016 at 12:48 pm #

        Every time I see her comment, I picture my dad’s goldfish swimming around in the aquarium with a 4 inch long string of fish poop hanging out of its fish butt.

        • kfunk937
          September 21, 2016 at 3:58 pm #

          I feel bad about myself for laughing at this. Touché.

          • moto_librarian
            September 21, 2016 at 4:36 pm #

            I don’t. Only I’m thinking of the huge pleco in my 40 gallon tank who routinely has a long string of fish poop trailing behind him.

      • The Bofa on the Sofa
        September 21, 2016 at 1:05 pm #

        What I found interesting there is that, for the most part, I didn’t recognize the commentors there. Apparently, there is not a lot of overlap between the regular readership at Harriet Hall and here.

        Yet, the response to her was exactly the same.

        As the saying goes, “The common denominator of all your failed relationships is you.” You go from place to place and get the same response, perhaps the problem is not those places but is you? But that would take a moment of self-awareness, of which she has none.

      • Heidi
        September 21, 2016 at 3:20 pm #

        I can’t tell she’s mentioned it, but I get the feeling she does not have a child. I really don’t believe she’s actually ever breastfed.

        • Heidi
          September 21, 2016 at 3:21 pm #

          Which I mention, because wouldn’t it be something to base your self-esteem and worth on something you haven’t done yet?

          • MB
            September 21, 2016 at 3:26 pm #

            Omg. I think you might be right. Which makes the whole thing even more crazy.

          • Wren
            September 22, 2016 at 9:40 am #

            I wonder if she was not breastfed and has now decided all the problems in her life are because of that. It lets her blame mom, not herself, for things that go wrong. It would explain the identity based on breastfeeding without having actually breastfed.

          • Heidi
            September 22, 2016 at 10:06 am #

            That reminds me one day I was trying to figure out why I have hypoglycemic episodes and consulted the Google. I stumbled upon something that claimed IV dextrose was never needed for hypoglycemic newborns, it wasn’t a serious condition, treating it with formula (gasp!) or sugar (double gasp!) water would make all sorts of bad things happen down the road and all babies needed was to breastfeed. All I knew was that I got IV dextrose and I was formula fed and I decided that was probably why I occasionally experience hypoglycemia. I was angry. So anyway, I ask my mom about what happened exactly and I learned that even in 1984, my mom had decided to breastfeed and the medical staff respected that and their first line of defense for my low blood sugar was to have me nurse. My sugar still hadn’t gone up so then they tried formula. Formula didn’t work either so they used IV dextrose as a last resort. I think I was on that IV for over a day because I really did have a serious case of hypoglycemia. I’ve concluded the hypo thing is genetic. My grandmother still has hypo episodes in her 80s and she never developed diabetes. (I know reactive hypoglycemia is a thing but neither of ours appear to really be reactive.) Anyway, I also learned my mom switched to formula because I wasn’t gaining weight properly and she wasn’t producing enough. Here I am with a baby born hypo, although much less hypo than me thankfully, and don’t produce enough milk.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 22, 2016 at 10:09 am #

            Yeah, maybe, and I know this is a stretch, but just maybe the fact that you needed IV glucose as a baby REFLECTS your physiological proneness to hypoglycemia, and didn’t actually cause it?

            Nah, that’s just crazy talk. Why would anyone think that an adult who is prone to hypoglycemia might have also been so as a baby?

          • Heidi
            September 22, 2016 at 10:11 am #

            Nah, the corn water just poisoned me!!!

          • Azuran
            September 22, 2016 at 10:23 am #

            Ah the lactivist way: Not enough breastmilk? Give more breastmilk!

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 22, 2016 at 10:53 pm #

            Remember Nikkilee the LC? She believes her husbands health problems are directly linked to being formula fed.

          • Wren
            September 23, 2016 at 6:40 am #

            I missed that one. It doesn’t surprise me though.

          • Heidi
            September 23, 2016 at 1:18 pm #

            I definitely remember Nikki Lee but didn’t know that one!

        • Bombshellrisa
          September 21, 2016 at 7:54 pm #

          I was going to say that, she sounds much like the smug people who refer to epidurals as “gateway drugs” and are dead set against them–until they have actually experienced labor.

        • momofone
          September 22, 2016 at 10:07 pm #

          I think she mentioned having two children, but I don’t want to reread her posts to be sure.

    • momofone
      September 22, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

      Wow. I’m impressed by the patience she was shown by so many commenters there.

  8. guest
    September 20, 2016 at 5:34 pm #

    I’m reading this while breastfeeding my baby. On my phone. Not bonding with my baby. Feeding is utilitarian. I don’t stare into her eyes every time, she eats ten times a day for god’s sake.

    • sdsures
      September 20, 2016 at 5:34 pm #

      IKR??

    • BeatriceC
      September 20, 2016 at 10:20 pm #

      I used to grade papers and make lesson plans during those middle of the night feeds. Definitely not bonding, just doing whatever I could to keep myself awake and not drop the kid.

    • MaineJen
      September 21, 2016 at 9:18 am #

      I made it through soooo many TV series while breastfeeding my son. He was a big eater…

      • Sonja Henie
        September 21, 2016 at 5:25 pm #

        I remember watching the World Series while breast feeding.

  9. maidmarian555
    September 20, 2016 at 12:36 pm #

    You know, I’ve been watching this thread progress and, whilst I see absolutely no point in arguing with an Internet stranger who is apparently incapable of empathy, I would like to just take a moment to THANK all the women who share their stories here. I found this site during a very dark time and I will be eternally grateful to all of you for being brave and sharing your truths and your stories.

    There are plenty of places online where ‘perfect’ women share their ‘perfect’ birth and feeding tales, merrily slapping each other on the back whilst telling those of us who had c-sections or bottle feed how ‘sad’ they are for us (puhlease!). The raw honesty here is to be commended, not shut down (as apparently some people with their own agendas would prefer).

    So, once again, thank you ladies. I would bet there are a lot of women like me who rarely comment but do indeed find some real solace and helpful advice here.

    • Anna Perch
      September 20, 2016 at 12:55 pm #

      I do not agree that it is necessary to find a scapegoat in order to share an emotional experience!
      I do not believe that sharing misinformation is helpful to anyone.
      I do not agree that people who believe breastfeeding is important are perfect or that they think they are perfect.

      I do believe that something about within the culture of this page gives license to write libelous, defamatory comments about other posters.

      • Stephanie Rotherham
        September 20, 2016 at 1:00 pm #

        Can I ask you a question?
        Why are you still here?
        I don’t think you are going to change anyone’s opinion right now.
        It might be better if you just cut your losses and left. There’s not much point sticking around arguing when it’s pretty clear you’re not changing anything.

        • Anna Perch
          September 20, 2016 at 1:41 pm #

          I am changing my understanding of people who have opinions that differ than my own. I find them intriguing.

          • Stephanie Rotherham
            September 20, 2016 at 1:44 pm #

            And here I thought you were arguing with people because you are an insufferable fucknugget.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 11:37 am #

            So you’re treating other human beings like a social experiment?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:10 pm #

            Um, no.? Wiki: “A social experiment is a research project conducted with human subjects in the real world”

          • corblimeybot
            September 22, 2016 at 11:17 am #

            Oh shit, you cited a literal definition from Wikipedia. Whatever will I do now.

            You really are a rigid, uncreative thinker.

      • moto_librarian
        September 20, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

        Given that you refuse to post a single shred of evidence for your own viewpoints and casually dismiss the very real experiences of many of the women in this group, I find your claim that you are being victimized laughable.

        Frankly, you’re quite boring. You offer nothing substantive to the conversation, and I”m done trying to engage with you. I’ve repeatedly asked you to back up your claims, and you refuse. I’d be better off talking to a tree at this point.

        • Bombshellrisa
          September 20, 2016 at 1:09 pm #

          Well, she is ever so slightly more intelligent than Brooke. You have to hand it to her that she hasn’t mentioned men suckling babies in Papau New Guinea as an example.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 11:37 am #

            That just means she isn’t actively stoned as often as Brooke is.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:45 am #

            Hey, I write more sense than Brooke when I’m stoned.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 11:50 am #

            You’re starting out with an exponentially better brain than Brooke!

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:50 am #

            “Check out the big brain on Brooke!”

      • Charybdis
        September 20, 2016 at 1:37 pm #

        Then why, oh why, do you continue to share misinformation?

      • Sarah
        September 21, 2016 at 1:43 pm #

        #that’snicedear

    • Bombshellrisa
      September 20, 2016 at 1:29 pm #

      It’s a great place to gather!

    • Megan
      September 20, 2016 at 2:22 pm #

      I feel the same way. I felt a lot of guilt after having a failed induction and CS and then not being able to BF my first. Then I found this community. With the birth of my second child, I had a prelabor RCS and loved it. Tried to breastfeed but when it again didn’t work out, switched to formula and have enjoyed my younger daughter’s babyhood so much more (and still am!). I look back on my older daughter’s infancy and regret how much time I spent pumping and crying over my struggles/attempt to breastfeed and regret that it interfered with our time together. For me, breastfeeding inhibited our bonding. I wish I had snuggled her while bottle feeding instead. Rabid lactivists won’t talk about this possibility and that’s a real shame.

      • maidmarian555
        September 20, 2016 at 3:07 pm #

        I had a failed induction and CS. After I got home, I googled CPD as I’d never heard of it before it happened to me and found a bunch of woo sites, where people claimed CPD didn’t exist and that it was something doctors made up to frighten women into having C-sections. In my wonky post-partum state, I was devastated. I spent 3 days having brutal contractions and didn’t dilate a single centimetre in all that time. I let them break my waters on day 3 and ‘caved’ and had an epidural shortly afterwards. The only part of the entire experience I didn’t hate was the operation. I was so grateful my son came out healthy and breathing. Those sites made me hate myself, they made me feel so guilty and question the OB who’d performed the section, who had told me at the time that I mustn’t feel bad as there was no way my son could have ever been born ‘naturally’ and that I’d made the best decision for both of us.

        This site gave me my sanity back. I find it so frustrating when people parachute in here to tell women that they should be quiet and not tell their own stories. I am glad you were able to enjoy feeding your second child. I combo feed and love that Dad can join in with the bottles, it’s a beautiful thing that we would all miss out on if I EBF.

        • Erin
          September 20, 2016 at 4:22 pm #

          I spent many many many hours googling it too, trying to figure out why my six pound nine ounce (with giant head) didn’t descend.

          I suppose the clue was really the “giant head” but I couldn’t see that for a long time.

          • maidmarian555
            September 20, 2016 at 4:34 pm #

            Ha! Yeah my son’s head was at the 91st centile. His weight and height were 75th, which is fairly large but not enormous. I’m only 5″3, I understand now that it’s just one of those things that happen sometimes.

            Thank you for your story btw, the bit that really resonated with me was that I had a very similar experience with a midwife pulling down my top and manhandling my breasts whilst I was telling her to stop (my son was screaming, she’d yanked him out of his bassinet where he was sleeping because she ‘needed to see him feed on my left side’ even though I’d said it could wait as he hadn’t slept properly since he’d been born and had finished feeding on my right boob not 15 minutes beforehand). I hadn’t had a prior experience that made it triggering, but it was horrible and I still have nightmares about it. Had my partner not come in at that moment and told her to eff off, I am not sure whether breastfeeding would have been a thing for me and my son at all. It very nearly put me off altogether, I have never felt so humiliated in my life.

          • Erin
            September 21, 2016 at 11:34 am #

            I think I got hung up on his weight, which was the 19th percentcile I think and totally ignored the 90 percentcile head (and yes, he was a bobble head til about 5 months old).

            It’s interesting, I used to get really frustrated with my Birth Trauma groups who would be crying “Birth rape” at the drop of a hat and then I started to think about my own experiences and that of other women. Whilst you and/or your partner can attach your child, why is it considered acceptable for anyone else to grab your breasts? Also why do midwives always have freezing cold hands?

      • Bombshellrisa
        September 20, 2016 at 4:21 pm #

        Rabid lactivists never focus on any part of parenting that isn’t about them and their breast milk. Which is sad, since that part of parenting is a short period of time. I think the other things like going to the park, reading together and seeing your child blossom into their own little self is amazing, much more interesting than breastfeeding. I know I am totally jealous you have not one but two girls to have a tea party with! What a wonderful bunch of things you have to look forward to and enjoy (and have nothing to do with breast milk!).

        • Megan
          September 20, 2016 at 4:35 pm #

          I am excited for younger daughter to be able to participate in our tea parties! Older daughter likes to take her tea set and put “sugar” in the whole teapot though, so if you like your tea plain, too bad I guess. The creamer is right out; she won’t use it at all! She’s my little tea dictator 🙂

          • sdsures
            September 20, 2016 at 5:33 pm #

            Cuteness!!

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 21, 2016 at 8:09 pm #

            That is precious!
            I was the tea dictator as a child, everyone got lemon whether they wanted it or not.

          • Old Lady
            September 22, 2016 at 9:47 am #

            I find the whole tea party thing very strange. According to movies, shows and books it is the defining feature of little girl’s play. I have never in real life seen little girls play tea party or ever participated in it myself. Most American adults don’t even drink tea much less have parties around it.

          • demodocus
            September 22, 2016 at 10:02 am #

            My son has brgled my itty bitty teapot pn cushion and pours us tea frequently 🙂 Usually into our real mugs, lol

          • corblimeybot
            September 22, 2016 at 11:15 am #

            My brother and I had a tea set and I guess we did do tea parties? But we never dressed up in frilly Victorian clothing and tried to give the “tea” to our toys.

          • Roadstergal
            September 22, 2016 at 12:50 pm #

            My sister and I did tea parties, but it was mostly because of Alice in Wonderland, I think.

          • MaineJen
            September 22, 2016 at 12:53 pm #

            Clean cup! Move down!

          • MaineJen
            September 22, 2016 at 12:52 pm #

            I’ve recently inherited my grandma’s old mini-tea set (tiny cups and saucers…adorable), and I have vague, fond memories of drinking chamomile tea with her during visits. But it’s not something my sister and I ever thought of doing on our own…we were strictly a coffee household 🙂 And neither of us cared much for frilly dresses…

        • Amazed
          September 20, 2016 at 5:03 pm #

          I find the parallel Anna is trying to draw between a lactivist and a breastfeeder here a very interesting one. As if you can’t be a breastfeeder if you aren’t a lactivist as well.

          My SIL is EBF. Her kid’s lips had never been assaulted by a drop of inferior formula. And she’s quite comfortable saying that perhaps the kid likes her bottles (of breastmilk) better than the boob since she doesn’t need to work to get the food out. Not that SIL would know. She’s never given one. It’s the rest of us who do. She breastfeeds but happily acknowledge that perhaps the kid would have been just as happy if not happier with a bottle.

          Just today, they sent me another video of the kid laughing and babbling. One can almost think that they consider talking and rolling against the edge of every sofa she’s placed at more important than the fact that the kid has never had formula. That singing to her, reciting children’s rhymes and playing with her is what pays off in the form of this (mostly) constantly smiling baby. Go figure!

        • corblimeybot
          September 21, 2016 at 11:36 am #

          They’ll talk about going to the park with their kid. If they can talk about breastfeeding there. Even better if they can frame their time breastfeeding at the park as highfalutin civil disobedience.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 11:39 am #

            NB: I breastfed at parks (and generally in public) plenty of times, so no need for Anna to tell me that I just don’t get it.

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 21, 2016 at 8:07 pm #

            She still will. I think everyone is right that she hasn’t read anything but blogs and junk science and has never had a baby. Which makes me want to laugh, since she is akin to the people who are perfect parents whose toddlers will sleep through the night, never have a tantrum and will eat only healthy home cooked meals–until they actually have children.
            I breastfed in public and had a baby who didn’t like a cover, so I didn’t use one (I just tried to be discreet). Even then, I couldn’t stand the women who couldn’t talk about anything but breastfeeding and acted like breastfeeding without a cover was somehow the way to convince people that breast is best.

      • sdsures
        September 20, 2016 at 5:32 pm #

        Ditto.

        Not on here, but elsewhere, I have been told that disabled people like me and my husband should never have children because we are disabled. By able-bodied idiots.

        • Megan
          September 20, 2016 at 9:22 pm #

          That’s horrible.

          • sdsures
            October 2, 2016 at 11:32 am #

            Yep.

        • demodocus
          September 20, 2016 at 9:41 pm #

          I hear ya. Not so much for myself (my hearing impairment is invisible) but all the people who think I’m essentially a single parent. Even the usual “husbands are just an extra kid” jokes get old really fast.

          • sdsures
            October 2, 2016 at 11:32 am #

            I hear ya. 🙁

        • MaineJen
          September 21, 2016 at 9:18 am #

          Jesus christ. Eugenics much?

          • demodocus
            September 21, 2016 at 5:38 pm #

            Oddly enough, I don’t know any disabled people who have disabled children.

          • sdsures
            September 30, 2016 at 10:30 pm #

            Particularly funny since almost nothing either of us have can be passed onto our kids.

          • sdsures
            October 2, 2016 at 11:32 am #

            God only knows.

        • sdsures
          September 27, 2016 at 12:41 pm #

          We will also probably be FF or combo-feeding depending on how it goes because of the meds I’m on, which causes people to moan, “Maybe you shouldn’t have kids at all if you’re on so many meds.”

          *eyeroll* I *obviously* won’t breastfeed or even TTC if I am on meds that could hurt the baby!

          Good news!!! We are experimenting with lowering my sodium valproate dose some more. 300mg twice a day. The Botox is working, and seems to have kept the migraines at the same frequency on 800mg daily as it did on 1000mg daily, so my nurse suggested we try lowering me to 600mg daily for the next 12 weeks. Goal is to be off it completely so we can TTC. <3

    • BeatriceC
      September 22, 2016 at 3:15 pm #

      Thank you for sharing. We speak openly here, and counter the exaggerations and outright lies spouted by pseudoscience, lactivists, and NCB cultists precisely for people like you. It is our hope by doing so we can reach the lurkers who are perhaps in a dark place because of those lies, and bring them out of it. We also hope we can reach people before they get to that dark place by providing them with real information, not the fairy tales presented so often elsewhere.

  10. Erin
    September 20, 2016 at 10:36 am #

    I’ve mentioned before that one of the baby and toddler groups I attend with my son also has a breastfeeding support group built in (with NHS peer workers). This morning one of them who I’ve got to know reasonably well was asking how pregnancy was treating me over a cup of tea. For some reason I ended up talking about this thread and how despite everything I went through last time that part of me still wants to try breastfeeding. Just preferably without reaching the bit where slicing off my nipples seemed like a sensible suggestion.

    Her reply surprised me somewhat. Not only did she suggest that I should discuss my feelings with my consultant and/or a mental health professional, she also went on to say that immediate skin to skin was nonsense and that me being functioning and sane outweighed any benefits of breastfeeding. She went on to say that she would support as best she could if I felt the same after the baby’s arrival but that if I started exhibiting 1 tenth of the behaviours I admitted to with my first, she would be recommending formula and getting help for PnD.

    Even my son “washing” another child’s hair with squished up banana couldn’t get the smile off my face although it’s amazing how much banana the average banana contains when it’s smeared across two small children, several chairs and your handbag.

    • moto_librarian
      September 20, 2016 at 10:45 am #

      I’m so very glad that you have finally found sensible support. Finally, someone is listening! May it continue.

    • Bombshellrisa
      September 20, 2016 at 12:21 pm #

      I am so glad you were able to talk about this with someone who really listened!
      Banana is a good deep conditioner for hair : )

    • Stephanie Rotherham
      September 20, 2016 at 12:24 pm #

      I’m glad to hear you got to talk to someone and get the support you and your family need- I hope things stay good and get better.

    • BeatriceC
      September 20, 2016 at 11:58 pm #

      We need to clone that woman. I’m so glad she’s a part of your life.

    • Sarah
      September 21, 2016 at 3:38 pm #

      Think of the potassium. At least your handbag will be healthy.

  11. Ob in OZ
    September 20, 2016 at 10:15 am #

    On board with everything except he concept that by being a man it excludes you from having an informed opinion on these topics. Just like being fortunate enough not to have experienced cancer, I can still discuss the topic. I am a patient advocate whose patients happen to all be female. I provide them with the best information I can so they make informed decisions of every aspect of their pregnancy and postpartum care. I should not be considered less capable than a women of providing high quality, evidence-based, family-centered care. That said, I agree with the blog in general

    • The Bofa on the Sofa
      September 20, 2016 at 10:36 am #

      I agree, but I think the most common objection to the “he’s a guy” part is when it’s “It’s easy and convenient”

      Easy for a man to say that breastfeeding is easy.

      • Ob in OZ
        September 24, 2016 at 6:21 am #

        I would say it’s stupid for a man to say it’s easy. What a man or woman should say is about 85% of of those who wish to breastfeed are successful. Easy or not is not what is in the published literature as far as I know. I have heard a short statured female doctor guilt a patient into a vaginal delivery after a prior shoulder dystocia because she had vaginal births without complications. My point being there are idiots who’ve “been there (women)” and idiots who never will (men). As I’ve responded to others, I don’t feel I should be left out of the conversation because of my external genitalia when my entire career is devoted to women’s health advocacy

    • Roadstergal
      September 20, 2016 at 11:00 am #

      “I should not be considered less capable than a women of providing high quality, evidence-based, family-centered care.”

      I agree, but if you weren’t providing high quality, evidence-based, family-centered care, but were instead – frex – saying that it is easy and convenient to be abstinent, we would have a legitimate basis to claim that you were looking at the situation from a male-privilege view.

      • Ob in OZ
        September 24, 2016 at 6:13 am #

        Agree. So men, like women, should be judged by their words and actions. All male doctors are not like the ones Dr T describes, and too often for my taste she implies that a male doctor cannot have an opinion when it comes to women’s health issues. I am a big fan of her agenda, except for this specific issue.

    • FEDUP MD
      September 20, 2016 at 9:04 pm #

      It would be like me, as a woman, saying that getting kicked in the testicles isn’t so bad. Or that getting an erection is easy no matter what. Or that the side effects of prostate cancer treatment aren’t so bad. I would rightly sound sanctimonious and lacking empathy.

      • Ob in OZ
        September 24, 2016 at 5:58 am #

        But you not I would never say that, which is my point. We are caring doctors, not assholes, regardless of our external genitalia.

    • Sarah
      September 21, 2016 at 2:06 pm #

      You shouldn’t, but Jack Newman is going a long way beyond that and that’s what he’s criticised for here. Aside from mutual possession of penises, I don’t see any resemblance between his behaviour and the care you mention offering here.

  12. Cody
    September 19, 2016 at 4:30 pm #

    When Jack Newman mentions judges and child protection agencies, he’s talking about women being forced to give up breastfeeding because they have to share access of their babies with the father 50/50 in situations where the parents don’t live together. He talks about this in greater detail in his book.

    I see this issue from both sides, because I was still breastfeeding when the father of my kids breached an access agreement and kept my kids for an extended period of time when he wasn’t supposed to. This ended breastfeeding for us. There was nothing I could do about it and I felt like it should have been my choice to end breastfeeding, not his. Courts in Ontario (where Jack Newman practices) will sometimes put in place temporary access schedules that help support breastfeeding relationships during the first year with the I intention of amending them later so that the father has more time with the child after breastfeeding is done.

    On the other hand, women know this and some of them will say that are breastfeeding when they aren’t, so they can purposely limit access between father and child during the first year. My husband has experience with this. If the father questions this in court she may be required to supply a doctors note which explains that mom is breastfeeding and includes recommendations to the court as to how breastfeeding can be preserved through appropriate access.

    • Maud Pie
      September 19, 2016 at 9:17 pm #

      Thank you for posting this information. It’s always awful when parents won’t cooperate to act in the child’s best interests. No one should use breastfeeding as a strategic weapon in custody battles. I am genuinely sorry that you and your husband were abused in this fashion by your former partners.

      • Cody
        September 19, 2016 at 9:33 pm #

        Ultimately, it’s the kids who suffer the most. When I say that I’m not talking about the breastfeeding stuff because that was a minuscule part of it. Family court sucks for everyone, plain and simple. I’m pretty sure that the judges don’t want to be there either.

        • Maud Pie
          September 19, 2016 at 9:43 pm #

          yes, it sucks to high heaven. I bitch about my XH, but I know there are a lot worse.

  13. Wren
    September 19, 2016 at 4:12 pm #

    If breastfeeding is sooooo much better than formula, why is it that no one could walk into a classroom of 9-10 year olds (chosen as those are the ages of my kids) and pick out who breastfed and who didn’t, let alone who breastfed for at least 2 years and who quit before 1?

    I breastfed both of mine, one for 35 months and the other for 9 1/2 months with an extra 2 1/2 months of mixed formula and pumped milk. I generally found it easy and it fit in with my life. Without knowing, you could never guess which of my kids was breastfed for 3 times as long as the other, or even that they were.

    • Roadstergal
      September 19, 2016 at 4:46 pm #

      Just by the numbers, I’m sure we’ve turned down for hiring people who were breastfed in favor of people who were formula fed.

      • momofone
        September 19, 2016 at 6:20 pm #

        I’m betting the people who hired them were formula fed.

        • Roadstergal
          September 19, 2016 at 6:26 pm #

          You know, I’ve yet to have a lactivist even try to explain to me why, if breastfeeding is so protective against asthma, allergies, and obesity, these conditions have been steadily increasing from the nadir of breastfeeding in the 70s to the new boob renaissance today (speaking for the US).

          I’m sure they’d drag some bullshit out of their butts about ‘just one drop’ if put in a corner.

          Or Monsanto. Monsanto is always a good fallback.

          • Young CC Prof
            September 19, 2016 at 7:28 pm #

            Epigenetics. It must be epigenetics. Or they’ll claim breastfeeding rates aren’t really rising after all.

          • Sarah
            September 21, 2016 at 2:06 pm #

            Vaccines, presumably.

          • Roadstergal
            September 22, 2016 at 12:51 pm #

            Ah, breastmilk is so weak and useless it can’t even protect against the ebul vaccines? 😀

  14. Amy Tuteur, MD
    September 19, 2016 at 3:33 pm #

    Imagine:

    • Bombshellrisa
      September 19, 2016 at 4:02 pm #

      Oh but then some moms would have to admit they are doing things for status not because it’s actually better!

  15. BeatriceC
    September 19, 2016 at 2:27 pm #

    I had to take a step back yesterday, as the topic got too upsetting for me. Nasty lactivism cropped up in two places yesterday and one of them I couldn’t avoid, so I forced myself into speaking out and handling things even though I was puking my guts out with anxiety. I had some awful moments with lactivists, but nothing like what some women experience, and combined with my anxiety when it comes to confrontation, this was not a good thing.

    So some of you know I run a FB group for maternal mental health support focusing on postpartum depression but branching out into other areas. I’m obviously not going to go into specifics, as that would betray the trust these women have in the group, but I will say that based on numerous comments and the community’s gratefulness at our hardline approach to shutting down lactivism, the idea that breastfeeding itself, and the immense pressure to breastfeed contributes greatly to PPD in many cases is one that needs to be researched a lot more heavily than it has been.

    • Anna Perch
      September 19, 2016 at 2:52 pm #

      Sanctimony?

      • demodocus
        September 19, 2016 at 8:26 pm #

        Projection?

      • BeatriceC
        September 19, 2016 at 10:00 pm #

        Because actually believing women when they talk about their real experiences and concluding that research should be done on the topic is the very definition of sanctimony.

        • Anna Perch
          September 20, 2016 at 11:57 am #

          But you said that you take a “hardline approach to shutting down lactivism” within your group. And you believe it makes your group better than other groups. Your devotion to the formula apologist ideology IS sanctimonious.
          It has nothing to do with allowing women to talk – it is censorship. That is not necessarily bad, conversations about pregnancy are often censored from fertility groups.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 12:29 pm #

            I was brought up Catholic and remained in the church until my 30s. I am now an atheist and practice no religion. I believe in people’s right to practice a religion.*. I believe in people’s right to practice no religion. I am opposed to religious persons imposing their religion on others. Does that make me an anti-theocrat apologist? Does my commitment to the separation of church and state make mean that I have to justify the imposition of non-religion on the religious or be deemed equally oppressive in forcing my free exercise non-establishment beliefs on those who believe in non-free exercise and free pro establishment?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 12:39 pm #

            That makes no sense. You are making all kinds of irrational assumptions. You have no idea if I am also a raised Catholic who is now an atheist who opposes the imposition of any religion.
            THOSE assumptions are ALL based on the fact that I believe the well established science that breastfeeding matters and I am willing to express that, vocally, within a group that rabidly despises people who talk favorably about breastfeeding.

          • swbarnes2
            September 20, 2016 at 12:44 pm #

            For the hundredth time, cite that well-established science. And restrict yourself to only citing well-controlled studies.

            The only people who are rabidly despised are those who lie about what the science says. You can easily prove you are not one of them by citing the well-controlled research that supports your claims

            Just to be clear, by “well-controlled” I mostly mean don’t cite anything where the breastfeeding group is whiter, richer, and better educated than the formula group. If your study doesn’t specify, it’s probably not well-controlled, so omit it, and cite something that is well-controlled.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 12:45 pm #

            Have you ever heard of the Fallacy Fallacy?

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:31 am #

            Department of Redundancy Department, this is Anna, how may I not help you?

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 12:21 pm #

            Have you ever heard of the burden of proof?

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:21 pm #

            Yes.

            Rejecting your argument doesn’t mean you’re wrong. It means you have a bad argument.

            But the problem is that your only argument is assertion i.e. you don’t have one.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:42 pm #

            Still not evidence….

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 12:56 pm #

            Are you finally ready to share those studies behind this ‘well established science’

            Didn’t think so.

          • momofone
            September 20, 2016 at 1:08 pm #

            Please either cite said “well established science” or shut the hell up about it.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 1:35 pm #

            Thanks for corroborating my assessment.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:39 pm #

            My point is that you do not need any corroboration from me. You are making assumptions about me based on your prejudice.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 1:39 pm #

            And why the hell do I need to know anything about your religious history to state the facts of my religious history? If I wrote “I ate Fage yogurt for breakfast this morning,” would you respond by wailing that I am making assumptions about what you ate for breakfast?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:54 pm #

            My bad, I thought you were trying to make some sort of point about your religious history and how it influences your thinking.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 12:53 pm #

            If the conversation about pregnancy where about telling infertile women that their IVF babies are not as good as naturally conceived baby, or that they love their babies less, of that they should have tried harder to conceive naturally, then yes, censorship is more than welcome in those groups.
            You are not ‘promoting’ breastfeeding. You are shaming and degrading formula feeding mother. There is a difference. We are not ‘formula appologist’ we support every mother equally no matter how they feed their child.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:03 pm #

            Um…it is pretty obvious that you are attempting to shame and degrade me. I have no ill will toward people who use formula nor do I rank people who breastfeed as somehow better than other people. Your assumption is a load of bunk.

            As I have said, many, if not all of you here, do liberally share the formula apologist rhetoric and talking points. Little if anything has been written that defies the formula apologist ideology.

          • Box of Salt
            September 20, 2016 at 1:13 pm #

            Anna Perch ” formula apologist”

            “I have no ill will toward people who use formula nor do I rank people who breastfeed as somehow better than other people.”

            Every time you use the phrase ” formula apologist”
            you are, indeed, spreading ill will towards every formula user, and ranking them lower than breastfeeders. Don’t bother blathering about that is not your intention.

            Words matter. Your words provided the label.

            It’s interesting that you lack the insight into your own behavior that you deny what you are doing within a single comment.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:16 pm #

            Are you implying that every time anyone uses the term “lactivist” it is spreading ill will toward every breastfeeder?? Ranking them lower than formula feeders?

          • Box of Salt
            September 20, 2016 at 1:20 pm #

            Anna, to be clear:
            In my comment, I am criticizing your behavior. Yours only.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:28 pm #

            People who use the term “lactivist” are not insulting all breastfeeders, but people who use the term “formula apologist” ARE insulting all formula feeders.
            Can you say double standard?

            Absolutely fascinating opinion.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 7:25 pm #

            They are not analogous terms. “Lactavist” is a portmanteau of fairy recent vintage (5-10 years?) which means “an proponent of breastfeeding who favors and/or effectuates policies and practices intended to deprive parents of the option of using formula. These policies and practices include, but are not limited to: aggressive, hard-sell and emotional messaging exaggerating the alleged advantages of breastfeeding and disadvantages of formula, social shaming of formula users, limitation of access to formula in medical and retail establishments, co-opting medical, educational, and governmental institutions by incentivizing cooperation with lactavists.”

            That’s a bit clumsy but not bad for an impromptu definition.

            “Formula apologist” – a term invented by a pro-lactavist participant in an online forum with the ostensible intent of portraying approval of formula use as ignorant and irresponsible.

            It’s significant that many anti-formula crusaders embrace the term lactavist, but pro-choicers repudiate the insinuation that we are “apologizing ” for formula, which we maintain has no need of apologies.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 9:17 pm #

            Thank you for the thought provoking post. It will take me a little while to compose my thoughts.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 2:03 pm #

            You have no ill will?
            You have refused to say that formula feeding women have the same right as breastfeeding mothers to feed their child in peace. You said multiple time that formula is inferior, which means that breastfeeding mothers are better. You push false information that formula feeding mothers are hurting their child.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:56 pm #

            Apologist rhetoric: “formula is inferior, which means that breastfeeding mothers are better.”

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 3:17 pm #

            So you admit that formula feeding is just as good as breastfeeding?
            You can’t have is both way. You can’t say that one is better than the other, but both are equal. So either formula is inferior, which means that breastfeeding mothers are better, or both are equally acceptable way of feeding a baby and both mothers are equally good mothers.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 4:08 pm #

            No, I don’t believe apologist rhetoric.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 4:27 pm #

            That’s not really a matter of believe. You can’t, logically consider one better but still equal.
            You are just an hypocrite and don’t want to admit to your hurtful views

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 5:01 pm #

            Apologists do it all the time, “Breast is best, but formula is just as good.”

          • Roadstergal
            September 20, 2016 at 5:26 pm #

            “All else being equal, given abundant supply of milk that is not deficient in fat/protein/carbohydrate/vitamins/etc, given good latch on the part of the baby, given no physical or preference barriers on the part of the mom, given no harm is being done to mom, given a decent sleep and feeding schedule, given decent maternity leave, the best-quality studies suggest that breastmilk might have some slight advantage in terms of minor short-term GI illnesses for term infants that might tip one towards breastfeeding if all else is equal, but given that all else is never equal, and given the minor difference in the absolute best case for breastmilk, a woman’s feeding choice – breast, pumped, formula, or combo – is a choice that she deserves to make – in the light of the highest quality evidence – of what’s best for her, the baby, and the family, and is not something she has any need to justify or apologize to Anna Perch for.”

            It’s something that’s worked out well for many people here, including Dr T. It’s not as pithy as “Breast is best,” I agree, but it’s a helluva lot more accurate.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 6:47 pm #

            I guess my point went over your head? You said that it is problematic if anyone attempts to agree with contradictory statements. I merely pointed out the apologists do it all.the.time.

            And by the way, Anna Perch has not asked for an apology for using infant formula from anyone. Your statement is more apologist drivel. (not something she has any need to justify or apologize to Anna Perch for).

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:36 am #

            My statement in the post you replied to is not contradictory. The only contradictory statement is the one you tried to put in my mouth, which is why I clarified it for you. I do _not_ agree that “Breast is best” as a blanket statement. I agree with what I posted above.

            What, in my post, do you disagree with? Be specific.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:17 pm #

            Is this the bit you are asking me to critique? “All else being equal, given abundant supply of milk that is not deficient in fat/protein/carbohydrate/vitamins/etc, given good latch on the part of the baby, given no physical or preference barriers on the part of the mom, given no harm is being done to mom, given a decent sleep and feeding schedule, given decent maternity leave, the best-quality studies suggest that breastmilk might have some slight advantage in terms of minor short-term GI illnesses for term infants that might tip one towards breastfeeding if all else is equal, but given that all else is never equal, and given the minor difference in the absolute best case for breastmilk, a woman’s feeding choice – breast, pumped, formula, or combo – is a choice that she deserves to make – in the light of the highest quality evidence – of what’s best for her, the baby, and the family”

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:21 pm #

            I asked what part of that statement you disagree with, yes. I’d ask for citations to support your disagreement, but since your definition of ‘citing a study’ is saying ‘duh,’ I’ll lower my expectations on that.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 7:22 pm #

            Basically what we say more or like looks like: In a totally hypothetical world, where everything is rainbow and magic, and everything works perfectly well 100% of the time for 100% of people, yea, breastmilk is very slightly better than formula (as in: 8% fewer diarrhea and cold in the first year, the only actual real benefits, for which someone actually bothered to show evidence. You still haven’t provided any BTW))

            Even in this imaginary world, it has absolutely no long term effect.
            And in the reald world, it’s one of the least important or helpful thing you can do. Whatever slight benefits there might be are dwarfed by basically everything else. Hence, it’s not worth the suffering and shame people like you are putting mother’s through.
            You would be the exact same person you are today if your mom fed you differently, I would be also, also. There isn’t anyone who can say they would be anything different if their parents fed them differently. It just doesn’t matter.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:29 am #

            No. We don’t agree that breast is always best. If it is working for you and you are not starving or underfeeding your baby by EBF, then by all means, carry on with your bad self. If it is not working, for whatever reason, or if you simply don’t want to breastfeed, then formula is just as good. Better, in some cases.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 11:39 am #

            Two things 1) “Breastfeeding is best” is written on every can of formula, so yeah, apologists say it all.the.time. 2) Even if you do not say it “Breast is best, but formula is just as good”, or some form of that, is also said all.the.time.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:48 am #

            Yes, Breast is Best is written on cans of formula – to appease lactivists who throw toddler shitfits at the idea that some women might not be feeling sufficiently guilty about using formula. If I had my way, the only thing on them would be ‘consult a pediatrician if you have any questions or concerns about your baby’s feeding.’

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:09 pm #

            If you think that lactivists are appeased by the words “breastfeeding is best” on formula cans while so many other aspects of the WHO Code are ignored, then you have another think coming.
            They do type out a recommendation on the label to talk to a pediatrician about using formula, don’t they?

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:11 pm #

            So you speak for the lactivists?

            I agree with you that it’s dumb to try to appease the unappeasable. “Breast is best” shouldn’t be on formula cans.

          • Charybdis
            September 22, 2016 at 10:08 am #

            I hope to hell she is not the Lorax of the Lactivists. That would just be bad all around.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 9:25 pm #

            Like the fact that they (the WHO) support and recommend vaccination? Lactivists (some, not all) certainly do pick and choose what appeals to them and what they will rabidly latch onto as dogma, don’t they?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 10:45 pm #

            What?! Lactivists are not all marching in lock step? Blasphemy!

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:50 am #

            It wasn’t on formula until the lactivists started their public hissy fit meltdown that breastfeeding and breastmilk MUST be every woman’s first choice to feed her baby. And that any mention of formula or even it’s very existence is somehow jeopardizing breastfeeding. That women cannot see, hear about or learn to use formula because it puts women off breastfeeding and we certainly can’t have that, can we?

            That does not make breast always best. It just makes it orders of magnitude harder for a woman worrying about feeding her baby adequately so that they thrive to obtain and feed her baby perfectly good food. Trying to make one option (formula) so difficult to access so that women won’t even try it does not automatically mean that the other option (breastfeeding) will be easier or a more attractive option.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:05 pm #

            If you think it is false to say that “breastfeeding is best” then why aren’t you complaining to the formula industry???
            Again, these are unfounded apologist distortions “breastmilk MUST be every woman’s first choice to feed her baby”, “trying to make formula so difficult to access”, and “women cannot learn to use formula”. Teaching mothers who choose to formula feed how to prepare it properly is a component of breastfeeding advocacy.
            I do not understand your need to cling to this baloney. I do, however, respect your right to believe it.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 9:22 pm #

            Then explain why the lovely swag diaper bags now do not contain formula samples. I was lucky, I got two. One from my OB/hospital and one from my pediatrician. They had diaper rash cream, diapers, a changing pad, a small sample can of formula and coupons for all the previously listed items. As they were from two different offices, they were from two different formula companies. When I left the hospital, I got a couple of pacifiers, diapers, a couple of receiving blankets and some RTF nursette bottles and corresponding nipples. I also took home a hospital grade pump, nipple ointment, extra pump parts, storage bags and bottles, nursing pads and a little soft-sided cooler with a blue ice insert. Plus the LC’s phone number and other contact information. I hated, loathed and despised breastfeeding and it was a major factor in my PPD. The formula I wound up using was neither of the brands I received as samples.

            How is it a bad thing to have these things available for new mothers to take home if they wish? Asking is not “pushing” or “forcing” women into accepting/taking these items and they can always say “no thank you” if they don’t want one. How can that be considered subversive?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 10:25 pm #

            Why aren’t you complaining to the formula industry ? I thought you were the “answer the question” monitor.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:42 pm #

            Because it wasn’t the formula industry who brought that practice to a screeching halt. It was the lactivists and the pro breastfeeding brigade who threw an extended, almighty temper tantrum to stop that practice. Toss in the push for BFHI with the edicts that a mother must sign a form stating that she has been informed of the “risks of formula” each time she requests it AND that a doctor’s order *should* be required before it is dispensed and the nonsense about pacifiers, skin-to-skin and breastfeed within the first hour after birth, well, you have the makings of a disastrous policy.
            So, as question monitor, we have several you still haven’t answered. 1. If Vitamin D isn’t a vitamin, what is it?
            2. How is a pediatrician’s advice to supplement breastfeeding with Vit. D drops undermining breastfeeding?
            3. How does being offered a free swag bag containing some formula samples and other useful baby supplies & coupons a bad thing and/or worthy of banning?
            I know there are more, but we’ll start here.

          • Anna Perch
            September 22, 2016 at 7:15 am #

            “It was the lactivists and the pro breastfeeding brigade who threw an extended, almighty temper tantrum to stop that practice.” What practice did they stop?

            I’m impressed 🙂 “BFHI …mother must sign a form stating that she has been informed of the “risks of formula” each time she requests it AND that a doctor’s order *should* be required before it is dispensed and … pacifiers, skin-to-skin and breastfeed within the first hour after birth”, that actually is included in the BFHI.

          • Charybdis
            September 22, 2016 at 10:07 am #

            You are thick as a brick, aren’t you? The lactivists/pro-breastfeeding brigade finally made hospitals and doctor’s offices STOP offering/handing out diaper bags with formula samples in them. I think you can still get them, but you have to request them directly from the company, whereas they were offered/provided by the hospital/OB/pediatrician. No one was forced to take one if they didn’t want one and they contained other things besides formula samples. Useful things like diapers, diaper rash cream, changing pads, maybe a pacifier, a sample of baby wash, small package of baby wipes and coupons for all those items. Is providing disposable diapers in the bags undermining cloth diapering? Or a baby wipe sample undermining making and using your own?

            The lactivists threw an unholy, extended temper tantrum because putting a small sample can (they weren’t even full size cans) of formula in a gift bag full of useful items was somehow subversive and detrimental to breastfeeding. THOSE CANS HAD TO GO!! It didn’t occur to them to say “No, thank you” when a bag was offered, or that some folks might find the bags useful and be thankful that they were provided. Or that you could accept the bag but not use the formula samples. No, no, no. That wasn’t good enough.

            You seem surprised that I/we here are familiar with the edicts of BFHI. We are familiar with it and many of us could provide you with citiations/links to what it says and the 10 steps contained therein. We do, however, think it is a draconian measure and certainly a Pyrrhic victory for the lactivists.

          • Anna Perch
            September 22, 2016 at 11:18 am #

            What’s wrong with requesting them directly from the company? Is that such a big effort?Why should hospitals and doctors offices be marketing depots for infant formula?

            You seem to be conflating lactivists and new moms. “It didn’t occur to them to say “No, thank you” when a bag was offered”

            Well, I’d hardly call the BFHI recommendations “edicts” or “draconian measures”, but, yes, it is refreshing when someone is familiar with some of actual recommendations, rather than the usual myths.

          • demodocus
            September 22, 2016 at 7:38 am #

            Nothing but mom’s nipple shall pass baby’s lips until 12 months or else DOOM!

          • Who?
            September 22, 2016 at 8:04 am #

            Oh well if doom is at stake.

            No one mentioned doom.

            I’ve totally backflipped.

          • Charybdis
            September 22, 2016 at 9:48 am #

            Pfft! 12 months is amateur league! /sarcasm

          • demodocus
            September 22, 2016 at 9:54 am #

            well, at 12 m, you can started to offer minced organic kale

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:39 pm #

            Well, for a start, the formula industry isn’t making claims on this article, are they now?

          • Anna Perch
            October 16, 2016 at 8:41 pm #

            The partial out of context quotes are so typical. Anyway, the rest, “If you think it is false to say that “breastfeeding is best” then why aren’t you complaining to the formula industry???” They write it on every can.

          • October 17, 2016 at 5:36 am #

            Are the formula industry *making claims* on *this article* It is a simple yes-no question.

          • Wren
            September 22, 2016 at 8:49 am #

            It’s bad for the same reason that offering epidurals to women in labour is bad. Anything that might tempt a woman from the path of righteousness (natural birth, breastfeeding, attachment parenting) is bad.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:39 pm #

            We don’t need to cling to it. That’s why we’re begging you to show us the evidence.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:38 pm #

            No, it’s.

            “All else equal, breast is best.” but the thing is? ALL ELSE IS NEVER EQUAL.

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 12:12 pm #

            That’s not rhetoric, that’s a logical conclusion. If there are only two options, and one of them is inferior, that means the other is better. That’s how comparison works.

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 12:40 pm #

            All other things being equal and good, breastmilk is absolutely better. Things are not always equal and good.

            If mom needs medication that could harm the baby, then formula is better than her breastmilk. If trying to breastfeed is destroying her mental health or keeping her from getting any sleep, then formula is better. If the breastmilk is unscreened milk acquired from a stranger over the Internet, then formula is about a billion times better.

            I breastfed all three of my kids. My older two tandem fed, and my oldest and youngest both nursed until around age four. I love breastfeeding and think every mother should try it – same as I recommend my favourite books to everyone. I’ve done the breastfeeding thing pretty much perfectly by lactivist standards, but that does not make me a superior mother than any of my friends who fed formula. Truth be told, some of them are better than me.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 12:53 pm #

            Breastfeeding not absolutely better, though. Even when all things are equal, it’s not so much better that it can be called “absolutely” better. “Marginally”, maybe.

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

            Absolutely marginally better? Meh, I absolutely believe there are benefits, but it’s not a big deal, not like car seats or back-sleeping or vaccines which are big deals and I will think badly of a mother who chooses not to bother using a carseat correctly,but not a mom who chooses formula for whatever reason (and no, I don’t need to know her reasons).

          • corblimeybot
            October 23, 2016 at 11:19 pm #

            Yeah, but if it’s marginal, it’s not worth even really talking about. If breastfed children turn out impossible to differentiate from formula-fed children, the benefits are so marginal they might as well not exist.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

            Even PROBIT and the discordant sibling study had confounders. :p

            Breastfeeding has certain advantages in certain circumstances. Formula has certain advantages in certain circumstances. One isn’t better than the other.

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 2:15 pm #

            That’s really the deal. Imagine how much misery women could avoid, if we could all just acknowledge that

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 1:06 pm #

            And I got off track there and sound argumentative. That was directed at both you and Anne. My point was that it is possible to love breastfeeding and believe in it and support/encourage it without stomping all over formula feeders. What happens in lactivist communities (and I’ve been in many) is not how to do that. They are full of misinformation and shaming, the latter often appearing in the guise of pity.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 5:40 pm #

            ” it is possible to love breastfeeding and believe in it and support/encourage it without stomping all over formula feeders”
            Actually, I don’t think so. I have not said anything negative about people who use formula, and yet because I have said that there are measurable risks to using formula (that people deserve to be aware of), I am treated like a pariah who “stomps all over” formula feeders and who thrives on shaming others.
            My point is, when breastfeeding is spoken about in honest terms, apologists will perceive “shaming of formula feeders” even when it is not there.
            This discussion stands as evidence to that.

          • momofone
            September 21, 2016 at 5:43 pm #

            This discussion stands as evidence of many things (most of which you choose to ignore), but not that.

          • Who?
            September 21, 2016 at 6:02 pm #

            There are no known risks of formula feeding. Stop making stuff up. Or if you’re going to make stuff up, at least try to be entertaining.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 6:11 pm #

            “There are no known risks of formula feeding” well, that is made up stuff that isn’t very entertaining. Practice what you preach?

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 6:25 pm #

            That statement is not made up, nor is it an example of magical thinking that lactivist apologists like to make.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 6:16 pm #

            “because I have said that there are measurable risks to using formula (that people deserve to be aware of), ”

            No, it’s because you make that blanket assertion and refuse to provide any evidence at all of it. And when presented with high-quality published evidence in direct contradiction to that blanket assertion, you ignore it and say ‘potato’ (which is delicious with butter and garlic, but utterly tangential).

          • D/
            September 21, 2016 at 6:48 pm #

            And yet at my house the potato evidence is clear. Breast IS always best … with butter and garlic 😀

            https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/287e7cb8b799f6395e3c5b8640d3794bac10006287f75858db65c5440120e130.jpg

          • Michael McCarthy
            September 21, 2016 at 7:37 pm #

            Anna Perch has decided to Barzini. (I got to use your new verb in a sentence!!)

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 8:24 pm #

            Congratulations!

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:32 pm #

            Hey, if you believe that since exercise is recommended then people who do not exercise are inferior to people who do exercise, that is not logical.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 1:37 pm #

            Exercise is good, just like a fed baby is good. What you’re doing is saying that running is inherently better than cycling because our ancestors didn’t have bicycles, rather than noting that each has advantages and disadvantages that prevent a blanket determination of superiority for one versus the other.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:24 pm #

            “What you’re doing is ..” You are not very good at listening.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:37 pm #

            You are exceedingly poor at communicating. We’ve given you plenty of opportunity to give a clear statement and to give citations to back up your assertions, and you just wander off on a tangent and/or attempt to be snarky.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:07 pm #

            My statement are candid, clear, terse and as pointed out, lacking in fuzzy warmth. If they do not make good sense to you, then you need to read more carefully and maybe put a little tiny bit of effort into opening your mind to another’s point of view.

          • swbarnes2
            September 21, 2016 at 3:25 pm #

            Where is your clear evidence for your factual claims about the overwhelmingly wonderful benefits of breastmilk? You were asked for them over and over again.

            You have none, because you are fundamentally dishonest, and don’t even see anything wrong with that.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 6:20 pm #

            Your statements are, sometimes, terse. What they are not is clear. I could give fewer shits than I make on a given day if they are warm or not.

            You have said there are risks to formula. We have given you citations and summaries of cited papers to show that there are no risks to properly prepared formula in term infants. I checked out the link to SBM, and you were given more of the same there.

            If you want to be clear:
            1: State a proven risk (specific and quantifiable) to properly prepared formula in term infants
            2: Cite at least one published peer-reviewed paper in support of that risk.
            3: Repeat 1 for as many proven risks as you think exist.

            I really can’t spoon-feed you Communication In Reality any more than that.

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:17 pm #

            It’s not about whether they make good sense or not. It’s about whether the evidence supports your claims. Do you have any?

          • Anna Perch
            October 11, 2016 at 8:54 pm #

            I believe that is called changing the goal posts?

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:36 pm #

            A) The logical fallacy is called “moving the goalposts.”

            B)We asked you for evidence, originally. Pointing out that you *missed* the goal and didn’t actually score in the first place doesn’t move the goalposts.

            C)You’re the one who moved the goalposts by responding “it makes good sense” when asked for evidence.

          • Wren
            September 21, 2016 at 3:52 pm #

            I think I found the problem with your explanation there Nick, or at least why Anna can’t see it. Logic.

          • swbarnes2
            September 20, 2016 at 2:11 pm #

            Well, yes. We do shame and degrade people who make factual claims and refuse to back them up with evidence. If you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

            If you want to stay in the kitchen, cite the well-controlled studies that back up your claims. It’s easy as pie to cite evidence that shows no health differences between formula feeding and breastfeeding. See, here: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077166/

            Took me 5 seconds. You’ve been here for days, why can’t you do what I did in 5 seconds? What honest person would balk at providing evidence for their claims?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:54 pm #

            “We do shame and degrade people who make factual claims and refuse to back them up with evidence.” OK

          • swbarnes2
            September 20, 2016 at 2:56 pm #

            Well, good we are in agreement. This board is for people who are intellectually honest and you aren’t.

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:55 pm #

            What about your lactivist apologist ideology?

            And not allowing lactivists to get on their soapboxes and pontificate about inaccurate science and wild overestimations about breastmilk DOES make that group better than other groups for the women who are looking for evidence-based support with PPD and other issues.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:04 pm #

            “wild overestimations”, by that you mean anything that suggests that formula is not on par with breastfeeding?

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 3:13 pm #

            Yup

    • demodocus
      September 19, 2016 at 3:00 pm #

      and we thank you for it. Though I found the fb group less troublesome. Maybe cause noone said anything directly to me?

      • BeatriceC
        September 19, 2016 at 3:10 pm #

        I think that the facebook issue was inherently less troublesome, however with my issues with confrontation, having to go be an admin and shut it down took more out of me than this did. Also, you were right in the thick of things here, where I was just reading.

        And you guys are the reason I do it. I’m long past my days of having an infant. But helping make the lives of younger mothers better with resources that weren’t available to me is something that gives me great joy. Selfishly, I’m also hoping that working to make your lives better will help my sons and their future wives when they have children. Every ounce of misery I went through yesterday shutting that crap down was worth it, and I’d do it again in a heartbeat.

        • demodocus
          September 19, 2016 at 3:29 pm #

          “younger” mother makes me laugh, since I’m 39, but the implied “newer” is certainly accurate. 🙂

          • BeatriceC
            September 19, 2016 at 3:32 pm #

            Mothers of younger kids, I think, is what I was aiming for. Though you’re technically younger than me, so there.

    • Bombshellrisa
      September 19, 2016 at 3:21 pm #

      Have you covered depression and anxiety during pregnancy? It’s a topic that needs to be addressed, although even healthcare providers can have a hard time addressing it properly.

      • BeatriceC
        September 19, 2016 at 3:23 pm #

        The name of the group indicates that we just deal with PPD and PPA, but we also accept women who have prenatal mental health issues and women with older kids who have mental health issues as well. We also accept women who have had life long mental health issues and not necessarily a result of having kids. A better name might be “maternal mental health”, but it did start out as just PPD/A. We’re growing at a huge rate, so we must be doing something right.

        • Bombshellrisa
          September 19, 2016 at 3:28 pm #

          That is awesome! I wish I would have been part of this group during pregnancy.

          • BeatriceC
            September 19, 2016 at 3:35 pm #

            We started it a while ago but it never took off until about two months ago, when one of the other admins really kicked it into gear. We went from 23 members two months ago to over 800 today, and the admins get daily comments and messages thanking us for what we (mostly that one other admin…I play a supporting role, but it’s “her” group) do. So far we’ve had several intense situations where we’ve been able to make a positive difference, and dozens of women who are just incredibly thankful to have a group that’s not full of woo and is honest about the realities of motherhood and mood disorders.

          • Mary Guralnyk
            September 20, 2016 at 3:05 am #

            Hi there Beatrice, is there a way I could get in touch regarding that group?

    • corblimeybot
      September 19, 2016 at 5:38 pm #

      I am in that group, and it’s probably the best FB group I’ve ever been in. One of the best internet spaces I’ve been a member of, honestly. You’re doing a fantastic job.

      • BeatriceC
        September 19, 2016 at 6:22 pm #

        Thanks! We’ve had some growing pains, but we are trying our hardest to make it a safe, welcoming place for the greatest number of women.

    • Maud Pie
      September 19, 2016 at 9:37 pm #

      I am so grateful to read this. As I worked my way out of PPD I developed a clear understanding of how my breastfeeding difficulties and the pressure from the LC and XH exacerbated it, and how switching to formula saved me and my baby. While I gained insights I was horrified at the lactavism fanatics’ staunch refusal to even acknowledge the connection. That’s why I’m so outraged at Perch’s insistence on silencing mothers who have experienced this. Responsible breastfeeding supporters would understand and accept this reality. Only a reckless fanatic would see it as a heresy that must be stamped out.

      • BeatriceC
        September 19, 2016 at 10:39 pm #

        Your story is unfortunately not unique. That’s why I put so much effort into my group. We may not change the world, but we can be a voice of reason and evidence based support for the women who do find us, and that can change the world for those women and their families.

        First and foremost, we believe women when they tell us what their experiences are. That’s the first step towards changing the status quo.

        • Anna Perch
          September 20, 2016 at 11:47 am #

          Some formula feeders suggests that they support “all moms”, presuming that breastfeeders only support other breastfeeders. It is interesting to note that you are attempting to create a postpartum group that alienates those who breastfeeding or at least tries to silence them.

          • Heidi
            September 20, 2016 at 11:59 am #

            You’re just making stuff up now. Beatrice did not say she was making a group that alienates those who breastfeed. Lactivists are not always breast feeders (um, Jack Newman comes to mind) and breast feeders are mostly not lactivists.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 12:31 pm #

            Well, she surely did not say that she takes a hardline approach to rudeness or incivility. She said she takes a hardline approach to rooting out lactivism.
            Lactivism is often perceived to be anything that suggests that formula has risks. If formula does have risks, then her group is censoring truth.

          • Heidi
            September 20, 2016 at 12:34 pm #

            Properly prepared formula doesn’t have any unique risks that breast milk doesn’t. We’ve asked to see these risks and you haven’t provided us with anything. If someone is telling a woman suffering through PPD that she is risking her baby by giving him appropriate formula s/he should be thrown right out.

          • Daleth
            September 20, 2016 at 12:40 pm #

            And actually, breast milk has risks that formula doesn’t. Here’s just one example: a woman who has plenty of milk and no trouble nursing can still give her baby bone damage if she happens to be deficient in vitamin D:

            http://www.nytimes.com/2008/08/26/health/research/26rick.html

            That won’t happen if you use formula, because formula has all the vitamin D babies need.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 12:43 pm #

            Yup. Vitamin D, a common apologist talking point.

          • swbarnes2
            September 20, 2016 at 1:01 pm #

            See this is the kind of person you are. The argument is true, and you literally don’t care.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:21 pm #

            It is true that vitamin D is a common apologist talking point. It is also true that vitamin D is not a vitamin.
            I suppose I should be flattered that I am the kind of person who speaks truth?

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:35 pm #

            Vitamin D is a vitamin. A fat soluble one. What, pray tell, do you think it is?

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 11:32 am #

            I keep thinking of the line from Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are dead: “Just a conspiracy of cartographers?” Our devastatingly smart commenter Anna here really thinks that the basic existence of Vitamin D… is a conspiracy… of formula… apologists? I couldn’t make this up if I were trying to do a lactivist Poe!

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 12:13 pm #

            Wait ’til she learns about DHA.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 1:59 pm #

            But even IF it wasn’t a vitamin, it still doesn’t negate the danger of vitamin D deficiency.
            You are, once again, just trying to avoid the topic because you are wrong and don’t have any proof to support any of your claims.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 7:54 pm #

            Are you suggesting that Vitamin D deficiency is a sham concocted by pro-choice feeders to discredit breastfeeding?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 8:25 pm #

            Ooo, you got me. I almost said that Vitamin D deficiency is not a scam.

            But, yes, the assertion that breastmilk is deficient in vitamin D IS a talking point of so called “pro-choice” feeders, which they use to undermine breastfeeding.

          • FEDUP MD
            September 20, 2016 at 9:10 pm #

            Do you know what rickets is? Have you ever seen it? I have.

            Yea, breastmilk is deficient in vitamin D. I, like many other breastfeeding women, just gave Vitamin D drops. No biggie.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 9:44 am #

            That must be why my pediatrician told me “If you’re exclusively breastfeeding (which I was), it’s probably a good idea to give these vitamin D supplements, especially since your baby was born in the winter months.” It didn’t discourage or undermine me. Why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 9:55 am #

            As a general rule, pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding. Many do.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 10:00 am #

            That would be an example of a lactivist talking point. Telling people to ignore their doctor’s advice is a good idea why?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 10:52 am #

            Except that I did not say or imply anything of the sort. it is that kind of word twisting that makes apologists untrustworthy.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 11:06 am #

            “Pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding.” How exactly did I twist your words?

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:24 am #

            You also did not answer the question. Let’s refresh your memory. MaineJen asked “why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?” To which you replied: ” As a general rule pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding. Many do”. You answered in a non sequitur that has no bearing on the actual question.

            In no way did you answer the question. So again, why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 5:31 pm #

            When you “refresh my memory”, you seem to invent a story line that does not match up with the original comments.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 6:39 pm #

            Here is MaineJen’s post from above. I have conveniently copied and pasted it VERBATIM here for you, so you don’t have to scroll back up.

            **************************************************
            That must be why my pediatrician told me “If you’re exclusively breastfeeding (which I was), it’s probably a good idea to give these vitamin D supplements, especially since your baby was born in the winter months.” It didn’t discourage or undermine me. Why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement? (MaineJen)
            *************************************************

            This was your retort, again copied and pasted so you don’t have to scroll back up.

            *****************************************************
            As a general rule, pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding. Many do. (Anna)
            ******************************************************

            My response to you. Again, no scrolling necessary.

            ****************************************************
            ou also did not answer the question. Let’s refresh your memory. MaineJen asked “why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?” To which you replied: ” As a general rule pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding. Many do”. You answered in a non sequitur that has no bearing on the actual question.

            In no way did you answer the question. So again, why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement? (Charybdis)
            *****************************************************
            And your final post, right above this one. Again, I’ve done the work for you.

            *****************************************************
            When you “refresh my memory”, you seem to invent a story line that does not match up with the original comments (Anna)
            ****************************************************

            This brings us to two things. One, what part of my “refresh your memory” post is the invented part that does not match up with the original comments. Two, ANSWER MAINEJEN’S QUESTION: Why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 8:23 pm #

            I will not play this game again. It is a waste of space and my time. If you attempt “to refresh my memory” again, I will assume you are just being malevolent. [anything in brackets is commentary]

            D And actually, breast milk has risks that formula doesn’t. Here’s just one example: a woman who has plenty of milk and no trouble nursing can still give her baby bone damage if she happens to be deficient in vitamin D: [con’t]
            AP Yup. Vitamin D, a common apologist talking point.
            SB [insults, no substance]
            AP It is true that vitamin D is a common apologist talking point. It is also true that vitamin D is not a vitamin.
            MP Are you suggesting that Vitamin D deficiency is a sham concocted by pro-choice feeders to discredit breastfeeding?
            AP Ooo, you got me. I almost said that Vitamin D deficiency is not a scam.
            But, yes, the assertion that breastmilk is deficient in vitamin D IS a talking point of so called “pro-choice” feeders, which they use to undermine breastfeeding.
            MJ [the part I responded to]That must be why my pediatrician told me “If you’re exclusively breastfeeding (which I was), it’s probably a good idea to give these vitamin D supplements, especially since your baby was born in the winter months.”
            [the part I did not respond to] It didn’t discourage or undermine me. Why would it undermine someone to have to give a vitamin supplement?
            AP As a general rule, pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding. Many do.
            MJ That would be an example of a lactivist talking point. Telling people to ignore their doctor’s advice is a good idea why?
            AP Except that I did not say or imply anything of the sort. it is that kind of word twisting that makes apologists untrustworthy.
            CB You answered in a non sequitur that has no bearing on the actual question.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 9:41 pm #

            You still didn’t answer the question. Why would you think a pediatrician who recommended Vitamin D drops to a breastfeeding mother to use to supplement her child didn’t know much about breastfeeding and that the recommendation would somehow undermine MaineJen’s breastfeeding?

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 11:28 am #

            Was your implication not that people should ignore doctors advice on the subject of vitamin d in breastfed children because it’s just an apologist talking point? If you’re aware that it’s a real thing and the doctors are correct, then what possibly could your objection be to people being informed of it?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 11:39 am #

            Nope. You inferred that.

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 12:16 pm #

            My bad then. Though I’m sure you can see where people got the idea from your insistence on it being an apologist talking point combined with “as a general rule, pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding.”

            Your repetitive claim of “apologist talking point” makes it sound as if you are dismissing the issue of risk of vitamin d deficiency as either unimportant or untrue – either way, as something that should not be talked about so much. If this is not what you intended, then please explain just what was your point?

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 12:17 pm #

            Vaccine?

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 12:23 pm #

            Oops. Catching glimpses of comment below while made me think of them and suffered from word creep. Not enough coffee.

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 12:24 pm #

            I was wondering, because if she was antivax, too, the gloves were coming off.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 12:44 pm #

            Given her level of understanding of immunology displayed in the SBM comments, I wouldn’t be surprised if she is a ‘breastmilk does more than vaccination’ type.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:28 pm #

            This is the deal, you are assuming that I am making up a bunch of fictions, so you believe that the only way to find out more about these alleged fictions is to pester me until I “confess” or reveal them. I am stating to you that nearly every thing I have said can be discovered online by anyone who has any desire at all to learn.
            If breastmilk is naturally dangerously low in vitamin D, ask yourself, how did the human race survive? How are humans supposed to get vitamin D if not from food?
            Suggesting that breastmilk is inherently deficient in vitamin D is a talking point that apologists (and the formula industry) use to cast doubt on the reliability of breastfeeding. As with most well crafted propaganda, these is some semblance of truth to the rhetoric. But it is deliberately misleading. The premise that breastmilk is routinely inadequate in vitamin D, or iron, or volume, or whatever else, undermines breastfeeding by increases mothers skepticism about whether or not her milk is “enough”. It is fear mongering.
            When you stretch what I have said to mean that I am dismissing the risk or denying that people do experience vitamin D deficiencies, or even rickets, that is disingenuous.

          • momofone
            September 21, 2016 at 1:30 pm #

            No, you make the claim, you provide the evidence. Been waiting a while on those citations.

          • Sarah
            September 21, 2016 at 1:42 pm #

            Is she Brooke in disguise?

          • Heidi
            September 21, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

            It seems like Brooke will say something stupid then run off never to return to say anything else about it. Anna just keeps digging herself deeper into the hole, reinforcing what she claims is an untrue stereotype over and over and over.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:00 pm #

            Ha! Simulpost!

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:00 pm #

            Ha! Simulpost!

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 1:59 pm #

            Their styles seem different to me. Brooke is vacuous and comment-shy, posting something hugely dumb and/or nonsensical and then running off. Anna Perch _wants_ to be cutting and nasty, like she resents the fact that this isn’t high school anymore and wants to still be a Mean Girl in the Cool Club. She hasn’t realized that we’re in the adult world now, and the Mean Girl stuff just sounds silly and nobody cares what club you’re in.

          • Sarah
            September 21, 2016 at 2:10 pm #

            Also in all fairness to Anna, she hasn’t cast anyone’s infertility up to them yet.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:12 pm #

            True – but on the other hand, it hasn’t come up yet. I’ll take a wait-and-see approach.

          • Sarah
            September 21, 2016 at 2:22 pm #

            Hmm. Let’s reconvene this time next week.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:23 pm #

            My people will talk to your people.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 5:28 pm #

            “Mean Girl” is the whole gist of Skeptical OB’s page!

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 21, 2016 at 2:51 pm #

            She is clearly older than Brooke. Brooke appears to have finally moved beyond her “SAT preparation” phase, but that was still not that long ago.

          • Sarah
            September 21, 2016 at 3:27 pm #

            That works on a number of levels because in the UK, we take SATs in primary school.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 1:35 pm #

            “If breastmilk is naturally dangerously low in Vitamin D, ask yourself, how did the human race survive?”

            With a lot of death and rickets. Evolution isn’t perfect, it’s ‘good enough.’ It doesn’t care if a high percentage of babies die, it doesn’t care if a lot of children suffer, it just cares that enough babies survive to reproductive age to pop out a stable or increasing population.

            Evolution isn’t the reason humans are so successful these days. It’s because we’ve used our big brains (that make childbirth painful and often deadly) to improve on what evolution had stumbled blindly towards.

            This was all explained to you in painstaking detail over at SBM. Did you think you were hitting the Reset button on reality by going to another site?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:16 pm #

            So, you have no curiosity, no interest in learning, you just want to cling to your fixed notions.

          • momofone
            September 21, 2016 at 3:35 pm #

            We’ve all but begged you to teach us by sharing your vast stores of scientific citations, but you still refuse. Show us which fixed notions we should change, based on scientific findings.

          • indigo_sky
            September 21, 2016 at 2:16 pm #

            “If breastmilk is naturally dangerously low in vitamin D, ask yourself, how did the human race survive? How are humans supposed to get vitamin D if not from food?”

            From sunlight. The natural source of vitamin D has never been food or breastmilk – it’s sunlight.

            Well, except perhaps the Inuit. As human beings moved farther from the intense sun of the equator, we evolved lighter skin to better absorb what our bodies needed to make vitamin D. The Inuit kept fairly dark skin despite living as about as far from the equator as possible because they have a whole lot of fish in their diet so really did get vitamin D mainly from diet.

            For everyone else though, diet was never enough for sufficient vitamin D. That’s why rickets became such a problem during the industrial revolution when smog and factory work and such really began keeping people out of the sun.

            I live fairly far north in Canada. Vitamin D is a real issue here, and the lack of it causes health problems (it’s even suspected to be contribute to why our rates of MS are so much higher than farther south, though that has not been proven, to my knowledge).

            Even in Florida though, with babies kept under beach umbreallas and stroller canopies and in large floppy hats with long sleeves and then high power sunscreen, vitamin D can be an issue.

            It’s not so much that breastmilk is deficient as that our lives are now deficient in sunlight and so vitamin D must be added to formula and should be supplemented for breastfed infants.

            As I mentioned, I’m in Canada, where it’s a big issue and new parents are spammed with info about the importance of supplementing it. And yet, our breastfeeding rates are still higher than in the states. Of course, that probably has a lot to do with paid maternity leave, but still, pushing vitamin D is certainly not undermining breastfeeding here.

            I am not suggesting you are dismissing or denying that some people suffer from vitamin D deficiency or even, rarely, so severally that they develop rickets. What I am suggesting is that you are dismissing the real risk of vitamin D deficiency in breastfed infants as “fearmongering” and implying that it should not be talked about and that doctors should not push vitamin D drops because because those things undermine breastfeeding.

            If I am wrong, and you agree that parents need to be informed of the risk of vitamin D deficiency and should supplement with vitamin D drops, then please again explain what your point was insisting over and over that it was a “formula apologist talking point” and also how you felt “As a general rule, pediatricians do not know a lot about breastfeeding,” fit into this particular thread and what you meant people to take from that.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:25 pm #

            “From sunlight. The natural source of vitamin D has never been food or breastmilk – it’s sunlight.” Thank you.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 5:26 pm #

            When the vitamin D issue is presented this way it is scare mongering and suggests to mothers that there is something wrong with their milk. It undermines her confidence and lessens her resolve:
            “breast milk has risks that formula doesn’t. Here’s just one example: a woman who has plenty of milk and no trouble nursing can still give her baby bone damage if she happens to be deficient in vitamin D”

            It should be presented as: People in northern climates often do not get enough exposure to sunlight, so vitamin D supplementation is recommended.

            It has nothing to do with breastfeeding.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 21, 2016 at 2:49 pm #

            If breastmilk is naturally dangerously low in vitamin D, ask yourself, how did the human race survive?

            If drunk driving is dangerous, how can millions of people drive drunk each year without an accident?

            How many dead babies are acceptable as long as we are perpetuating the species?

          • Amy Tuteur, MD
            September 21, 2016 at 3:04 pm #

            “If breastmilk is naturally dangerously low in vitamin D, ask yourself, how did the human race survive?”

            The same exact way it survived a natural miscarriage rate of 20%.

          • An Actual Attorney
            September 21, 2016 at 5:22 pm #

            If 95% of cheetah cubs don’t survive (which is the actual mortality rate for them), how are cheetahs even a thing? http://www1.ucsc.edu/oncampus/currents/98-99/08-10/cheetah.feed.htm

          • momofone
            September 21, 2016 at 5:23 pm #

            Prove it.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 21, 2016 at 10:26 am #

            Aside from the total bullshit nature of the claim, the other thing is that pediatricians DO know a lot about sick babies. And they aren’t going to ignore sickness just because the baby is breastfed.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 6:00 pm #

            “There are mothers who want to breastfeed and trust the health care system to help them continue when in fact, they are frequently left feeling guilty for not breastfeeding, feeling that they “failed” or feeling that they “couldn’t” breastfeed for medical reasons.” Agree?

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 6:21 pm #

            Is there a reason couldn’t is in scare quotes? It’s my understanding that there are some people who cannot breastfeed, for medical reasons.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 22, 2016 at 9:50 am #

            I agree that many women are set up to believe that breastfeeding is easy (“easy, cheap and convenient” right?) and that if they happen to discover that it isn’t easy for them, or even not possible for medical reason, they are left feeling guilty and that they have failed.

            But the problem there lies with the ones who set them up in the first place.

            Doctors will tell them, “It is ok if you don’t breastfeed, you can formula feed instead.” And you think THAT is the problem?

            Who are the ones sending the message that they have failed if they don’t breastfeed? Not the doctors.

          • Anna Perch
            September 22, 2016 at 11:34 am #

            Yes, non-lactivist doctors and healthcare workers.

            “Mothers are left feeling frustrated and devastated because they desired to breastfeed and due to the lack of qualified help or incorrect medical advice they begin to see breastfeeding as “unreliable,” “painful” and “potentially dangerous” and ultimately its importance as “exaggerated.”

            Some of those women, who wanted to breastfeed but were told that they couldn’t, find the experience traumatizing and they expend their anger online in discussions about infant feeding. Oftentimes they blame the people who are working the hardest to improve the quality of lactation knowledge and practice and align with those who devalue it. It’s not unlike the Fox and the Grapes. I couldn’t have it, so it couldn’t have been that good.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 22, 2016 at 1:40 pm #

            Yes, non-lactivist doctors and healthcare workers.

            Nonsense. The “non-lactivist” doctors tell them that it is ok if you don’t breastfeed. That is the exact OPPOSITE of calling them a failure.

            they begin to see breastfeeding as “unreliable,” “painful” and “potentially dangerous” and ultimately its importance as “exaggerated.”

            You are a piece of work. Women don’t see breastfeeding as “unreliable” or “painful” because of what their doctor told them, they come to realize that, despite what they were told by their lactation loons, they are finding breastfeeding to unreliable, painful, or just plain not working.

            Why do you think they are asking the doctor about it in the first place? You don’t go to the doctor and say, “Breastfeeding is peachy!” and have him respond with “Oh it’s painful and unreliable!” They aren’t going to the doctor for lack of desire, but because they are having problems. And the doctor says, “It’s ok, you don’t have to breastfeed.”

            OF COURSE they are devastated, because they have been led to believe that breastfeeding is the most important thing in the world and they are failing their child if they don’t do it. Who told them that in the first place?*** Those are the people who are causing the problem.

            ***Folks like you, that’s who

          • Heidi
            September 22, 2016 at 1:54 pm #

            That couldn’t be better said!

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 12:11 pm #

            Yup. My ped and the NICU insisted on vitamin D and iron supplements for my breastfed preemies. The iron was because of their prematurity, but the vit. D was because of the breastfeeding and being born in the dead of winter in a cold climate.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 21, 2016 at 10:15 am #

            But, yes, the assertion that breastmilk is deficient in vitamin D IS a talking point of so called “pro-choice” feeders, which they use to undermine breastfeeding.

            Perhaps, but the more important question is, is it not true?

            I noticed in all your blathering about “apologists” you haven’t actually countered the claim that vitamin D deficiency is a risk of breastfeeding.

          • FEDUP MD
            September 20, 2016 at 9:08 pm #

            Vitamin D is not a vitamin? In what world?

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 11:56 am #

            So, are you gonna answer FEDUP MD’s question or not?

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:58 am #

            I’m betting on “NOT”.

            ‘Cause you know that’s how she is.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:56 pm #

            Yes, I said that and I also said, “I do not think it is acceptable to have a mother sign a piece of paper saying that she is “putting her child at risk” period. ”
            Are you being deliberately obtuse or can you seriously not see the difference?

          • Nick Sanders
            September 21, 2016 at 6:20 pm #

            You said what? The question was, “If Vitamin D is not a vitamin, what is it?”. I’m not being deliberately obtuse, and I don’t know what “difference” you are talking about, but I did not see you answer the question anywhere.

          • shay simmons
            September 21, 2016 at 8:09 pm #

            You certainly are flattering yourself if you think you’re the kind of person who speaks the truth.

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:13 pm #

            What do you think Vitamin D is then?

            A vegetable?

          • Anna Perch
            October 11, 2016 at 9:46 pm #

            Post more questions and I’ll get back to you when I can.

          • Maud Pie
            September 20, 2016 at 1:32 pm #

            This isn’t about facts, it’s about blaspheming the Holy Name of Breast Milk.

          • Daleth
            September 21, 2016 at 2:29 am #

            It’s a common talking point because it’s a common condition (google “vitamin D deficiency America women” to get stats) and can be devastating to babies. And surely that’s the important point–that breast milk actually can harm babies? In other words, breast is NOT in fact always best?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 12:43 pm #

            Why do you think women with PPD should be thrown out and what have I said that makes you think I’d agree?
            Yes, as I have said, you can believe anything that you want. Moon is made of cream cheese, whatever.
            It is absolutely fascinating to me how ridiculous the assumptions you make about me are. All because I say that breastfeeding matters and it is not nice to generalize.

          • Heidi
            September 20, 2016 at 12:52 pm #

            See, Anna, you never counter with facts. You say crap like, “You can believe the moon is made of cream cheese.” You just talk around any valid points anyone makes. If I did believe the moon was made of cream cheese, by the way, I don’t think I could hurt anyone with that belief. I’m having a hard time imagining a scenario where I’d induce guilt, shame, or encourage a person to do something that is affecting them negatively.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:13 pm #

            Did you just say that stating my belief, that there is compelling evidence that breastfeeding matters, hurts people??!

            Have I encouraged you to breastfeed? Have I encouraged anyone here to breastfeed?
            How is stating a belief in science related to inducing guilt and shame in others?
            Where have I encouraged anyone to do something that is affecting them negatively?
            Where have encouraged anyone to do anything other than stop generalizing, dissing, stereotyping, or sharing misinformation?

          • Heidi
            September 20, 2016 at 1:28 pm #

            Last time I am communicating with you. You said, “Yes, formula feeding has risks. Yes, formula fed babies are more likely to die.” You’ve said formula has significant risks. We’ve asked you for the data that proper formula feeding in a full term infant can be directly attributed to more deaths. You won’t give us your sources. You think women should be FORCED to sign a box that they are giving a baby an inferior product if they choose not to breastfeed. Your beliefs aren’t based in good science. If they were, you’d post this good science in a heartbeat. You think people should be given the negatives of FF and the positives of BF and nothing else as far as I can tell.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:40 pm #

            Thank you.

          • Nick Sanders
            September 20, 2016 at 1:54 pm #

            Stating your belief? No. Being an utter jackass about that belief? Yes.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:13 pm #

            Well, maybe you waited until I shared my belief multiple times before you starting making assumptions, but others jumped right in.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 7:35 pm #

            Again with the reading comprehension fail. The women with PPD wouldn’t be the ones being thrown out. The pro-breastfeeders/lactivists who give her the line that she is risking her baby by feeding formula are the ones who are invited not to stay.

          • swbarnes2
            September 20, 2016 at 12:47 pm #

            For the hundreth time show those risks. For instance, here’s a paper where one method of feeding has a 11x higher risk of sending the baby back to the hospital for neonatal dehydration. This is the kind of thing you need to be citing.

            http://archpedi.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=191546

          • rosewater1
            September 20, 2016 at 12:57 pm #

            It appears from the description that the women involved haven’t gotten adequate support from breastfeeders. Why is having a group where those who have suffered trauma alienating? And besides…since it’s a closed group how would you know?

            You appear to be painting with a very broad brush in this situation. And your combative and at times downright nasty attitude and words can hardly be seen as supportive.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:45 pm #

            She did not say it was a group explicitly for those who had difficulty with breastfeeding (maybe it is), she said it is a PPD/PPA group. She also said that people who speak out positively about breastfeeding aka lactivists are silenced. Isn’t that alienating?

            Can hardly be supportive of what?

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:52 pm #

            Support of breastfeeding is fine. Support of formula feeding is fine. Support for combo feeding is fine. Support to want to STOP breastfeeding is fine, although I think you would argue that point and try to “support” and “educate” and “encourage” to continue breastfeeding when they have indicated they want to stop.

            Lactivists need not apply. If you are looking for a lactivist echo chamber where you will receive all the kudos and congratulations you wish, I suggest you check out Meg Nagle. She’s another of you cut from the same cloth.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:55 pm #

            “Lactivists need not apply. “

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:59 pm #

            Damn straight. Check your lactivist ideology at the door please.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:02 pm #

            Exclusively for promotion of formula apologist ideology.

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 6:06 pm #

            I’m not a formula apologist because there is nothing formula needs to apologize for. In fact, I don’t care how someone feeds their baby, either by breastmilk/breastfeeding or by formula feeding in any of the myriad ways you can feed formula. If I see a mom breastfeeding in public, I don’t bat an eye. Nor do I go out of my way to congratulate her or give her kudos for feeding her baby. If I see a mom using a bottle to feed her baby, I don’t bat an eye or go out of my way to congratulate her or give kudos for feeding her baby. Nor do I feel it necessary to ask her about why she is not breastfeeding, tell her that she is harming her child by feeding formula, or trying to “educate” or “inform” her about breastmilk. That’s how it is supposed to work. No apologizing necessary or required.

            So, not sure why you keep droning on and on and on about “formula apologists” because you are a “lactivist apologist”.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 6:40 pm #

            You’ve completely missed my point. On a person by person basis, I don’t care how someone feeds their baby, either by breastmilk/breastfeeding or by formula feeding in any of the myriad ways you can feed formula. If I see a mom breastfeeding in public, I don’t bat an eye, but I might go out of my way to congratulate her or give her kudos for feeding her baby. If I see a mom using a bottle to feed her baby, I don’t bat an eye nor do I ever ask her about why she is not breastfeeding, tell her that she is harming her child by feeding formula, or trying to “educate” or “inform” her about breastmilk. If I know her I will ask if she would like me to feed the baby.
            My objection is to formula apologism (nothing to do with regret), not the use of formula. Big difference.
            Formula apologists (such as Skeptical OB) routinely disparage people who speak out in favor of breastfeeding, they try to censor information about breastfeeding, they share misinformation about formula (it is only trivially lesser than breastmilk), and share misinformation about lactivism (this is endless, I’m not even gonna try to pick one to highlight, read the thread). Frankly, I do not see how anyone can participate in that kind of behavior. Even I don’t stoop that low.

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 7:40 pm #

            The hell you don’t. This thread is full of you stooping that low.

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 20, 2016 at 8:15 pm #

            Are you a regular reader? Do you actually read, sit back and take in what you are reading before you start typing? This blog has never shared misinformation about breastfeeding or formula. The only reason anyone talks about lactivists is when they show up with both barrels blazing and have nothing logical to say. The only people “speaking out in favor of breastfeeding” here want to make a point that they support breastfeeding, usually done in a belligerent fashion, people who are so fragile that they require validation and kuddos for their bodily functions and situation in life making breastfeeding a choice that works for them. The people you label as apologists are the ones who figure fed is best.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 8:20 pm #

            Misinformation about breastfeeding has been shared routinely.

            The major reason that people diss Lactivists is that the formula lobby is quite powerful.

            “The people you label as apologists are the ones who figure fed is best.” No, s@@t, Sherlock.

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 20, 2016 at 8:28 pm #

            Fed is best.
            What misinformation? If you can’t give three concrete examples, then it didn’t happen.
            Fed is best.
            You don’t seem to be able to show any kind of logic, empathy or present the science backing up your claims.
            Fed is best.
            Nobody is able to distinguish between children fed formula and children fed breast milk.
            Fed is best.
            Parenting is actually focusing on the child, not the way they got nutrients for a few months.
            Fed is best.
            Your attitude is why women are still reduced to bodily functions like pregnancy and lactation.

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:12 pm #

            Well, if it’s been done routinely then it will be easy for you to provide say, 12 examples, right?

            Kindly get on with it.

          • Roadstergal
            October 11, 2016 at 7:43 pm #

            She couldn’t think up even three examples 21 days ago in response to Bombshellrisa, below…

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:44 pm #

            Well, she’s had 21 days to look now.

          • Anna Perch
            October 11, 2016 at 8:59 pm #

            Not a problem. I’ll just have to pick which 12.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:32 pm #

            Just pick 12 at random.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 9:54 am #

            “This blog has never shared misinformation ” Bwah-ha-ha!
            ” only reason anyone talks about lactivists..” Classic.

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 21, 2016 at 10:11 am #

            You are welcome, and in fact have been invited, multiple times, to provide examples of misinformation shared on this blog.

            You have never done so. Can you please do that for once?

          • Maud Pie
            September 21, 2016 at 8:58 am #

            Crikey, the multiple levels of self-deception, self-congratulations, and self-pity are high enough to cause a nosebleed.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 9:15 am #

            Yes, exactly.

          • Charybdis
            September 21, 2016 at 11:02 am #

            She was talking about you….

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 12:01 pm #

            “they share misinformation about formula (it is only trivially lesser than breastmilk)”

            Ooh! Ooh! Anna actually identified something she considers to be ‘misinformation’!

            Okay, that gives us a place to start. In light of the information from the best-controlled-for-confounders studies – the PROBIT study and the discordant sibling study – why do you consider this to be misinformation? Be specific and cite your sources.

            PROBIT study:
            http://jama.jamanetwork.com/article.aspx?articleid=193490

            Discordant sibling study:
            http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277953614000549

            For extra credit, identify confounders that remain unaccounted-for in each of these studies.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:53 pm #

            I consider it to be misinformation because of what the research shows. Duh.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 1:55 pm #

            The research does not show that. I even linked it for you, right above.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 2:23 pm #

            Potato, potato.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:36 pm #

            So you expect us to just take your word that you know the science better than the immunologists, biochemists, pediatricians, and other assorted scientists in the thread because… of your inability to know what a vitamin is, and your misunderstanding of basic science as demonstrated in the SBM thread?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:01 pm #

            Actually, you are the one that doesn’t know what a vitamin is.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:01 pm #

            Actually, you are the one that doesn’t know what a vitamin is.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 6:10 pm #

            No, your mom doesn’t know what a vitamin is! 😀 Are you actually, physically, in grade school, or were you just never able to leave that mindset behind?

          • Michael McCarthy
            September 21, 2016 at 3:27 pm #

            “I consider it to be misinformation because of what the research shows. “
            So, because you don’t agree with the information, it is misinformation, Is that correct?

          • The Bofa on the Sofa
            September 22, 2016 at 9:40 am #

            I consider it to be misinformation because of what the research shows.

            What Roadstergal shows above IS the research!!!!

            I mean, direct links to the original publications! What is this “research” you are talking about? Studies that were done before these, and done so poorly that better ones like these needed to be done?

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:32 pm #

            So what are the PMID numbers of said research.

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 12:08 pm #

            Why wouldn’t you go out of your way to congratulate a woman feeding her baby with a bottle? Why not give her kudos for making the decision to feed her baby in the way that works best for her?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:38 pm #

            Gosh, you are incorrigible. Should I congratulate her for being able to prepare a bottle? For remembering to feed her baby? For actually making a decision despite pregnancy brain? For picking the right brand of formula? For the cool bottles she chose? For being brave enough to bottlefeed in public?
            Seriously, tell me, in what way could I possibly congratulate her for feeding her baby with a bottle. And don’t side track with some gibberish about I could congratulate her for having a baby, for making it outside the house, for getting her hair combed, for finding a really cute baby outfit, because not of those have anything to do with her feeding her baby a bottle of formula.

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 2:25 pm #

            Why would you go out of your way to congratulate a woman on having breasts and remembering to feed her baby, if you wouldn’t do the same for formula? Why do you think one needs you to go out of your way (since we’re talking about a stranger you spot in public here) to provide kind words of encouragement, but not the other?

            I mean, personally I think it’s ridiculous to congratulate either one on their method of feeding, but withholding your approval from bottle feeders while showering breastfeeders with praise is why you’re getting such a negative reaction here. You perpetuate the myth that women who use bottles (wither it’s breastmilk or formula in it) are inferior mothers. If they were equally good in your eyes, they would merit equal praise. The fact that you can’t see this demonstrates that *you* are the biased on here. *You* are the apologist. You are the only one in this discussion who is prioritizing one method of feeding over others (in spite of not being able to provide a shred of evidence in support of this). If it seems like we spend all our time talking about the benefits of formula, it’s because *you* keep coming at us saying breastmilk is leaps and bounds better.

            Try us sometime. Comment under a pseudonym and post comments asserting that it’s formula moms who should be praised above all else, and lecture us on how breast milk is an inferior food for children. See what kind of responses you get when you set a different stage.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:03 pm #

            Um, I asked what I am support to congratulate her for, you did not answer.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 3:06 pm #

            Well actually, you could congratulate her on her beautiful baby. And leave it at that. Whether she is breast or bottle feeding.

            That’s what a decent, kind human being would do.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:09 pm #

            Again, if you are not going to read my posts then don’t bother commenting to me.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 3:39 pm #

            No, I read the “Don’t sidetrack me with some gibberish” part. I wish I hadn’t, but I did. Because that is what *normal decent* people do, Anna…they simply congratulate the mom on having such a beautiful baby, and leave it at that. Normal decent people feel no need to comment on another person’s method of feeding their baby, be it breast or bottle.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:31 pm #

            Anna Perch: What am I supposed to congratulate her for?

            MaineJen: You could congratulate her on her beautiful baby.

            Anna Perch after Maine Jen answers Anna Perch’s question about what Anna Perch is supposed to congratulate bottle feeding mom with a suggestion on congratulating both mums on their beautiful baby: “If you’re not going to read my posts….”

          • Anna Perch
            October 16, 2016 at 8:48 pm #

            Another out of context quote. Full original paragraph, “Seriously, tell me, in what way could I possibly congratulate her FOR feeding her baby WITH A BOTTLE. And don’t side track with some gibberish about I could congratulate her for having a baby, for making it outside the house, for getting her hair combed, for finding a really cute baby outfit, BECAUSE NOT OF THOSE HAVE ANYTHING to do with her FEEDING her baby a BOTTLE of formula.”

          • October 17, 2016 at 5:34 am #

            Hmmm….how do you know there’s formula in the bottle?

          • corblimeybot
            September 21, 2016 at 6:56 pm #

            Please don’t approach breastfeeding women to congratulate them. I would have found that so fucking creepy, like being approached by a crazed street proselytizer.

          • swbarnes2
            September 21, 2016 at 7:21 pm #

            For the thousdandth time an honest person would have cited the information about how breastfeeding is more than trivially beneficial over formula. You can’t because you are fundamentally dishonest. I can cite my evidence:

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077166/

            Because I’m not fundamentally dishonest.

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm #

            How is

            “Great, share us this evidence promoting breastfeeding” at all an attempt to silence you? It’s actually asking you to TALK MORE.

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 12:07 pm #

            For you, Anna, “lactivist” means someone who supports breastfeeders. By that definition, many of the regulars here are lactivists. BUT.

            Here, “lactivist” is the term for those who promote breastfeeding *above all else.* Lactivist isn’t a synonym for lactation consultant or La Leche League leader here – it’s the term for those who become zealots about it, those who use misinformation and shaming, who think that breastfeeding should be done at all costs, by any means necessary.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 1:49 pm #

            Yes, a lactivist advocates for breastfeeding as the expected and unequaled why to feed a child.
            Again, you are making up gibberish because you hang out in a formula apologist environment that has brainwashed you or something.
            Being zealous, advocating BF “at all cost”, being against the use of formula, using misinformation, shaming, and whatever other negative aspersions you throw out are obviously not effective ways to advocate for breastfeeding. They are stereotypes contrived and promoted by people like you.

          • swbarnes2
            September 21, 2016 at 2:08 pm #

            You are being dishonest again. No here one is using “lactivist” only to mean “someone who supports breastfeeding”.

            Why is it so very very hard for you to be honest?

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:15 pm #

            “Yes, a lactivist advocates for breastfeeding as the expected and unequaled why to feed a child.”

            Being generous and assuming that ‘why’ should be ‘way’ in order to make this sentence English…

            Is this what you consider to be lactivism? And do you consider it your own stance? Because your comments do not make it clear.

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 2:39 pm #

            Really, I think about 80% of Anna’s deal is that she considers herself a lactivist, but knows that she, herself, does not engage in some of the most outrageous lactivist behavior (grabbing boobs and shoving them into babies’ mouths without permission, etc.). Therefore, she finds it insulting to be lumped in with these people (who, she assumes, are very, very few in number and not representative). But like 80% of her problems with our forum would be solved if she stopped considering herself a “lactivist” (the term for overzealous, breastfeed-at-all-costs, make-formula-prescription-only people) and chose another term, like “breastfeeding supporter.”

            She won’t do this, of course, because she wants a cute portmanteau word for what she does, but I’m betting it would change the conversation substantially if she did.

          • Roadstergal
            September 21, 2016 at 2:47 pm #

            Interesting. I think that while she would not actually engage in such behavior herself, she can understand where they’re coming from, so to speak, and some part of her is cheering them on in the back of her mind.

            After all, she didn’t jump right up and say “That’s not lactivism! That’s horrible!” She tried to dismiss those experiences altogether.

          • Maud Pie
            September 21, 2016 at 4:55 pm #

            That’s an interesting suggestion but I can’t agree. I think she actually does believe in the extremes of lactavism (for example, her prolonged evasion of the Vitamin D issue, culminating in her finally admitting she believes it’s all fear mongering). As I see it, her schtick is creating the straw opponent of Formula Apologist, and imagining that these so-called FAs are saying and doing all the things that lactavists do. With the straw FA in the ring, she can deflect all criticism, attack arguments that no one is actually making, and declare herself a victim. The phantom FA provides a justification for the extremes of lactavism– we’re under siege! We have to protect ourselves!

            As for whether she, personally, would grab a woman’s breast to force her to breastfeed? I doubt that anything other than fear of legal consequences would stop her.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 5:12 pm #

            Yes, “she assumes, are very, very few in number and not representative” That’s sounds fair.

          • October 11, 2016 at 7:09 pm #

            That’s the point. Lactivists aren’t representative of breastfeeding supporters.

          • Anna Perch
            October 11, 2016 at 9:01 pm #

            No, you’ve missed the point. The point is that lactivists ARE breastfeeding supporters ie breastfeeding advocates. An advocate IS “a person who publicly supports or recommends a particular cause or policy.”

          • October 16, 2016 at 5:28 pm #

            Scroll up and reread what has already been explained to you.

          • guest
            September 21, 2016 at 2:30 pm #

            I did not make up “gibberish.” I explained to you what the word “lactivist” means IN THIS FORUM. And in other places, like the Fearless Formula Feeder website. Just because you want it to mean something else for us does not make it so.

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:02 pm #

            So, the reality here is different than reality outside of here?

          • Erin
            September 21, 2016 at 2:54 pm #

            Well then either the hospital at which I had baby number 1 and will be having baby 2 at is either staffed by “Formula apologists” pretending to be Lactivists or your idea of what is an effective way to promote breastfeeding is not shared by most other Lactivists.

            You are however correct that those tactics don’t work.

          • MaineJen
            September 21, 2016 at 3:01 pm #

            Yes. How could we possibly think you are “against the use of formula” based on your comments?

          • Anna Perch
            September 21, 2016 at 3:04 pm #

            That’s what I’m thinking.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 2:01 pm #

            She didn’t say ‘speak out positively’
            She’s talking about lactivist like you, who shame mothers.

          • BeatriceC
            September 22, 2016 at 4:38 pm #

            Precisely. I specifically used the word “lactivist”. Words mean something. I meant what I said; nothing more, nothing less. Ironically, every single one of the admins and mods on that group currently or previously breastfed their children to some degree. We love breastfeeding when it’s possible and wanted by the mother. We don’t tolerate lactivism. That’s an important distinction.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 12:59 pm #

            You do realize that a lot of people here are actually breastfeeders right?
            We have nothing against breastfeeders. We 100% support their choice.
            What we hate are lactivists like YOU. There is a huge difference.

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:46 pm #

            She is not trying to alienate or silence breastfeeders. She is providing a place where postpartum women can talk about their experiences and the things that trigger or exacerbate their conditions. Breastfeeding and being lambasted by lactivists certainly are contributors to PPD.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 1:53 pm #

            I am not in agreement that lactivists are contributors to PPD. Sounds like prejudice to me.

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 1:58 pm #

            Nope. Not prejudice in any way, shape or form. Just facts, experiences and anecdata go into the viewpoint that lactivists can exacerbate PPD.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:03 pm #

            I rest my case.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 2:08 pm #

            What case? You still haven’t provided any evidence of your ‘case’

          • Charybdis
            September 20, 2016 at 2:23 pm #

            What case would that be?

          • momofone
            September 22, 2016 at 8:21 am #

            You haven’t presented a case.

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 2:07 pm #

            And who are you to decide?
            And really, look at what you have written here. You have not written anything in support of breastfeeding or breastfeeding mother. You have not offered advices to anyone. You are just here, spouting nonsense about formula’s risks, breastmilk superiority and dismissing the real personal experiences of other women.
            How does ANY of what you have been doing here supports breastfeeding?

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:55 pm #

            Wow. I think this might be the first time I agree with you! ” You have not written anything in support of breastfeeding or breastfeeding mother. You have not offered advice to anyone.”

          • Azuran
            September 20, 2016 at 3:15 pm #

            Then why are you even here? If’s it’s not to support breastfeeding or to offer any kind of support?
            Are you admiting to being here to shame mother? To shame and put down formula feeding mother?
            And then you wonder why we have a problem with lactivist like you.

          • D/
            September 20, 2016 at 2:31 pm #

            Oh my word, Anna! Can you please just be still? For one moment even? You’ve come barreling up in here on some sort of three week manic, steamrolling-lactivist episode, and you are not listening to anyone. You. Are. Not. Listening … even to women very clearly telling you how YOUR behavior is affecting them!

            And this brand of lactivism spreads ill will toward every breastfeeding advocate, even toward those who can and do listen before speaking. Whatever valid points you might have had are buried so deep under so many feet of poor communication and insensitivity that they’re long since lost. I’d like to add my invitation to others’ that you just stop typing … or at least go type somewhere else.

            JSYK I have a ‘non-feeding’ approach toward trolls, hoping they’ll wither from failure to thrive faster in silence, so no need to reply. I won’t be.

          • Anna Perch
            September 20, 2016 at 2:53 pm #

            “Whatever valid points you might have had are buried so deep under so many feet of poor communication and insensitivity that they’re long since lost”
            Not really.

          • demodocus
            September 20, 2016 at 4:32 pm #

            She personally has exacerbated mine, that’s for sure.

          • D/
            September 20, 2016 at 5:23 pm #

            Need emoticon options here. Consider me bearing hugs and chocolate, or whatever you’d prefer that might serve in substitute 🙂

          • Roadstergal
            September 20, 2016 at 5:27 pm #

            If we had emoticons, Anna would just be posting the smiling poop everywhere. That’s how her comments look and smell to me, at least. Sanctimonious and full of shit.

          • Bombshellrisa
            September 20, 2016 at 6:40 pm #

            I imagine the South Park episode where everyone is in love with their own farts, the electric car drivers.

          • D/
            September 20, 2016 at 8:07 pm #

            Yep. Although I still feel like company here and am *very* hesitant to call much out.

            I guess I’m just sensitive to shit talk at the moment, though, after being called out by a family member for a recent gaffe of my own. Something I’ve used in jest for *years* talking with mothers but have never, ever considered the totally reasonable alternative interpretation that was (pretty nastily) pointed out to me. Left me wondering how many mothers could have had that same reaction and just said nothing or how many other unintentionally crappy things I’ve said. I not going to beat myself up over it, but if someone so clearly shares their perspective I need to shut the hell up and pay attention.

            That, and being on the receiving end of some marital-version shit talk from Mr D/ last night has left me feeling pretty testy. Gave him the advice above too 🙁

          • KeeperOfTheBooks
            September 22, 2016 at 2:18 pm #

            I certainly can’t speak for everyone here, but as for me–and I think for a lot of us–please feel free to post anytime. I always love your posts! While I wasn’t in a position to do so this time, if and when I have another baby, I seriously may give BFing another shot with a what-the-hell-let’s-see-if-this-works sort of attitude. I can ascribe that to a combination of your posts here and also to the delightfully, shockingly chill LC I met at the hospital this time.
            (Can’t remember if I posted about her, but she walked into the recovery room, introduced herself, and asked if I wanted help breastfeeding. I said no, thanks, I tried that the first time around and wasn’t willing to even try again because it went so horribly last time. She said, “no problem, here’s my card, if you change your mind feel free to call at any time for help, congrats on the cute baby, and have a good one!” I was floored.)

          • D/
            September 22, 2016 at 7:49 pm #

            Your sweet as sugar 🙂

            Tell you what, if and when you have another baby, I’d be honored to be your LC (whether you breastfeed or not). I earn a ton of vacation time and have never been on your side of the Mississippi. It would broaden my horizons so to speak.

            If the let’s-see-if-I want-to-mess-with-this-breastfeeding-stuff action plan leans toward what-the-hell-I’ll-give-it-a-try, all’s good. Private LC on the hook … if it works, it’ll w