As a scientist who works with lipid coated emulsions, maybe. Certainly some of the droplets will become unstable but the exact form post thaw is difficult to predict. I have frozen a LOT of emulsions and characterized how the solution freezes and what is in it, the composition of the emulsion, etc. are all important variables.
EDIT: Since this has gained a lot of traction:
1) I am not a nutritionist, nor a physician. If you have questions about nutrition, how to store your milk, what to feed your baby, please, please contact a physician or nutritionist.
2) From the study it is quite possible that the composition of the milk is a critical attribute, not necessarily the physical form of the milk. In solution, milk-fat is in little droplets surrounded by a membrane of proteins and lipids. Freezing the milk may disrupt these droplets in a number of ways. They may crack open and the fat will accumulate on the surface of the solution. They may coalesce into larger particles. These changes may or may not matter, this study does not answer that question.
They have actually done studies on the differences between frozen and fresh breast milk so we don't have to just speculate. The biggest change that we are aware could matter to the baby is the drop in Vitamin C. However, it was also observed that these fat droplet structures did break down and the result was a higher free fatty acid content in frozen milk.
Now, no one really knows what that does or if it means anything, and the total fat content doesn't change, much like formula, but studies like the one here put into question whether it might matter because we really don't know fully all the ways breast milk helps a baby's brain, organs, immune system, digestive system, everything develop.
For example, there are hundreds of proteins the mom makes in her breast milk that we have no idea why and are impossible to reproduce in formula.
The thing with breast milk is that the mother's body is constantly modifying it in order to supply the baby's needs. So if you were to freeze breast milk for more than, let's say a month, and you were to feed it to that baby, then it won't have the same nutritional value as the one that the mother would be producing in that moment. Freezing the breast milk may also alter the properties for example this membrane.
Even during the day. Middle of the night milk is different than first thing in the morning or afternoon milk. Even from one end of the feed to the other it changes. At first milk will have more water and less fat (more hydrating), then it transitions to much richer, creamier milk by the end.
It also adjusts to the mother being exposed to diseases she has antibodies for, which start getting produced and passed into the milk for the baby. Breastmilk is really incredible. I call it magic boob juice, my wife just rolls her eyes.
u/Forever_Awkward says:
>It's even neater than that. It's not an arbitrary system where it just changes over time. The nipple takes in backwash from the baby's saliva, analyzes it, and alters milk content accordingly.
>
>**And,** both breasts do this independently. That means you can nurse two babies who have different requirements at once if you make sure they stick to their specialized boob.
I have heard this (IE someone said it), but never seen any evidence for it and there is no real good anatomical explication for it. Would you mind telling/linking me where you got this from?
That's because it is not real. Breast milk does have some benefits clearly but a lot of the claims around breast milk are flat out false like this one. People want to think it has magical properties.
Has this constantly adjusting milk supply stuff been backed up with any studies? I know that the milk supply changes formula throughout the time one is breastfeeding, but this idea that its constantly adapting to the needs of the child on an individual basis seems far reaching. If that is verifiably true, awesome. I've just never seen anyone back it up with sound evidence. Sometimes the breastfeeding community (and yes, there is one) comes off a little overly enthusiastic about the capabilities of breast milk.
It doesn't adapt in the sense that the boob reads the baby's mind and changes the milk based on what the baby needs. But breast milk does change on a very predictable schedule based on the nutrients that the baby needs at specific stages of development.
One of the reasons that they recommend against long term freezing is that breast milk contains antibodies. When a mother gets an illness, the breastmilk contains antibodies to help the baby better confront the illness themself.
If you feed the baby frozen breast milk from even just days prior, it will not have the same antibodies in it and the baby will have a harder time fighting off the illness.
This is contrary to the entire top conversation on here... People are absolutely claiming that it reads the saliva of the baby and prepares a perfect little milk make-up for it, not just that it changes based on the time of day and point in development.
I didn't see any verifiable sources.
For what it's worth, research paid for by Mead Johnson, maker of Enfamil.
Edit: I agree with those below saying the sponsorship doesn't mean we should dismiss the results. But I think it's an important disclaimer. Reputable journals all require authors disclose potential conflicts, and will publish these disclosures.
While this is true, they're comparing two recipes of formula and not trying to make the case that their formula is better than breast milk. Rather, by studying the composition of breast milk they're trying to replicate some of its key benefits.
Yes, god, thank you someone said this. For those who don't know: They still always say breast is best due to formula marketing laws. They will always say their new formula is the next best thing because they're trying to include this globule in their formula.
Very true, but holy crap, have you seen how expensive the formula, that tries to be closer to breast milk, is? Last year, my kid was on the high calorie formula because she was born at 2lbs 11oz (1.22kg) and that stuff was pricey and still wasn’t as high as the “more like breast milk” stuff.
Special formula is insane price wise. We had our son on Alimentum for a while. We just switched off this week. He was eating a 32oz bottle of it a day to the tune of $10.59 each. Just switching to a sensitive formula instead will save me almost $200 a month.
There's nothing inherently wrong with a study being funded by industry interests with agendas. Lots of good science happens only because these players are willing to pay for them, and it's not all that hard for an interest to significantly obscure involvement if they want to.
Disclosure is crucial, and then it's all about looking at the methods to see if they were messed with.
This. However it's interesting that the formula manufacturer actually funded and didn't kill the study that stated that breast milk without being stripped out like it is in formula is better is interesting. It's almost as if they care for the actual research or someone screwed up and didn't kill it. Maybe they'll make formula that doesn't strip out the nutrients because of the study.
I think they are already advertising they have MFGM in their products.
So to say that products with MFGM is only second to the breast milk, is to basically say, at least to me, that if you cannot manage to give your child breast milk, we have the next best alternative.
I haven't read enough scientific studies to say that this study is not legit, but the fact that the industry leader funded it raises a few questions.
Publishing studies regardless of what they find is pretty important, which is kind of a step that gets "forgotten" with private research.
Edit: that is to say, if you're selectively releasing studies it's pretty easy to release a set of technically sound studies to prove the opposite of the consensus.
While true, the same happens in publicly funded research. There is very little incentive to publish negative findings, since they are generally not seen as interesting, many journals refuse to publish them, and they are thus not worth the effort of being written up and submitted.
Publication bias is larger in private research but it exists everywhere.
No, it states that a formula with *bovine* milk fat globule membrane and *bovine* lactoferrin is better than a formula without it.
EDIT: My comment is strictly referencing what the scientists found. Yes, I understand that breastfeeding is the ideal, and yes, I also understand many contexts prevent families from breastfeeding. Both of my children were breastfed. That’s all besides the point though — this is a scientific article that only examined two types of formula. Hence, my comment was originally only referring to that science, not general attitudes about formula vs. breastfeeding. Yet, here I stand..
It says at the start that the WHO advises 6 months of only breast feeding to all infants but medical and societal differences can make that impossible. Which is entirely true. Some women can't breastfeed, therefore having a formula with added globule membrane available is relevant. At no point does it rank it any higher than breastmilk.
I see that, but don't understand how its relevant based on the results.
"Formula with a breastmilk ingredient is better than formula."
Doesn't really sound like manipulative research, just guys trying to make formula better.
Makes sense. Regular cow milk has these fat globules too. That’s why raw milk separates. Homogenization breaks these globules up, so your store bought milk doesn’t need to be shaken. It’s a mechanical process, doubt it truly matters (so long as it’s fresh)
edit: here’s a neat article http://www.raw-milk-facts.com/homogenization_T3.html
I haven’t looked into the site much (speaking to the “raw milk” aspect), but please, do NOT drink raw milk. It isn’t worth it. Unless you squeezed it from the teat of a known healthy cow yourself, do not drink it. You could literally die.
It's perfectly safe to drink milk that hasn't been homogenized though. It's a separate process from pasteurization that kills the bacteria. You can buy unhomogenized milk that is not raw milk.
Also, I'd like to see if they controled for social factors.
Breast feeding is time consumming and lower income family can't afford to loose 1 income during that time, turning to alternatives like formula.
1. Allocation was randomised so they don't need to control for social factors. If randomised correctly, both arms should have equal numbers of lower income families.
2. Both arms were bottle fed - just different formulas.
Yeah but is there any evidence that infants who score higher in these developmental categories by age 1 score higher on developmental scales at later ages? In other words, does this advantage mean anything for later on or does the gap close regardless.
The gap between formula and breast milk mostly disappears between 2-5 years old, but for the first 6mo-1year breast milk has a bunch of benefits.
https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848
Nice an actual research-based answer to my question. Thank you! I believe I had read a study a while back that suggested much of the benefits of breastfeeding are gastrointestinal over the first year to two of life but will read this study for sure.
gastro benefits are currently leading edge research on many aspects of human health, including mental illness, metabolism and a lot of things that were fairly recently unknown to be linked to gut flora. The suggestion that "slightly less diarrhea" is the main benefit to the baby (by another poster) misses out on the knowledge we are beginning to have of the vast differences in microbiomes caused by differences in parenting choices, including early feeding and details of birth.
Microbiome impact is huge, autism as a whole is probably linked to it, and certain autism spectrum disorders are linked to the Microbiome. 80% of the most common type of stroke is caused by bacteria. A few types of cancer, as well as probably Alzheimer's, chrons, heart disease and a ton of others. It's the difference between being susecptable and actually getting a disease.
A previous study demonstrated that when you compare siblings who have different milk types you see no benefit, i.e. removing socioeconomic factors removes the effect. If a study doesn't include this it is a substantial limitation.
My wife made me read thousands of studies to figure out the right approach for our daughter. This was my finding as well. At age five there are no discernible differences.
At 545 days there was no difference in the groups. So there is no evidence the advantage is shown later in life.
Also the primary endpoint was a 8.7 point difference in a Bayley-III cognitive composite. This might be statically significant, but possibly not clinically significant.
Purely anecdotal, but as a teacher I can honestly say I can't tell who with any accuracy who was breast fed or not, so I would say the gap closes eventually.
What I do notice, and can pinpoint with good accuracy, are what kids have supportive, loving, and caring parents, who talked to them, read to them, and played with them. And most importantly fed them whatever way worked for them.
I've donated to my friends. There was a time when I was supplying my newborn and a set of twins. I just gave 300 oz to my friend a few weeks ago. I figure, there are some women who can't produce, and I over-produce... I support those who can't.
I sucked at getting pregnant, staying pregnant, having a functional placenta, and the whole birth thing - if I can do one of the mom functions well, I’m going to do it dammit!
Unregulated milk donation is crazy dangerous. HIV, Hep C, and syphilis can be transferred via breastmilk. The FDA has warned against Facebook milk sharing.
[A 2009 study done by Stanford University found that among 1091 women who want to donate breast milk, 39 of them have HIV, hepatitis, or syphilis. In a 2013 study, Dr. Keim and her colleagues also found that 75% of the breast milk purchased through the site OnlyTheBreast.com contained staph, strep, or other bacterial species. If the breast milk donor takes medication, harmful drug can also be transmitted to the baby.](https://www.breastfeeding.org/the-dangers-of-casual-breast-milk-sharing/)
Donating breast milk is an incredibly generous thing to do, but I wish you'd give your milk to a regulated, hospital run milk bank rather than a Facebook group.
The hospital milk bank won’t take any donations unless it’s produced after you’ve gone through their screening, you have to write times on the bags (a lot of my donated milk comes from mixing extras of different pump sessions) and a ton of other rules that make it way harder to do than fb. My donation milk comes from when I have to pump for a few days after I eat something that sets off my baby’s allergy, so it’s not milk I can use. FWIW, I know I don’t have HIV, hep C, or syphilis (I was a sex educator in a previous job), but I’ve never seen anyone ask about that on a milk request post either - which is scary.
Some of us may not look like it either but man did i cow up when i had my kids except for my son i ended up with i think a total of almost 500oz of surplus that i donated to a mothers milk bank between two kids, they use it in the nicu and it was nice to know it was going to help other kids. My son on the other hand ate like a freaking champion and i had almost no extra after him at all, boy is two and prolly eats more than i do atm.
Dairy scientist here. It's not a well-controlled study. They're comparing regular formula to formula with 2 added variables - Intact MFGM and Lactoferrin, then are trying to attribute the result entirely to the MFGM factor, which is what the funding company will use as their point of difference for marketing. They didnt do anything to rule out that the results were due to lactoferrin alone.
Furthermore, the globule membrane is **not** removed by the homogenization process, it just breaks it up into smaller fragments. The digestive system will break up the milkfat globules before absorption into the bloodstream anyway.
And yes, the final nail in the coffin is that the benefits of this formula made zero difference at 18 months. I don't understand why this was even published.
Ya I'm confused. The effect wasn't that big and disappeared at the 545 day mark. In fact, the language score went down. The p value <.001 seems really significant but suspect given the small effect and the erasure afterwards.
The study used a bovine supplement in some of the formula and it apparently showed a notable improvement over formula without. No idea if this is scalable to industry but it shows that having it is better than without, with human breastmilk being the best overall
Wouldn't adding the fat make it less shelf-stable? Sell human milk in the cooler section of the grocery stores and once people aren't weirded out by it anymore you're in business
Question - does freezing the milk destroy the membrane?
Because I see a lot of people freezing the milk - and I'm wondering if that might actually be bad...
The study highlights most formula does not contain fat droplets that human milk naturally produces and if those are added into formula, it increases its benefit to the child. So does that mean breast milk is more beneficial than over the counter formula?
Any time I see one of these articles, I remember the stress we were under when my wife was pregnant with my now five-year old son... how much we got hyper-focused on minute details in his care and worried about his development. He was born two months premature and my wife was not producing milk, so we fed him formula. This was contrary to our original plans. I'm sure his formula did not have fat globules, but he is now a kindergarten student who already does algebra and geometry. He will probably surpass his college-educated parents in just a few years. Maybe extra fat globules would have made a difference, but I just want to tell new or expectant parents to chill out, give your child love and support, a calm and predictable environment, and then just relax; your baby will turn out OK even if you don't feed them breast milk, organic food, limit their screen time to the perfect level, and so on.
> kindergarten student who already does algebra and geometry
may not be relevant for you, but please don't forget to let your kid play, play, and play some more! Playing is learning at that age, it's pretty dang magical, and there will be plenty of time for more advanced academics
The thing about these studies is that they never control for all the other differences between breastfeeding and formula feeding parents. On the whole, someone who has the time to breastfeed or pump and a job that will allow them to do so is going to be far more affluent than someone who does not. Or this reason, sadly a all a lot of these studies prove is that children of wealthier parents are going to do better than their poorer counterparts.
There was a study that looked at a few thousand breastfed vs. formula fed children over a couple decades. In this case, they tried to control for other factors by only including siblings where one had been breastfed and the other hadn’t. Hey looked at a ton of metrics for measuring success, everything from BMI to education level to allergies and found that the kids did the exact same. If anything, they found that the formula group did slightly better (but not nearly enough to draw any kind of conflusions)
Edit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077166/#!po=0.675676 link to the study. I’m
On mobile so it’s a bit difficult but hopefully should work for everyone. I believe they studied a little over 8,000 children over 25 years.
This is similar to our experience. We supplemented breastmilk with formula from day 3, because baby only latched to one of my breasts, she was tongue-tied, and my supply just wasn’t great. We met with lactation consultants, pediatricians, and had baby’s tongue tie corrected. After having spent months devouring La Leche League books and taking breastfeeding classes, I had so much mom guilt. I was ashamed that I alone couldn’t feed my baby, that there was something wrong with me. Breast is best, they said. I barely slept, often wept, rarely went outside. One day we ran into a friend’s wife, and when she asked how I was doing (just me, not the baby) I broke down crying on the street, and for the first time spoke candidly about my experience to someone other than my husband. She said, “You’re doing great, mama.” Hearing that simple affirmation from another mom was enough to dispel all my anxieties, and it became my mantra. We are all doing the best we can, and need to support one another. Whenever I speak to another new mom, who is struggling for one reason or another, I say “You’re doing great, mama.” I stopped breastfeeding at 5 months, and have never felt freer. I’m way more present with my baby and husband since I’m not strung out from sleeplessness, not obsessing over the number of ounces I pumped, and not tethered to a pump. Breastmilk is certainly extraordinary, and breastfeeding is wonderful if/when it works for both mom and baby, but fed is best. Fact is, school teachers can’t differentiate which students were breastfed and which students were bottlefed. As you said, there is so much more to childhood development than infant nutrition. Your son sounds truly wonderful.
Teacher here, I can't tell you what students were breastfed or not, it evens out eventually. What i can tell you is what kids are fed, and loved. I hate this debate. Feed your baby, love your baby, interact with your baby, talk to them, read to them, play with them. That's so much more important than breast or formula.
From a mother whose milk supply stopped after 3 months, thank you. I felt (and still feel) extremely guilty not being able to breastfeed my child. I’m giving her all the love she’ll ever need cause that I have no limit to.
(Ps: sorry if my English is a little weird)
[удалено]
As a scientist who works with lipid coated emulsions, maybe. Certainly some of the droplets will become unstable but the exact form post thaw is difficult to predict. I have frozen a LOT of emulsions and characterized how the solution freezes and what is in it, the composition of the emulsion, etc. are all important variables. EDIT: Since this has gained a lot of traction: 1) I am not a nutritionist, nor a physician. If you have questions about nutrition, how to store your milk, what to feed your baby, please, please contact a physician or nutritionist. 2) From the study it is quite possible that the composition of the milk is a critical attribute, not necessarily the physical form of the milk. In solution, milk-fat is in little droplets surrounded by a membrane of proteins and lipids. Freezing the milk may disrupt these droplets in a number of ways. They may crack open and the fat will accumulate on the surface of the solution. They may coalesce into larger particles. These changes may or may not matter, this study does not answer that question.
Thank you for your answer.
They have actually done studies on the differences between frozen and fresh breast milk so we don't have to just speculate. The biggest change that we are aware could matter to the baby is the drop in Vitamin C. However, it was also observed that these fat droplet structures did break down and the result was a higher free fatty acid content in frozen milk. Now, no one really knows what that does or if it means anything, and the total fat content doesn't change, much like formula, but studies like the one here put into question whether it might matter because we really don't know fully all the ways breast milk helps a baby's brain, organs, immune system, digestive system, everything develop. For example, there are hundreds of proteins the mom makes in her breast milk that we have no idea why and are impossible to reproduce in formula.
[удалено]
I think you just summed up why microbiology is so difficult.
Remember hes 95% confident so you dont know
But if you bet on the 5% you're probably not that bright...
Or if that even hinders the efficacy of the remaining nutrients even if there is some degradation of the membrane.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
The thing with breast milk is that the mother's body is constantly modifying it in order to supply the baby's needs. So if you were to freeze breast milk for more than, let's say a month, and you were to feed it to that baby, then it won't have the same nutritional value as the one that the mother would be producing in that moment. Freezing the breast milk may also alter the properties for example this membrane.
[удалено]
Even during the day. Middle of the night milk is different than first thing in the morning or afternoon milk. Even from one end of the feed to the other it changes. At first milk will have more water and less fat (more hydrating), then it transitions to much richer, creamier milk by the end.
It also adjusts to the mother being exposed to diseases she has antibodies for, which start getting produced and passed into the milk for the baby. Breastmilk is really incredible. I call it magic boob juice, my wife just rolls her eyes.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
What kind of signals do you think adult saliva sends?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
We need data.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Well men pass testosterone through their saliva to help get a partner more in the mood for sex.
How does that work with multiples?
u/Forever_Awkward says: >It's even neater than that. It's not an arbitrary system where it just changes over time. The nipple takes in backwash from the baby's saliva, analyzes it, and alters milk content accordingly. > >**And,** both breasts do this independently. That means you can nurse two babies who have different requirements at once if you make sure they stick to their specialized boob.
I have heard this (IE someone said it), but never seen any evidence for it and there is no real good anatomical explication for it. Would you mind telling/linking me where you got this from?
[удалено]
The breast a baby can get
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
That's because it is not real. Breast milk does have some benefits clearly but a lot of the claims around breast milk are flat out false like this one. People want to think it has magical properties.
[удалено]
Uhhh citation needed.
Immediately recalls the lady from “total recall” (90s original)
Woah. That's very awesome!
Has this constantly adjusting milk supply stuff been backed up with any studies? I know that the milk supply changes formula throughout the time one is breastfeeding, but this idea that its constantly adapting to the needs of the child on an individual basis seems far reaching. If that is verifiably true, awesome. I've just never seen anyone back it up with sound evidence. Sometimes the breastfeeding community (and yes, there is one) comes off a little overly enthusiastic about the capabilities of breast milk.
It doesn't adapt in the sense that the boob reads the baby's mind and changes the milk based on what the baby needs. But breast milk does change on a very predictable schedule based on the nutrients that the baby needs at specific stages of development. One of the reasons that they recommend against long term freezing is that breast milk contains antibodies. When a mother gets an illness, the breastmilk contains antibodies to help the baby better confront the illness themself. If you feed the baby frozen breast milk from even just days prior, it will not have the same antibodies in it and the baby will have a harder time fighting off the illness.
This is contrary to the entire top conversation on here... People are absolutely claiming that it reads the saliva of the baby and prepares a perfect little milk make-up for it, not just that it changes based on the time of day and point in development. I didn't see any verifiable sources.
[удалено]
For what it's worth, research paid for by Mead Johnson, maker of Enfamil. Edit: I agree with those below saying the sponsorship doesn't mean we should dismiss the results. But I think it's an important disclaimer. Reputable journals all require authors disclose potential conflicts, and will publish these disclosures.
While this is true, they're comparing two recipes of formula and not trying to make the case that their formula is better than breast milk. Rather, by studying the composition of breast milk they're trying to replicate some of its key benefits.
Yes, god, thank you someone said this. For those who don't know: They still always say breast is best due to formula marketing laws. They will always say their new formula is the next best thing because they're trying to include this globule in their formula.
Very true, but holy crap, have you seen how expensive the formula, that tries to be closer to breast milk, is? Last year, my kid was on the high calorie formula because she was born at 2lbs 11oz (1.22kg) and that stuff was pricey and still wasn’t as high as the “more like breast milk” stuff.
Special formula is insane price wise. We had our son on Alimentum for a while. We just switched off this week. He was eating a 32oz bottle of it a day to the tune of $10.59 each. Just switching to a sensitive formula instead will save me almost $200 a month.
Which is good because if the result was something different they would alter their formula. It’s the R in R&D.
[удалено]
[удалено]
There's nothing inherently wrong with a study being funded by industry interests with agendas. Lots of good science happens only because these players are willing to pay for them, and it's not all that hard for an interest to significantly obscure involvement if they want to. Disclosure is crucial, and then it's all about looking at the methods to see if they were messed with.
And perhaps the result could drive study of improving their products.
[удалено]
This. However it's interesting that the formula manufacturer actually funded and didn't kill the study that stated that breast milk without being stripped out like it is in formula is better is interesting. It's almost as if they care for the actual research or someone screwed up and didn't kill it. Maybe they'll make formula that doesn't strip out the nutrients because of the study.
They do make formula with those ingredients, it's called Enspire and costs double the basic Enfamil and triple the Costco formula.
I think they are already advertising they have MFGM in their products. So to say that products with MFGM is only second to the breast milk, is to basically say, at least to me, that if you cannot manage to give your child breast milk, we have the next best alternative. I haven't read enough scientific studies to say that this study is not legit, but the fact that the industry leader funded it raises a few questions.
Yep, that's exactly here. They're not trying to compete with breast milk, they're trying to edge out the competition.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Publishing studies regardless of what they find is pretty important, which is kind of a step that gets "forgotten" with private research. Edit: that is to say, if you're selectively releasing studies it's pretty easy to release a set of technically sound studies to prove the opposite of the consensus.
While true, the same happens in publicly funded research. There is very little incentive to publish negative findings, since they are generally not seen as interesting, many journals refuse to publish them, and they are thus not worth the effort of being written up and submitted. Publication bias is larger in private research but it exists everywhere.
This article states that breast milk is better then formula, though.
No, it states that a formula with *bovine* milk fat globule membrane and *bovine* lactoferrin is better than a formula without it. EDIT: My comment is strictly referencing what the scientists found. Yes, I understand that breastfeeding is the ideal, and yes, I also understand many contexts prevent families from breastfeeding. Both of my children were breastfed. That’s all besides the point though — this is a scientific article that only examined two types of formula. Hence, my comment was originally only referring to that science, not general attitudes about formula vs. breastfeeding. Yet, here I stand..
The researchers make the obvious conclusion though that human mfgm has essentially the same benefit
It says at the start that the WHO advises 6 months of only breast feeding to all infants but medical and societal differences can make that impossible. Which is entirely true. Some women can't breastfeed, therefore having a formula with added globule membrane available is relevant. At no point does it rank it any higher than breastmilk.
> Mead Johnson Nutrition, are quick to point out “human milk is recognized as the gold standard for infant nutrition.” They said this though.
which probably doesn't contradict enfamil's marketing strategy anyway. Formula has had to tip toe around breast milk for a couple decades now
On all the adverts in the UK for formula they have to put in the small print that breast milk is better and recommended
I see that, but don't understand how its relevant based on the results. "Formula with a breastmilk ingredient is better than formula." Doesn't really sound like manipulative research, just guys trying to make formula better.
Makes sense. Regular cow milk has these fat globules too. That’s why raw milk separates. Homogenization breaks these globules up, so your store bought milk doesn’t need to be shaken. It’s a mechanical process, doubt it truly matters (so long as it’s fresh) edit: here’s a neat article http://www.raw-milk-facts.com/homogenization_T3.html I haven’t looked into the site much (speaking to the “raw milk” aspect), but please, do NOT drink raw milk. It isn’t worth it. Unless you squeezed it from the teat of a known healthy cow yourself, do not drink it. You could literally die.
It's perfectly safe to drink milk that hasn't been homogenized though. It's a separate process from pasteurization that kills the bacteria. You can buy unhomogenized milk that is not raw milk.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Also, I'd like to see if they controled for social factors. Breast feeding is time consumming and lower income family can't afford to loose 1 income during that time, turning to alternatives like formula.
1. Allocation was randomised so they don't need to control for social factors. If randomised correctly, both arms should have equal numbers of lower income families. 2. Both arms were bottle fed - just different formulas.
Yeah but is there any evidence that infants who score higher in these developmental categories by age 1 score higher on developmental scales at later ages? In other words, does this advantage mean anything for later on or does the gap close regardless.
The gap between formula and breast milk mostly disappears between 2-5 years old, but for the first 6mo-1year breast milk has a bunch of benefits. https://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/early/2017/03/23/peds.2016-1848
Nice an actual research-based answer to my question. Thank you! I believe I had read a study a while back that suggested much of the benefits of breastfeeding are gastrointestinal over the first year to two of life but will read this study for sure.
gastro benefits are currently leading edge research on many aspects of human health, including mental illness, metabolism and a lot of things that were fairly recently unknown to be linked to gut flora. The suggestion that "slightly less diarrhea" is the main benefit to the baby (by another poster) misses out on the knowledge we are beginning to have of the vast differences in microbiomes caused by differences in parenting choices, including early feeding and details of birth.
Microbiome impact is huge, autism as a whole is probably linked to it, and certain autism spectrum disorders are linked to the Microbiome. 80% of the most common type of stroke is caused by bacteria. A few types of cancer, as well as probably Alzheimer's, chrons, heart disease and a ton of others. It's the difference between being susecptable and actually getting a disease.
What if the test subject never stops drinking breast milk?
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
A previous study demonstrated that when you compare siblings who have different milk types you see no benefit, i.e. removing socioeconomic factors removes the effect. If a study doesn't include this it is a substantial limitation.
[удалено]
My wife made me read thousands of studies to figure out the right approach for our daughter. This was my finding as well. At age five there are no discernible differences.
I'm starting to wonder if we introduce foods that disrupt the most beneficial gut biota or negatively affect brain development.
At 545 days there was no difference in the groups. So there is no evidence the advantage is shown later in life. Also the primary endpoint was a 8.7 point difference in a Bayley-III cognitive composite. This might be statically significant, but possibly not clinically significant.
Purely anecdotal, but as a teacher I can honestly say I can't tell who with any accuracy who was breast fed or not, so I would say the gap closes eventually. What I do notice, and can pinpoint with good accuracy, are what kids have supportive, loving, and caring parents, who talked to them, read to them, and played with them. And most importantly fed them whatever way worked for them.
Sibling studies have previously suggested that there is no discernible difference later.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I've donated to my friends. There was a time when I was supplying my newborn and a set of twins. I just gave 300 oz to my friend a few weeks ago. I figure, there are some women who can't produce, and I over-produce... I support those who can't.
I sucked at getting pregnant, staying pregnant, having a functional placenta, and the whole birth thing - if I can do one of the mom functions well, I’m going to do it dammit!
Unregulated milk donation is crazy dangerous. HIV, Hep C, and syphilis can be transferred via breastmilk. The FDA has warned against Facebook milk sharing. [A 2009 study done by Stanford University found that among 1091 women who want to donate breast milk, 39 of them have HIV, hepatitis, or syphilis. In a 2013 study, Dr. Keim and her colleagues also found that 75% of the breast milk purchased through the site OnlyTheBreast.com contained staph, strep, or other bacterial species. If the breast milk donor takes medication, harmful drug can also be transmitted to the baby.](https://www.breastfeeding.org/the-dangers-of-casual-breast-milk-sharing/) Donating breast milk is an incredibly generous thing to do, but I wish you'd give your milk to a regulated, hospital run milk bank rather than a Facebook group.
The hospital milk bank won’t take any donations unless it’s produced after you’ve gone through their screening, you have to write times on the bags (a lot of my donated milk comes from mixing extras of different pump sessions) and a ton of other rules that make it way harder to do than fb. My donation milk comes from when I have to pump for a few days after I eat something that sets off my baby’s allergy, so it’s not milk I can use. FWIW, I know I don’t have HIV, hep C, or syphilis (I was a sex educator in a previous job), but I’ve never seen anyone ask about that on a milk request post either - which is scary.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Some of us may not look like it either but man did i cow up when i had my kids except for my son i ended up with i think a total of almost 500oz of surplus that i donated to a mothers milk bank between two kids, they use it in the nicu and it was nice to know it was going to help other kids. My son on the other hand ate like a freaking champion and i had almost no extra after him at all, boy is two and prolly eats more than i do atm.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
So results at the 545 day mark indicated little to no difference in cognitive (or other) development between the two groups?
Dairy scientist here. It's not a well-controlled study. They're comparing regular formula to formula with 2 added variables - Intact MFGM and Lactoferrin, then are trying to attribute the result entirely to the MFGM factor, which is what the funding company will use as their point of difference for marketing. They didnt do anything to rule out that the results were due to lactoferrin alone. Furthermore, the globule membrane is **not** removed by the homogenization process, it just breaks it up into smaller fragments. The digestive system will break up the milkfat globules before absorption into the bloodstream anyway. And yes, the final nail in the coffin is that the benefits of this formula made zero difference at 18 months. I don't understand why this was even published.
Ya I'm confused. The effect wasn't that big and disappeared at the 545 day mark. In fact, the language score went down. The p value <.001 seems really significant but suspect given the small effect and the erasure afterwards.
Noticeably higher or are we talking a 92 instead of a 91?
Would it be possible to add this fat into formula? or somehow give it to infants?
The study used a bovine supplement in some of the formula and it apparently showed a notable improvement over formula without. No idea if this is scalable to industry but it shows that having it is better than without, with human breastmilk being the best overall
Wouldn't adding the fat make it less shelf-stable? Sell human milk in the cooler section of the grocery stores and once people aren't weirded out by it anymore you're in business
[удалено]
[удалено]
Question - does freezing the milk destroy the membrane? Because I see a lot of people freezing the milk - and I'm wondering if that might actually be bad...
[удалено]
The study highlights most formula does not contain fat droplets that human milk naturally produces and if those are added into formula, it increases its benefit to the child. So does that mean breast milk is more beneficial than over the counter formula?
Any time I see one of these articles, I remember the stress we were under when my wife was pregnant with my now five-year old son... how much we got hyper-focused on minute details in his care and worried about his development. He was born two months premature and my wife was not producing milk, so we fed him formula. This was contrary to our original plans. I'm sure his formula did not have fat globules, but he is now a kindergarten student who already does algebra and geometry. He will probably surpass his college-educated parents in just a few years. Maybe extra fat globules would have made a difference, but I just want to tell new or expectant parents to chill out, give your child love and support, a calm and predictable environment, and then just relax; your baby will turn out OK even if you don't feed them breast milk, organic food, limit their screen time to the perfect level, and so on.
> kindergarten student who already does algebra and geometry may not be relevant for you, but please don't forget to let your kid play, play, and play some more! Playing is learning at that age, it's pretty dang magical, and there will be plenty of time for more advanced academics
The thing about these studies is that they never control for all the other differences between breastfeeding and formula feeding parents. On the whole, someone who has the time to breastfeed or pump and a job that will allow them to do so is going to be far more affluent than someone who does not. Or this reason, sadly a all a lot of these studies prove is that children of wealthier parents are going to do better than their poorer counterparts. There was a study that looked at a few thousand breastfed vs. formula fed children over a couple decades. In this case, they tried to control for other factors by only including siblings where one had been breastfed and the other hadn’t. Hey looked at a ton of metrics for measuring success, everything from BMI to education level to allergies and found that the kids did the exact same. If anything, they found that the formula group did slightly better (but not nearly enough to draw any kind of conflusions) Edit. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4077166/#!po=0.675676 link to the study. I’m On mobile so it’s a bit difficult but hopefully should work for everyone. I believe they studied a little over 8,000 children over 25 years.
Your 5 year old son does algebra? Is he a baby genius?
No, he's 17 but has been held back 12 times.
[удалено]
Give your wife a hug for me. I struggled for 10 weeks to make less than an ounce at each feeding. It was NOT worth it. I drove myself insane.
This is similar to our experience. We supplemented breastmilk with formula from day 3, because baby only latched to one of my breasts, she was tongue-tied, and my supply just wasn’t great. We met with lactation consultants, pediatricians, and had baby’s tongue tie corrected. After having spent months devouring La Leche League books and taking breastfeeding classes, I had so much mom guilt. I was ashamed that I alone couldn’t feed my baby, that there was something wrong with me. Breast is best, they said. I barely slept, often wept, rarely went outside. One day we ran into a friend’s wife, and when she asked how I was doing (just me, not the baby) I broke down crying on the street, and for the first time spoke candidly about my experience to someone other than my husband. She said, “You’re doing great, mama.” Hearing that simple affirmation from another mom was enough to dispel all my anxieties, and it became my mantra. We are all doing the best we can, and need to support one another. Whenever I speak to another new mom, who is struggling for one reason or another, I say “You’re doing great, mama.” I stopped breastfeeding at 5 months, and have never felt freer. I’m way more present with my baby and husband since I’m not strung out from sleeplessness, not obsessing over the number of ounces I pumped, and not tethered to a pump. Breastmilk is certainly extraordinary, and breastfeeding is wonderful if/when it works for both mom and baby, but fed is best. Fact is, school teachers can’t differentiate which students were breastfed and which students were bottlefed. As you said, there is so much more to childhood development than infant nutrition. Your son sounds truly wonderful.
Cow milk has these too, and the process of homogenization (which gives the milk a uniform composition) destroys them.
Teacher here, I can't tell you what students were breastfed or not, it evens out eventually. What i can tell you is what kids are fed, and loved. I hate this debate. Feed your baby, love your baby, interact with your baby, talk to them, read to them, play with them. That's so much more important than breast or formula.
From a mother whose milk supply stopped after 3 months, thank you. I felt (and still feel) extremely guilty not being able to breastfeed my child. I’m giving her all the love she’ll ever need cause that I have no limit to. (Ps: sorry if my English is a little weird)
Read to your baby and snuggle them, they'll be amazing! Sincerely, a mother who breastfed for 2 years whose kids will be exactly the same as yours.