There is a new “medical” study that is out on how the results of breastfeeding have been exaggerated. The study claims that long-term effects of breastfeeding have been inflated compared to bottle-feeding infants. Did your jaw just hit the floor like mine did? I’m surprised that something like this would surface when we live in a age when breastfeeding mothers are finding minimal support as it is.
“Breastfeeding Results Are Exaggerated” – The New Study
This study was done by David Ramey and Cynthia Colen, two SOCIOLOGISTS who set out on a mission to evaluate 655 families in the United States. They chose to study families where one child was breastfed and the other was bottle-fed.
This new study says that research that claims that breastfeeding boosts children’s IQ and protects from a vast range of health conditions later in life is flawed. Cythia and David claim that these outcomes include BMI/obesity, asthma, hyperactivity, attachment, compliance, academic achievement and competence. The study further states that typical estimates of the impact of breastfeeding on child wellbeing may be overstated.
It further went on to state that children who were breast-fed were at higher risk for asthma.
My Concerns:
I’m a little taken back by this very controversial opinion/study which contradicts an overwhelming amount of evidence and research that we have all heard and learned about. I’m seeing articles coming out saying, “Hold the Guilt“…as if this new study is a way for formula feeding mothers to rest easy and feel less guilty.
I understand that we all cannot breastfeed for difference circumstances. I wasn’t able to breastfeed my son because of a traumatic event that affected my milk supply. However, I would never underestimate breastfeeding so that I could feel less guilty or more approval to formula feed. This has nothing to do with me. This has everything to do with our babies and children deserving the nourishment that was intended for them.
The area of asthma is one to talk more in depth about. I would be very interested to know if diet and lifestyle were taken into any account when conducting this study.
13 Studies Proving Breastfeeding Results ARE NOT Exaggerated:
1. Breastfeeding should be exclusive for 6 months and then continued for AT LEAST a year.
“The AAP reaffirms its recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for about the first six months of a baby’s life, followed by breastfeeding in combination with the introduction of complementary foods until at least 12 months of age, and continuation of breastfeeding for as long as mutually desired by mother and baby.” (1)
2. Breastfeeding Improves the Gut and Prevents Against Illness…Including Otitis Media (Ear Infection)
The direct benefits of breastfeeding include improvement in gastrointestinal function and host defense, and prevention of acute illnesses (eg, acute otitis media) during the time of breastfeeding. (2).
As an example, the incidence of two or more episodes of otitis media was reduced in infants breast-fed for one year compared with infants fed formula (34 versus 54 percent). (14)
3. Anti-inflammatory Agents in Human Milk May Reduce NEC (necrotizing enterocolitis) and Other Infections:
Anti-inflammatory agents (eg, interleukin 10) may reduce the risk of NEC. Interleukin-10 is an anti-inflammatory cytokine that decreases inflammation and injury to the gastrointestinal tract (3) . In addition, polyunsaturated fatty acids modulate inflammatory reactions and may protect the gastrointestinal tract from NEC (4).
4. Human Milk Has Anti-Microbial Properties:
Specific Proteins are found in human milk. These proteins are generally resistant to proteolytic degeneration, line the mucosal surfaces and prevent microbial attachment. They further inhibit microbial activity (5, 6, 7).
5. In Developing Countries, Mortality is Lower in Breast-fed Infants Verses Formula-Fed.
In addition, gastroenteritis and respiratory disease is lower in breast-fed infants (8, 9)
6. In Developed Countries, Hospitalization and Outpatient Visits is Lower Among Breast-Fed Infants in the First Year
The attack rate of acute illness is lower among breast-fed infants compared to formula fed infants (10).
7. Respiratory Illnesses are Less Frequent in Breast-Fed Infants Compared with Formula-Fed Infants
In one study, breast-fed compared with formula-fed infants had a lower incidence of respiratory illness during the first 13 weeks of life (25.6 versus 37 percent). (11)
Two studies reported a decrease in the incidence of wheezing and lower respiratory tract infections during the first four to six months of life (12 and 13).
8. Breast-Fed Infants Have Less Urinary Tract Infections:
In one study done, infants who were hospitalized for urinary tract infections were less likely to have been breast-fed. This protection is suggested based on the fact that breast-fed infants have greater content of anti-microbial components in their urine. (15)
9. Post-Breastfeeding Protection Appears to Increase the Duration of Breastfeeding
The longer you breastfeed, the better protected the infant is. This was illustrated in a study done with children between 6 and 24 months of age. Infants who were exclusively breastfed for four to six months compared with those who exclusively breastfed for MORE THAN 6 months were more likely to develop pneumonia, have more ear infections during the 12-month period preceding the study. (16)
10. There May Be a Relationship Between Breastfeeding and the Prevention of Chronic Disease
- Obesity – There may be a relationship between breastfeeding and the prevention of obesity. Several studies have been done on various ethnic children and the results are the same. Prolonged breastfeeding was associated with a reduced risk of being obese. (17, 18, 19)
- Cancer – Breastfeeding has been associated with an overall reduced risk in childhood cancer as well as lymphoma and leukemia. (20, 21, 22)
- Type 1 Diabetes – Breastfed infants appear to have a decreased risk of developing type 1 diabetes mellitus compared to formula-fed infants. The difference is thought to be due to a cell-mediated response to a specific cow’s milk protein, beta-casein, which may be involved in the development of type 1 diabetes. (23)
11. Cognitive Development is Improved Later in Life with Breastfed Infants
There have been several reports that breastfeeding slightly improves cognitive development later in childhood and adolescence. (24)
One particular study done on ten-year-old children discovered that those who were predominately breastfed for 6 months or longer in infancy had higher academic scores than children who were breastfed for less than 6 months. (25)
12. Breastfed Infants Have Improved Visual Function Compared to Formula-Fed Infants
This is said to be benefited to the DHA which is present in human milk (26) . DHA plays a major role in brain and visual development.
13. Breastfed Infants are Less Stressed
There is an analgesic effect of breastfeeding, which is, most likely, due to the maternal-infant bonding that happens when nursing an infant (27). Breastfed infants experience less stress than formula fed infants. This could also be due to the higher cortisol levels of breastfeeding compared to formula-fed infants (28).
Conclusion:
The benefits of breastfeeding are astounding and nothing to undermine. Reading these studies should not make anyone feel guilty or less of a mother because you are not able to breastfeed. Everyone should be aware of the incredible benefits of human milk.
Breastfeeding for all infants is strongly supported by the right professional organizations. If you cannot find the support you need, reach out to La Leche League or call a hospital to talk to a lactation consultant. Many times a decrease in milk supply is because of improper latch which can be easily corrected.
Books to Help the Nursing Mother:
- The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding
- Breastfeeding with Confidence
- Breastfeeding Made Simple
- Ina May’s Guide to Breastfeeding
- The Nursing Mother’s Companion
Sources:
- (1) American Academy of Pediatrics
- (2) Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries
- (3) The National Center for Biotechnology Information
- (4) The National Center for Biotechnology Information
- (5) Biochemistry and Physiological Function of Human Milk Proteins
- (6) Protective Factors in Milk
- (7) Immunologic Protection of the Premature Newborn by Human Milk
- (8) The Protective Effect of Human Milk Against Diarrhea
- (9) Breast-feeding and Diarrheal Morbidity
- (10) Prolonged and Exclusive Breastfeeding Reduces the Risk of Infectious Diseases in Infancy
- (11) Protective Effect of Breastfeeding Against Infection
- (12) Review of the Epidemiologic Evidence for an Association Between Infant Feeding and Infant health
- (13) Breastfeeding and Lower Respiratory Tract Illness in the First Year of Life
- (14) Differences in Morbidity Between Breast-Fed and Formula-Fed Infants
- (15) Human Milk Feeding Enhances the Urinary Excretion of Immunologic Factors
- (16) Full Breastfeeding Duration and Associated Decrease in Respiratory Tract Infection in US Children
- (17) Does Breastfeeding Protect Against Pediatric Overweight?
- (18) Evidence Report on Breastfeeding in Developed Countries
- (19) Breastfeeding and Obesity Among Schoolchildren
- (20) Breastfeeding and the Risk of Childhood Leukemia
- (21) Breastfeeding and Childhood Cancer
- (22) Infant Feeding and Childhood Cancer
- (23) Diet, Cow’s Milk Protein Antibodies and the Risk of IDDM in Finnish Children
- (24) The Association Between Duration of Breastfeeding and Adult Intelligence
- (25) Breastfeeding Duration and Academic Achievement at 10 years
- (26) DHA is the Preferred Dietary n-3 Fatty Acid for Development of the Brain and Retina
- (27) Analgesic Effect of Breastfeeding in Term Neonates
- (28) Are Breastfed Infants More Resilient? Feeding Method and Cortisol in Infants
https://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/sibbreast.htm
Actually what she said is:
“If breast-feeding doesn’t have the impact that we think it will have on long-term childhood outcomes, then even though it is very important in the short-term we really need to focus on other things,” she said. “We need to look at school quality, adequate housing and the type of employment parents have when their kids are growing up.
“We need to take a much more careful look at what happens past that first year of life and understand that breast-feeding might be very difficult, even untenable, for certain groups of women. Rather than placing the blame at their feet, let’s be more realistic about what breast-feeding does and doesn’t do.”
And, yea, she’s “just” a sociologist,right? I’d be careful to attack someone’s qualification to comment on a subject anyway, but, here is her CV.
https://sociology.osu.edu/sites/sociology.osu.edu/files/CV2013_Colen.pdf
I read the study that she put out. I am not attacking her. She is, obviously, a very educated woman and I respect that. I am simply stating the facts and studies that have been done on breastfeeding.
The problem with a study like this is that it’s being taken out of context. The authors point is that other socio-economic factors are also important in the long-term overall outcome for a child, but that is being overlooked and overshadowed by those who are using this to justify formula use and attack breastfeeding, which I highly doubt was the intent of the authors.
Articles such as this are pointing out that multiple studies have proven that breastfeeding is the best choice if at all possible in the short and long term and that this study does not negate those studies or benefits.
I’m a momma of a 3 year old. I had a really hard time breastfeeding and didn’t produce enough to exclusively breastfeed. Because of this, I breastfed as much as I could, and then topped off with formula. I also had to go back to work when he was 8 weeks old, which further reduced my milk supply. By the time he was 7 months old, my milk dried up completely, and he went to formula and baby foods.
I would never argue which was “best”. Of course, God created babies to be fed human milk, and that is “best”. There are so many attacks against formula feeding parents, though, that I think when this information is shared, we should understand that everyone is different, and not everyone can breastfeed well for a variety of reasons. A formula fed baby is certainly better off than a malnourished and starving baby.
I love these studies though that remind us that natural is best vs. consuming chemical concoctions called “food”. It reminds me of why I am mostly Paleo in my own life, and hopefully for the next baby, if the Lord blesses me again, I will be able to breastfeed longer. If not, I know He will fill the gap. (and my child will be fed Paleo food vs. what I fed my son as an infant…)
Good article.
Great article on breast feeding and great point. We actually did both. My wife did it until she could no longer do it. then we used formula for a few months with both children. She had both naturally. We have always tried to make the best decisions we can for our children. If someone wants to use formula I won’t argue but it just doesn’t seem natural. God provides what the babies need. Why not try that first, right?
Excellent post, Jackie. I just promoted it on my Facebook page. You ripped that so-called study apart. Love your rebuttal. Unbelievable this study even got published.
Thank you so much Tracey! <3
I actually tracked down the study and read up on their statistical analysis. It’s results are pretty robust. Basically everything being equal, what is a magnitude of breast-feeding on a child years after? The study looks at year 8. Were they to look at first few years, the impact of breast-feeding is higher, which makes sense and as you move away from those years the impacts of other environmental factors start to out weight the impact of breast-feeding. To put it extremes, at year 70, the impact of being breast fed is lower to other factors such as recent heart attack or smoking habits.
Now, the study STILL found a statistically significant differences between breast-fed babies and bottle-fed babies at year 8. They needed to isolate the factor of breast-feeding so they looked a siblings. What is the implication? That parents who breast-feed their children are BETTER parents. So when they isolated different levels of parenting, they saw the statistical significance of breast-feeding disappear.
So by age 8, Parenting is stronger factor than breast-feeding alone. Which makes sense to me. Although author of the study equals parenting with socioeconomic factors and access to resources, that isn’t supported by the statistical analysis. Parenting is a difficult factor to quantify, I am ALMOST certain that they tried to define it as income, education, access to government resources but didn’t get the results they wanted.
J.
I agree with what Jong Lee is saying. I also read the study. The whole point that’s being made is that there is no real ethical way of measuring, without bias or error, the effects of breastfeeding vs. formula feeding. What may be reported as a positive effect of breastfeeding could be totally unrelated and due to other factors, such as socioeconomics. This can’t be ignored. I don’t understand, even one bit, what you mean by saying that the study is being used as a crutch to defend formula. How so? I think that most responsible parents who’ve had any measure of education about parenting would tell you that they agree that breastfeeding is best, but the overwhelming majority of judgement and condescension comes from BREASTFEEDERS, not the other way around! The way our society harps on and guilt-trips mothers who can’t or don’t breastfeed is atrocious. People need to do what they feel is best for their own families, and button their lips about the rest. I’m actually a naturalist myself, who’s a fan of home-birth, placenta encapsulation, the whole shebang. But I’m NOT a fan of mothers putting other mothers down, especially based on findings that aren’t entirely accurate. Breastfeeding is undoubtedly the best possible ideal, seeing as it’s what nature intended, but the notion that your child is somehow better, smarter, healthier? No. That I don’t buy. And it’s certainly not an excuse to put down a mother who uses formula, for whatever reason. And finally I’ll add this: all you have to do is look at the generation before ours, where formula feeding was quite popular, and few people were encouraged to breastfeed. Those people turned out fine. Those people didn’t die off due to natural selection or fill our special-ed schools. It’s insulting to insinuate that that’s what will happen to every kid who is formula-fed. It’s just not true. That’s what the study is about. It’s not calling breastfeeding “bad” or even “equal” to formula-feeding. It’s saying that the results have been grossly exaggerated on blogs and all over the internets, usually by moms who love to convince themselves and others that their own parenting style is above reproach…
Not to mention the health benefits to mom: HUGE in reducing breast cancer risk the longer mom breastfeeds
Great article! I totally agree!
I regret that I haven’t read anything that would prepare me for breastfeeding when my first baby was born but I certainly don’t regret that I decided to use this method of feeding. But one is sure – it’s not that easy. When I was pregnant for the first time I was sure I wanted to breastfeed and I didn’t think I need to prepare for it. Now I know that it’s so not true! I had problems at the beginning of breastfeeding and I dropped it!. When I was pregnant with my second daughter I knew I need to be prepared for this task. My friend told me about Susan Urban’s guide “How to make breastfeeding pleasant and easy” ( http://www.parental-love.com ). She said it’s great because after reading it she knew exactly what to do when she had problems. She told me that I should read it and I did. She was right! This guide was awesome! Helped me so much with breastfeeding. I was confident and well-prepared. I knew how to deal with problems that may occur. Every new mom or mom to be should read it. Such a great help!