Fuschia

From babymilk action "Three of the four authors of the piece, Mary Fewtrell, Alan Lucas and David Wilson, receive funding from the baby food industry. Prof Lucas in particular plays a key role in advising the UK baby food industry, and has opposed the WHO recommendation for many years. In 2003 he went so far as to appear for the defence when one of the largest baby food companies, SMA Wyeth was successfully prosecuted for illegal advertising by Trading Standards. "

Our almost 3 yo is desperate to do "ballet" (though I did tap and Irish dancing myself as a child and am not so sure about ballet per se!) I'd like to find a fun class, not too expensive, easy to get to, also suitable for boys and a Saturday might be best. (Can those in the know give me the low down about little girls and dancing? Thanks!

EDmummy Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- Even according to the > WHO new press release above; the benefits of > exclusive bf until six months are "...a lower risk > of gastrointestinal infection for the baby, more > rapid maternal weight loss after birth, and > delayed return of menstrual periods"; It doesn't say those are the only benefits, it says that the last systemic review in Cochrane came up with those findings from " two controlled trials and 18 other studies" The review in question was comparing 6m exclusive bf with 4m bf followed by mixed feeding (ie it wasn't about weaning to solids) There are many more studies into the benefits of delayed weaning, I must say I AM convinced by the evidence regarding lower levels of adult heart disease and diabetes... and this latest report doesn't even touch on any of that, so i won't change my approach. Child no 1 ws weaned at 17w as per guidelines then, and has shown no ill effects but it was a hassle, tbh... and if there are long term health benefits to delaying to 6m I will follow the advice. This is no new evidence, just a slant on some of the existing studies.

plimsoul Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > what bothers me in all of this is how much parents > worry rather than follow their instincts. Thing is, you can't tell from yourn instincts if later weaning might result in a reduced incidenceof diabetes later in life, that sort of thing. And I suspect it's the feeling that sleep changes at about 4m are food related (baby not getting enough milk) rather than appreciating it's a normal developmental stage, that have led mothers to think of weaning at 4 months... I would have more confidence in analysis if it was based on new research, rather than rehashed studies from people who have had research funded by the baby food industry. There are millions of pounds at stake if women don't start to buy baby food from 4m... I think that explains where all this is coming from.

Very refreshing piece: http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2011/jan/14/breastfeeding-comment-joanna-moorhead

Statement from Francesco Branca - Head of Nutrition at WHO: WHO's global public health recommendation is for infants to be exclusively breastfed for the first 6 months of life to achieve optimal growth, development and health. Thereafter, infants should be given nutritious complementary foods and co...ntinue breastfeeding up to the age of 2 years or beyond. WHO closely follows new research findings in this area and has a process for periodically re-examining recommendations. Systematic reviews accompanied by an assessment of the quality of evidence are used to review guidelines in a process that is designed to ensure that the recommendations are based on the best available evidence and free from conflicts of interest. The paper in this week's BMJ is not the result of a systematic review. The latest systematic review on this issue available in the Cochrane Library was published in 2009 ("Optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding (Review)", Kramer MS, Kakuma R: The Cochrane Library 2009, Issue 4). It included studies in developed and developing countries and its findings are supportive of the current WHO recommendations. It found that the results of two controlled trials and 18 other studies suggest that exclusive breastfeeding (which means that the infant should have only breast milk, and no other foods or liquids) for 6 months has several advantages over exclusive breastfeeding for 3-4 months followed by mixed breastfeeding. These advantages include a lower risk of gastrointestinal infection for the baby, more rapid maternal weight loss after birth, and delayed return of menstrual periods. No reduced risks of other infections or of allergic diseases have been demonstrated. No adverse effects on growth have been documented with exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months, but a reduced level of iron has been observed in developing-country settings.

There is a developmental leap at 4m (19w) which I think can be confused with hunger. http://moxie.blogs.com/askmoxie/2006/02/qa_what_are_sle.html http://blogginaboutbabies.wordpress.com/2009/04/08/wonder-week-19/

http://info.babymilkaction.org/news/policyblog140111

full bmj article: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5955.full

ah, turns out this isn't new research but a rehashing of old studies and 3/4 authors have been funded by babyfood companies

I thought the recommendation re 6m was to do with a reduction in obesity and heart disease in adulthood... the evidence about allergy avoidance has always been a bit contradictory. The swedish study re gluten, what it said i seem to recall is that it's protective to introduce gluten while still bf (rather than that it's better to introduce it early) I will stick stick to 6m, less faff and by then you can go for BLW too which saves time. I do think the baby food industry (and many HVs!) have been looking for an excuse to stick with the old 4m recommendation.

SB: a new child is def such an event

Your husband's work (HR dept) probably are signed up to a scheme already, get the name of it and you can do the rest direct with the scheme. If his company are not yet signed up, I would recommend ACCOR or SODEXHO, but the company would need to agree to sign up.

Dodo1 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Phone BusyBees. they will talk you and even your > husbands company on how to set this up. Avoid busybees like the plague, they are a bunch of incompetents! I had to change the provider we use at work, they were so rubbish (and rude with it!)

I think you can have an ear infection without a temp

Pickle Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- He's about > to turn four, anyone got anything I should know? They just get worse as they get bigger. Luckily, they are in school before you go under...

Magic Moments Lordhsip Lane estate

let us know how it goes

might be worthing seeing an optician?

helibell Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > maybe best thing (v. unscientific) is always to > taste it first. > > I used to freeze breast milk & couldn't work out > why my son refused the bottle... until I tasted it > & realised it was going off when frozen. Yuk. > > I found an article on kellymom which said that > this is not uncommon because some women's milk is > v. high in certain enzymes. Or something. It hasn't gone off, just tastes odd. It's to do with lipase, if you scALD IT BEFORE FREEZING IT WON'T HAPPEN

Pumping for 20-30 mins with the double pump would normally yield from 1-6oz each side

Interesting: http://www.kellymom.com/bf/pumping/reusing-expressedmilk.html Milk storage info: http://www.kellymom.com/bf/pumping/milkstorage.html

Safe out of the fridge for 8h I thought

Can't do that due to surfeit of toddlers butnwill try for next

I also store milk in bigger bottles and decant bit by bit... but he can't take more than 3.5oz and usually wnats just 2.5 12 feeds a day is rather time cosuming...