Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
As for "extended past what our society feels is normal" nursing and independence - these are some of the things that came up googling
"breastfeeding and independence".
There are studies to back it up (that extended nursing does NOT cause physiological harm/or foster an unhealthy dependence) - most have cited sources at the bottom of the article. What would be interesting is to find research that shows extended breastfeeding causes a child to be more dependent in life than his peers.
Parental Concerns About Extended Breastfeeding in a Toddler -- Stein et al. 114 (5): 1506 -- Pediatrics (http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/114/5/S2/1506 - broken link)
Breastfeeding a Toddler - Why on Earth? (http://www.breastfeeding.com/all_about/faq_bf_toddler.html - broken link)
Extended Nursing Improves I.Q. and Social Skills: Intellectual and Emotional Benefits of Breastfeeding Toddlers (http://breastfeeding.suite101.com/article.cfm/extended_nursing_improves_iq_and_social_skills - broken link)
(in this link [“A Natural Age of Weaning”, 1997]
(From Kellymom.com link already provided) MYTH: Extended breastfeeding makes a child overly dependent and can cause psychological harm. FACT: On the contrary, meeting a child’s need for breastfeeding fosters independence on the child’s own developmental timetable. Both research and the experiences of mothers worldwide indicate that children who nurse past a year have excellent social adjustment. Per the American Academy of Pediatrics, “There is no upper limit to the duration of breastfeeding and no evidence of psychologic or developmental harm from breastfeeding into the third year of life or longer.”
For Taboo2:
Here are some studies showing the difference between intramammary immunization (as would be achieved during direct nursing) vs systemic (gut) immunization (achieved by general interaction with germs, ie the exclusively pumping mom). The reason they were a little difficult to find turns out to be that these studies are done in animals so the term "mammary" was a much better search term than "breastfeeding"! Also, they were all done in the early 80's so they come up lower on the search page. I hope this is informative. I found it quite interesting.
By the way, the generic immunization route certainly provides for an immune response which is transferred to the mammary (and milk), it's just that the localized (mammary) immunization provides a greater immune response. So if you are exclusively pumping, you are still doing pretty good! Just think, formula contains zero immunities at all, so it's still of great benefit to use pumped milk over formula if you are unable to nurse.
-----------------------------
Saif LJ, Bohl EH. Passive immunity to transmissible gastroenteritis virus: intramammary viral inoculation of sows. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 1983 Jun 30;409:708-23.
Sows were injected intramammarily with live-attenuated TGE virus, an enteric coronavirus--one sow during pregnancy and three sows during lactation. All sows were TGE antibody seronegative prior to inoculation except for one naturally infected sow inoculated during lactation. The animal injected during pregnancy had primarily IgG TGE antibodies in milk from all glands. By contrast, sows injected during lactation had IgA and IgM initially, and later IgA and IgG TGE antibodies in milk from injected and noninjected glands. The seropositive sow had elevated IgA TGE antibody titers in milk after IMm injection. Both seronegative sows inoculated intramammarily during lactation shed TGE virus in milk from injected glands, and their nursing piglets developed mild diarrhea and shed virus in their feces at three to nine DPE of the sows. Milk from IMm injected glands generally had higher TGE antibody titers than milk from noninjected glands. These results suggest that TGE virus replicates in lactating mammary gland tissue, thereby stimulating IgA immunocytes, leading to secretion of IgA antibodies in milk. Whether the intramammary route presents a natural route of enteric virus exposure in lactating animals (by way of infected nursing piglets), leading to IgA-antibody secretion in milk, requires further investigation.
------
Sheldrake RF, Husband AJ, Watson DL, Cripps AW. The effect of intraperitoneal and intramammary immunization of sheep on the numbers of antibody-containing cells in the mammary gland, and antibody titres in blood serum and mammary secretions. Immunology. 1985 Dec;56(4):605-14.
The contribution of gut-associated lymphoid tissue (GALT) to the local response in the mammary gland is well documented in laboratory animals and has been evaluated in this study in ruminants. Ewes were immunized intraperitoneally (IP) with antigen in Freund's complete adjuvant (FCA), a procedure which stimulates the production of antibodies of the IgA class in the intestine, and challenged intramammarily (IMam) either during colostrum formation or mammary gland involution. Despite a substantial IgA antibody-containing cell (ACC) response in the intestine in IP immunized sheep, there was no evidence to suggest a relocation of IgA-specific ACC to the mammary gland. There was, however, an IgA antibody response in mammary secretion of IP immunized animals, regardless of whether the mammary gland was locally immunized, but the origin of this antibody is unclear. IP/IMam immunized sheep did have an enhanced antigen-specific ACC response of the IgG1 isotype in locally immunized glands, but whether these cells were of GALT or systemic origin is also unclear.
-------
Sheldrake RF, Husband AJ, Watson DL. Specific antibody-containing cells in the mammary gland of non-lactating sheep after intraperitoneal and intramammary immunisation. Res Vet Sci. 1985 May;38(3):312-6.
Ewes were immunised intraperitoneally with ovalbumin and Brucella abortus in Freund's complete adjuvant, followed seven days later by intramammary immunisation in which ovalbumin was presented to one mammary gland and Brucella abortus to the other. Mammary tissue taken after a further seven days contained more antigen-specific plasma cells than ewes given intraperitoneal or intramammary immunisation alone. These cells were found predominantly in the specifically immunised gland and only a few were found in the contralateral gland. Most of these cells were of the IgG1 isotype. There was also an increase in the total number of IgG1- and IgG2-containing cells in mammary gland tissues of these ewes, indicating a non-specific response to immunisation. Following either intraperitoneal or intramammary immunisation there was also a significant increase in the number of antigen-specific IgA cells in the lamina propria of the jejunum. The gut response following intramammary immunisation alone was abrogated by chronic drainage of intestinal lymph but not mammary lymph. This suggests that antigen may relocate from the mammary gland to the intestine where an IgA response is generated from gut associated lymphoid tissue. These data provide evidence for interaction between the gut and mammary gland of sheep in response to antigen.
-----
Chang CC, Winter AJ, Norcross NL. Immune response in the bovine mammary gland after intestinal, local, and systemic immunization. Infect Immun. 1981 Feb;31(2):650-9.
The immune response in mammary glands of cattle was measured after intestinal, local, and systemic immunization with T4 bacteriophage. Nonlactating pregnant cows were immunized by infusions into the intestine or mammary gland and by subcutaneous injections in the region of the prescapular or external inguinal lymph nodes. Titers of antibodies of different isotypes were measured in serum and in lacteal secretions by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, and numbers of cells producing antibodies of each isotype were determined in lacteal secretions by the Jerne plaque assay. Substantial increases in immunoglobulin G subclass 1 (IgG1) and IgG2 antibody titers were detected in serum and lacteal secretions of animals immunized through an intestinal fistula. IgM and IgA antibody responses were low or undetectable. Low numbers of IgA and IgG1 plaque-forming cells were occasionally detected. It is proposed on the basis of these data that migration of antigen-stimulated IgG lymphoblasts, and perhaps of antigen, to spleen and peripheral lymph nodes may be dominant events after intestinal immunization of ruminants. This is consistent with the predominance of serum-derived IgG antibodies in colostrum and milk. Intramammary infusion of antigen gave rise to increases in antibody titers in all classes which were greater not only in lacteal secretions but also in blood serum than with either systemic route used. There was clear evidence from relative antibody titers for local synthesis of antibodies, principally IgA and IgG1, in the immunized glands. Comparison of IgA titers in secretions from the immunized glands with those in serum also suggested that locally synthesized IgA antibodies may have contributed in some measure to serum titers. Local synthesis in both immunized and nonimmunized glands was also reflected by the presence of increased numbers of IgA and IgG1 plaque-forming cells. It is hypothesized that antibody-forming cells responsible for local synthesis originated in lymphoid tissue within the mammary gland or from peripheral lymph nodes, depending upon the route of immunization. Overall increases of antibodies in mammary glands, unimmunized as well as immunized, and in blood serum, were substantially greater in all immunoglobulin classes after intramammary immunization than with any other method used.
Here is an excerpt from another article I came across which is more related to extended nursing support:
Miriam H. Labbok, David Clark & Armond S. Goldman. Breastfeeding: maintaining an irreplaceable immunological resource. Nature Reviews Immunology 4, 565-572 (July 2004)
Optimal practices include early initiation, exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months and continued breastfeeding (together with appropriate complementary feeding) for 2 years or more.
I don't understand why nursing a child who is over a year is so "sick". I think seeing a baby with a bottle full of artificial milk is pretty disgusting. Breastfeeding is what is best for the child. Like other posters pointed out, one year is the minimum that is recommended by the WHO.
I nursed my son until he self-weaned at 3.5. I also tandem nursed him and his baby brother for a year; my youngest is still nursing at 19 months. Nursing for so long(I am going on 4 years straight) is one of the most challenging and rewarding things I have ever done. I only nursed my girls for 10 days and 6 months because I had no support and encouragement. My boys are so much healthier than my girls were/are, and I definitely attribute it to the extended breastfeeding.
As for other AP techniques, we are also co-sleeping, homeschooling, and practiced babywearing.
how do you "wear a baby"?
how many babies have died from co-sleeping?
I guess you will go with them on their prom too? oh wait, home schooled, no prom, no social development.
I don't understand why nursing a child who is over a year is so "sick". I think seeing a baby with a bottle full of artificial milk is pretty disgusting. Breastfeeding is what is best for the child. Like other posters pointed out, one year is the minimum that is recommended by the WHO.
I nursed my son until he self-weaned at 3.5. I also tandem nursed him and his baby brother for a year; my youngest is still nursing at 19 months. Nursing for so long(I am going on 4 years straight) is one of the most challenging and rewarding things I have ever done. I only nursed my girls for 10 days and 6 months because I had no support and encouragement. My boys are so much healthier than my girls were/are, and I definitely attribute it to the extended breastfeeding.
As for other AP techniques, we are also co-sleeping, homeschooling, and practiced babywearing.
I did watch the videos, but I do not think that they were an unbiased presentation about attachment parenting. The "reporter" interviewed 3 families who are all pretty extreme, and one child psychologist who opposes AP. There are many families, like my own, who practice AP but don't go to the extremes that were shown in the videos. In addition, there are many experts who agree with the AP philosophy of parenting. The reporter didn't even mention, no less interview, any of them. She could have talked to Dr. Sears or Dr. McKenna about breastfeeding and co-sleeping. She could have talked about Kathryn Dettwyler's research regarding natural weaning. The reporter says some things as though they are facts when they are actually her opinions and chooses to show clips of things that I really don't think are very central to AP as though they are (like elimination communication). She says that AP parents don't believe in discipline and boundaries, and I don't think that's true. She uses the term "gentle discipline" as though it's a joke and there is really no such thing or something. I just really thought that this video was created to show AP in a bad light, and was not in any way an objective story.
Yes, I practice AP and extended breastfeeding. My daughter is almost 2.5 and she nurses about once a day most days. I won't be surprised if she's weaned by the new year because even when she nurses now, it's not for very long. My goal was to nurse for at least 2 years, so I didn't place many boundaries on nursing before then. But that doesn't mean that I don't believe in boundaries, just that I didn't want to do anything that could jeopardize that goal. Once she turned 2, we worked on night weaning, then on cutting down our daytime nursing. I believe that nursing is a relationship, and it has to work for both parties involved, so she doesn't get to nurse every time she wants to just because she wants to. Yes, we have boundaries now. Now we nurse before bed, and if she wants to when she wakes up in the morning, and sometimes at naptime.
Most people I know who have practiced extended breastfeeding have had children who weaned sometime around 2 or 3 years old. I think that biologically, this is the peak of the bell curve, though there will always be some who wean earlier or later. One factor is that a child's immune system is not fully developed for several years, so a child is still getting important immunities from breastmilk at that age. Another factor is that as long as a child still has a need for milk, that it might as well be breastmilk - I never understand why some people think it makes more sense to feed their child cow's milk instead of human milk when a child turns 1 year old, when clearly they still think the child needs milk. And that some people think that it's gross or unnatural for a child that age to be nursing instead of drinking cow's milk just shows a huge misunderstanding of the nature and biology of mammals. I also find it amusing that many people who find out my daughter is still nursing wonder if she eats table food or drinks other liquids out of a cup! Obviously, these people have never been around nursing toddlers, because of course she consumes a whole variety of foods and drinks besides nursing!
I think that that my philosophy around nursing applies to many other aspect of my parenting too - that this is a relationship and both of our needs are taken into consideration. I think that this idea was lacking in the video - that they only take into account the needs of the child. But I think that this way is much more typical of AP parents that I know. I think that mainstream society does not take the needs of the child into enough account and is much more focused on the needs of the parent.
There are very few antibodies in mature breast milk and children's immune systems are not fully developed until age 12 on average. Guess you have 10 more years to go.
What native cultures are you referring to? I ask because the worldwide NATURAL age of weaning is between 2 and 7 years. Do you have any cultures in particular in mind when you say that native cultures wean their children when the milk teeth come in? I think you are confusing the milk teeth with permanent adult teeth. Natural weaning when the adult teeth come (usually starting around age 5 or 6) makes more sense.
Babies at 6 months of age do not naturally eat table foods, but they do have teeth. Before the invention of artificial milk (baby formula), babies were nursed until they were old enough to be sustained on solid food and no milk. No other mammal drinks the milk of another species under normal circumstances. No other mammal pumps out their milk and feeds it to their babies out of a cup. If your argument is that humans are mammals and should do as other mammals do, then unfortunately, your logic is faulty.
If you want to compare yourself to other mammals, knock yourself out. Maybe since my dog can urinate outside wherever it wants, I could urinate on your porch? Other mammals do it, so it must be the best way, right?
Actually, this isn't true. A child drinking pumped milk in a cup does not receive all the benefits of it. When a nursing child is exposed to some germs, those germs are transferred to the mother during nursing via specialized glands. Those glands make immunities directed specifically toward the germs that the child was exposed to, and the next time the child nurses, the mother passes the immunities to the child to help fight the specific germs that the child was exposed to. If there is not physical contact at the breast, then these specific immunities are not generated in this way, and therefore the child is NOT receiving all the benefits of breastmilk. Yes, the child does receive many benefits through drinking breastmilk in a cup, but not all, and not the ones that I personally think are most important (being that I'm an immunologist).
According to the World Health Organization, the order of preference for milk is 1) breastmilk from mother's breast, 2) mother's pumped breastmilk, 3) breastmilk from another mother (such as a healthy wetnurse or donor milk), 4) breastmilk substitute, ie milk from another species (such as cow's milk or baby formula, depending on the age of the child). There is a difference between milk from the breast and pumped milk.
The only reason I can think of why someone would link the ability to ask with age appropriateness of nursing is that they associate nursing only with young babies, which of course is just a cultural bias rather than a biological indicator of readiness. The actual act of asking for something can't possibly have anything to do with not giving it to them - you don't say "if he's old enough to ask for juice (or whatever) then he's too old to drink it" because it makes no sense. What you are really reacting to here is just your perception of "what babies do" and talking/asking is apparently your cutoff between babyhood and toddlerhood. It's similar to when others say that when he can walk he's too old. There is no actual link between walking and nursing. Why don't you say "when he can walk/talk/whatever, he's too old to sleep in a crib?" After all cribs are for babies, yet many folks keep their toddlers in cribs too and nobody gives it a second thought. It's because these things actually have nothing to do with each other!
The emergence of teeth at least makes a little more sense when discussing weaning age, however it is obvious that an infant with a few teeth would not be able to survive without milk, therefore the emergence of first teeth is also not a good biological indicator. A better indication if you wanted to use teeth could be a complete set of teeth, which may happen around 2 years old (my 2.5 year old still doesn't have her "2 year molars"), or even the emergence of adult teeth (more like 5 years old). Another measure might be the age when the immune system is fully developed (more like 5 years old also). Of course there are other measures too, like 6x gestation (4.5 years), 4x birth weight (3 years), 1/3 adult weight (6 years), 1/2 sexual maturity (6 years), etc as has already been pointed out above in Dr. Dettwyler's research. There are many biological markers you could use to determine a "natural" age for weaning, but all of these point to later, not earlier weaning. If you want to wean your child when they are 6 months (first teeth) or 12 months (asking), then that's up to you. But don't try to argue that that is somehow more in line with the "natural" age of weaning than those of us who nurse toddlers because frankly that's laughable.
As for the age of weaning in "native cultures", I think that you will find with a little research that it is quite common for children to nurse 2-5 years in these cultures as well (barring subsequent pregnancy, which is another issue because most children will wean during pregnancy anyway). For more information on weaning in other cultures, you may read "How Weaning Happens", "Mothering Your Nursing Toddler", or "Adventures in Tandem Nursing" which all describe various weaning ages and practices in other cultures. Somehow I doubt that any of these were on your reading list though.
please link a study to this. Mom's a vaccination center. please, please link a study. I could find none.
Im going to ask this question out of sheer curiosity.
What if the mother doesnt breastfeed at all, but goes straight to formula instead?
the breast feeding nazis will come and take away your mother card.
Seriously though, my wife and I attended birthing classes before our first child and they talked more about breastfeeding than birthing. And yes, both women who taught the class were "extended breastfeeders". When my wife couldn't breastfeed because of medications, she felt like a failure. Every circumstance is different. Do what you feel is right. I have 2 healthy, happy kids that don't get sick all the time and haven't died yet. Neither one is overweight or has abandonment issues. There's hope for formula yet.
It is obviously a matter of preference, but I think that most of the time when parents choose not to breastfeed they have no knowledge of just how bad formula is for a growing child. Here is a link to the ingredient lists of popular formulas: Baby Formula label, want a scare? (http://www.breastfeeding.com/all_about/all_about_formula.html - broken link)
One of the main ingredients is whey which is a waste by-product of dairy products. Formula makers also use the cheapest, unhealthiest oils available. Formula is the crap that is left over after all of the nutrients have been sucked out of the food products, that's why they have to add so many vitamins to it! If you choose formula, you are choosing the nutritional equivalent of feeding your child movie theater popcorn for every meal.
I have 2 children that were essentially formula fed and 2 that have been breastfed well beyond the norm. My breastfed boys are way healthier than my girls, who still struggle with issues like allergies, constipation and reoccurring pneumonia. I didn't know just HOW bad formula is for babies, or I never would have thought of it as a close second to breast milk. I was young and naive and very unsupported when it came to breastfeeding.
No one needs to jump all over me for how I feel about breastfeeding. I was answering a specific question that was asked about using formula. I don't personally care how other people feed their children, but I DO think that women who choose artificial baby milk are uninformed.
see, this is why we call you people breastfeeding nazis. so someone who can't breastfeed should let their child starve to death when there are other alternatives? Are you aware of how many nondairy formulas are on the market these days?
How could this statement possible be true:
It may seem paradoxical to some, but the developing countries that have the highest use of infant formula also have the lowest rates of infant mortality. This is obviously not a cause and effect relationship - what the two statistics show is that as a country develops economically and as more women enter into paid employment, infant health and nutrition improves and the use of infant formula increases.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
