Fingers crossed
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2006
- Messages
- 1,626
- Reaction score
- 0
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/7355094.stm
Interesting
Interesting
Short BFs better for baby..News report
- Thread starter Fingers crossed
- Start date
I am doing the baby led feeding. Calleigh is putting on weight quite nicely, plus if i tried to restrict her feeds from when she wants it i am sure she would kick up one hell of a fuss 
And she feeds for as long as she wants then i will offer her the second boob if she is still hungry, but currently one boob at a feed is enough the majority of the time.
And she feeds for as long as she wants then i will offer her the second boob if she is still hungry, but currently one boob at a feed is enough the majority of the time.
I personally belive that no matter how LO is fed, breast, bottle, both, it should be on demand. All babies gain weight in their own time, and a study of just 63 women is negligible in research terms anyway 
They can't even leave the very basic, natural breastfeeding issue alone now 
They can't even leave the very basic, natural breastfeeding issue alone now A few months ago I would have agreed with you that this sounds rubbish, but my recent experience fits in with what they are suggesting in the report.
I didn't manage to bf DD so took in as much advice as possible with DS. He was huge when born (11,2.5!) so took a lot of feeding which was hampered by a dfficult labour/c-section/blood loss/transfusion/jaundice. I fed on demand which was constantly for the first 8 weeks then 2 hourly or so until 3 months. A feed never took less than an hour both sides. By 3 months he'd only gained 2lbs. Some weeks he didn't gain weight at all.
By the time he was 4 months my milk was deminishing depite this frequent feeding and he started to get cross and refuse the breast. Within a few days I'd switched to formula. (He still has a little suck prob once a day.)
In light of this (small sample) study, we may have done better just 10mins both sides...as my mother kept informing me is what they did in her day! Every mw/hv I saw said the first 10mins is just foremilk, which is why I kept him on for so long.
Do you think it's too late for me to get him back on the boob? I still have some milk there. It's been about 2 weeks since I switched.
Sorry to ramble, but I thought I'd made my peace with giving up as it wasn't working. If we have a chance of making it work this other way maybe I should give it another try...if it's not too late.
Thanks for listening!!
Ladybird xx
P.S. Since having formula he's put on 3lbs!
I didn't manage to bf DD so took in as much advice as possible with DS. He was huge when born (11,2.5!) so took a lot of feeding which was hampered by a dfficult labour/c-section/blood loss/transfusion/jaundice. I fed on demand which was constantly for the first 8 weeks then 2 hourly or so until 3 months. A feed never took less than an hour both sides. By 3 months he'd only gained 2lbs. Some weeks he didn't gain weight at all.
By the time he was 4 months my milk was deminishing depite this frequent feeding and he started to get cross and refuse the breast. Within a few days I'd switched to formula. (He still has a little suck prob once a day.)
In light of this (small sample) study, we may have done better just 10mins both sides...as my mother kept informing me is what they did in her day! Every mw/hv I saw said the first 10mins is just foremilk, which is why I kept him on for so long.
Do you think it's too late for me to get him back on the boob? I still have some milk there. It's been about 2 weeks since I switched.
Sorry to ramble, but I thought I'd made my peace with giving up as it wasn't working. If we have a chance of making it work this other way maybe I should give it another try...if it's not too late.
Thanks for listening!!
Ladybird xx
P.S. Since having formula he's put on 3lbs!
mrs_tommo22
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2007
- Messages
- 11,043
- Reaction score
- 0
Something else that will make mothers paranoid!
