Informed Parenting

Abbott Formula webcast a ploy to target Canadian Health Care Providers

2012-01-17T03:58:00.000-08:00

Abbott Nutrition Webcast to Target Canadian Health Care Providers

Health care providers across Canada will be the target of an Abbott Nutrition webcast on Wednesday. The January 18th webcast, presented by doctors and scientists, will promote Abbott’s infant formula, focusing on two of its marketing gimmicks, prebiotics and lutein. See the press release below.

View Abbott’s Webcast Information [PDF]:
http://infactsecure.com/broadcast-email/Abbott-Webcast.pdf

Let the organizers and presenters of the webcast know what you think about this flagrant violation of the WHO Code! Write an email letter or adapt INFACT’s sample letter.

Download INFACT Canada’s sample letter:
http://infactsecure.com/broadcast-email/Abbott-Webcast-Press-Release.doc

Send your emails to:

Webcast Moderator, Dr. David Mack: dmack@cheo.on.ca
Speaker, Dr. Philip M Sherman, with The Hospital for Sick Children: philip.sherman@sickkids.ca
Speaker, Glenn R. Gibson, PhD: g.r.gibson@reading.ac.uk
Abbott Representative, Michael Seibel: michael.seibel@abbott.com

From INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
http://infactsecure.com/broadcast-email/abbott-webcast.html

Press Release

Canadian and International Voices Call on Abbott Formula Company to Immediately Cancel Marketing Webcasts to Health Professionals Across Canada

January 16, 2012

Members of the International Lactation Consultants Association, the International Baby Food Action Network, together with their Canadian counterparts are demanding that Abbott Nutrition cancel the infant formula marketing immediately.

Abbott is one of the world’s largest manufacturers and promoters of infant formula. Infants in Canada and around the world suffer illness, malnutrition and even death because of Abbott’s aggressive marketing, which is designed to persuade mothers to formula feed instead of breastfeed. Globally UN agencies note that at least 1.5 million babies die every year linked to artificial feeding practices. As the one of the world’s most aggressive formula marketers, Abbott bears much responsibility for this outrageous death toll.

The World Health Organization International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and relevant resolutions of the World Health Assembly have been adopted globally to curb the marketing excesses of the infant formula companies and safeguard infant health. The International Code has been fully endorsed by all UN Member States, including Canada. These provisions unequivocally state that health care systems and professionals should not be complicit in the marketing and promotion of artificial feeding products. Conflicts of interest, such as the webcast formula promotion to health care professionals by Abbott are explicitly prohibited.

By making health claims about their products, Abbott is misrepresenting their products and deceiving parents into thinking that the products are similar to breastmilk. Nothing can be further from the truth. The reality is not “prebiotics and lutein”, but dirty contaminated bottles, stinking diarrhea, babies screaming with pain from otitis media, babies separated from their mothers in pediatric wards with acute respiratory disease, damaged guts that morph into chronic lifelong conditions such as Crohn’s disease, more women dying of breast cancer, the cost and pain of living a life with diabetes and lives cut short because of cardiac disease and so on. The addition of more chemicals to infant formula in order to create marketing advantages can only contribute to more health damage from this chemical cocktail.

What Abbott does not tell parents is that its powdered formula may also be contaminated with the lethal microorganism Enterobacter sakazakii, which can result in sepsis, necrotizing enterocolitis, meningitis and even death. The WHO recommends that powdered formula be reconstituted at 70 degrees centigrade to killE. sakazakii.

But these are not the only misleading claims Abbott makes to market its formula in Canada. Abbott claims its formula fats to be “closest to breast milk - to support your baby’s normal brain, and eye development”. These claims are unsubstantiated and designed to deceive parents into thinking the product is like breastmilk. Canada’s Food and Drugs Act prohibits such claims.

Full compliance of the International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes and the subsequent World Health Assembly resolutions relating to infant and young child nutrition is the minimum standard for the marketing of infant formulas. Abbott must immediately cease these damaging promotions and withdraw from this deceptive and damaging webcast designed to use Canada’s health care professionals as marketing agents for formula feeding.

Contact
Elisabeth Sterken, nutritionist, BSc, MSc. Dt
Director INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
esterken@infactcanada.ca
Tel: 416-595-9819

Read the press release online at:
http://infactsecure.com/broadcast-email/abbott-webcast.html

Stop the Discrimination by Revenue Canada- CCTB

2011-12-07T04:06:00.001-08:00

While many Canadians know that dealing with Revenue Canada can be a pain in the butt, and that dealing with the Canadian Child Tax Benefit people can be especially frustrating, they may not realize the just how far this agency will go to make life a living hell.

Twice in the past 4 years I've gone head to head with the CCTB offices. Once for a claim they'd made against me for no reason, and once when they spent 7 months giving me the run around and making me jump through hoops when our second youngest son was born. After 7 months of complete and utter frustration, I finally called up the offices of the Minister of Finance in Ottawa. I lucked out and somehow got a hold of the Aide to the Minister himself and was able to tell him the entire sordid tale.... miraculously, 24 hours later I got a call from the manager from the local Revenue Canada office and 5 days after that I had a cheque for the entire 7 months of back payments of missing CCTB cheques.

The noisy hinge gets the oil.

Last week a friend of mine sent me a link to a group on Facebook called "Stop The Discriminatory CTB Review" that grabbed my interest, so I clicked over to see what the group was about. While I was absolutely no stranger to the never ending frustration of dealing with Revenue Canada, what I discovered really rattled me. This is what Amber, owner of the Facebook page, wrote:

How The Canadian Child Tax Benefit Review Is DiscriminatoryThe CRA is conducting and has been conducting reviews of random families recieveing CTB. This review asks that you show various forms of proof that your child(ren) lived with you for specific tax years. They allow a month to provide the letters necessary, failing to provide exactly what they ask for results in you owing back the CTB for that tax year or not recieveing retro-payment. The specific requirements are: A letter from an authorized daycare, A letter from your child's school as well as a letter from your family Dr. or Dentist naming the dates your child was seen and the address at which they lived spanning the ENTIRE (the review itself put that in bold) year under review. Families who cannot provide the following required letters are as follows:...-Parents who choose to stay at home with thier children and not send them to daycare.-Parents who choose an unauthorized daycare provider (family member or friend)-Parents who home educate-Parents who choose not to or due to allergies are unable follow the regular vaccine schedule-Families who do not have a family doctors and only bring their child(ren) to the dentist every 6 months as recommended by the Canadian Dental Association. -Families who choose a Naturopathic doctor as their primary healthcare provider-Families who do not have dental insurance and recieve dental care through a free dental clinic I am currently working on a letter to Tony Clement describing (using statistics Canada) how the strict criteria for proving that your children lived with you for a specific tax year, is not only discriminatory, but also guarantees a large amount of savings in CTB pay out for our federal government. If you know of any families currently under going this "review" or simply believe that this is a discrimnatory review please send them to this group and join it yourselves.

Amber has written an excellent letter to Minister Tony Clement, asking that he, and our government, address this blatant discrimination against families in Canada. I would like to encourage everyone to send a copy of this letter, or write your own, to the Hon. Tony Clement, and to all your local MPs and MPPs. Our Canadian Government needs to hear the voices of those that are being discriminated against and the voices of Canadians in support of these necessary changes.

The CRA Ombudman's office has stated that their office will not handle these concerns however the Canadian Human Rights Commission can, and The Minister of Finance- jim.flaherty@parl.gc.ca This situation should/could be considered a "systemic" complaint, this link will take you directly to the comments form. It can be filled out with your own words, or use the letter below.

http://www.oto-boc.gc.ca/systmc_nqrs/cmmnts-eng.html

To The Honourable Tony Clement:
I have recently read the request for information for the Canada Revenue Agency’s Canadian Child Tax Benefit Review, and I am deeply concerned about the strict and discriminatory criteria for proving that one’s child lived with them during the year under review. I am also disturbed that the review appears to be an accusation of tax fraud, with monetary consequences and not criminal, as such, the burden of proof rests on the accused. For clarity, all quotes from the CCTB review documents will be in bold.
The strict and in some situations, impossible to provide, requirements are as follows:
In the proof of residency:
“If you are the owner of your residence, provide your property tax bill(s) for each year under review. Your property tax bill must include your full name, the address of the property and the year” What if the house is only in the spouses’ name and therefore the property tax bill does not include the name of the member of the family that receives CCTB?
“In addition to either A) or B) please provide one of the following documents”
“C) Mortgage papers” Mortgage may not be in the name of CCTB recipient
“D ) Insurance policies” CCTB receiver may not have insurance of any kind in their name.
“E) Household bills…Please provide TWO of these documents per year for each year under review.” People renting in all-inclusive situations and only using cell phones could not provide this information. Also the parent receiving CCTB, may not have utility bills in their name.
The discriminatory requirements are as follows:
"Please provide documentation from TWO of the following sources for each child to support the ENTIRE period under review” (please note: all uppercase print exists on original document)
“A) A copy of the child’s registration/enrollment document or information/emergency contact sheet. It must be signed and certified by the school to be a true copy.” According to the Ontario Federation of Teaching Parents, the number for Canada as a whole is estimated at approximately 60,000 homeschooled children.
“B) A letter from the daycare or school authorities which includes the following information from their files…” According to Statistics Canada, General Social Survey: Navigating Family Transitions, published Wednesday June 13th 2007: “23% of parents who took leave did not reintegrate into the labour market…24% who did not return to work said it was for financial reasons, that childcare services were too expensive to be worth the cost” Also, Statistics Canada article, Women in Canada: Paid Work. Published December 9th, 2010, stated : “The employment rate for women with children under the age of 3 was 64.4%” That leaves a percentage of 36.6% who did not need a regular daycare provider. I think we can agree that this is a significant amount of families that cannot possibly provide the required documents.
“C) Report card(s) for each year under review, only if they include the child’s home address, attendance record and guardian’s name.” see OFTP estimate of homeschooled children above.
“D) A letter from your family doctor or dentist confirming the child is under the doctor’s or dentist’s care and indicating the home address on their file for the child. The letter must contain the dates that the child was seen by them and must cover the entire period under review. The letter must be on letterhead and must be signed by the doctor or dentist…” “More than 1 quarter of those aged 20-34 were without a regular medical doctor…in comparison 1in 5 Canadians aged 35-44 (18%) …were without a regular family doctor…” – Statistics Canada, Canadian Community Health Survey (correction) published June 21st, 2011. These are the age groups who are currently raising families. I do not believe it is an unfair assumption that many of the children of these adults who do not have family physicians also are without a family physician themselves. Which leaves a letter from a dentist as proof of the child living with the CCTB recipient: “The letter must contain the dates that the child was seen by them and must cover the entire period under review” The Canadian Dental Association recommends: “…a dental exam every six months will let your child’s dentist catch small problems early.” Unless, the child(ren) is suffering from serious dental problems there is no way, with a letter from the dentist, that a family could provide the documents that cover the entire period under review, as requested by the Canada Revenue Agency.
Finally according to the CRA’s CTTB review: “If you do not reply or do not provide the requested information and supporting documentation, we will stop or revise your payments. You may also be required to repay amounts already received” Families who cannot provide the requested documentation and therefore may have their CCTB payments stopped, revised be forced to repay amounts received are as follows:
-Families with a stay at home parent, who choose not to send their children to a daycare center.
-Families who home educate.
-Families without a family doctor
-Families in which the CCTB recipient is unemployed or chooses not to be responsible for utilities and therefore has no bills in his/her name.
-Families who live in “utilities included” housing.
There is a large amount of families in this constituency and all over Canada, that fall under the descriptions above, please do not let this discriminatory review deprive them of much needed CCTB.
Thanking you in advance for your swift action to protect this financial income for the families in your constituency,

To send an email to Tony Clement-

tony.clement@parl.gc.ca

To find your local MP:

http://www.parl.gc.ca/MembersOfParliament/MainMPsCompleteList.aspx?TimePeriod=Current&Language=E

As I have said over and over, the only way we can make change happen is to stand up and speak out. Please, take 15 minutes out of your busy schedule and let your voice be heard!!!

IBFAN: The Business of Malnutrition

2011-11-29T05:21:00.001-08:00

The Business of malnutrition: breaking down trade rules to profit from the poor

Guidelines for a new range of products for babies ‘at risk’ of malnutrition was the topic at the annual meeting of Codex, the UN body that sets food standards. In the press release below, learn about how the mass marketing of these products may create the scary new ‘business of malnutrition’ where the developed world makes big profits from the malnutrition and poverty of the developing world.

From IBFAN
http://www.infactcanada.ca/whatsnew/codex-2011.html

Press Release

The Business of malnutrition:
breaking down trade rules to profit from the poor

Codex Nutrition Committee: Bad Soden, Frankfurt, Germany

12-18th November 2011

Health campaigners, led by the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) and representatives from a dozen developing countries attended the Nutrition Meeting of Codex, the UN body that sets international food standards These attendees achieved partial success in the Codex Guidelines by calling for strict controls on the marketing of a loose range of processed fortified products for babies that were never clearly defined. The objective was to provide nutrients which are “either lacking or are present in insufficient quantities,” with the clear aim of targeting all those ‘at risk’ of malnutrition.

The countries, Brazil, Nigeria, Chile, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Gambia, Togo, Cameroon, Nicaragua, Costa Rica, South Africa and Bolivia, fearing that uncontrolled marketing would undermine breastfeeding, increase family poverty and create dependence on products that are expensive and often unnecessary, called for several key World Health Assembly Resolutions to be mentioned in the guidelines. The United States and the European Union initially opposed this move saying that because the Resolutions stand on their own there was no need to refer to them. Australia and Botswana suggested that paragraphs from the relevant WHA texts could be referenced and, after the World Health Organisation (WHO) explained the importance of the Resolutions, the EU and the US agreed to a compromise.

Experts from the International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN), led by Elisabeth Sterken of INFACT Canada, suggest that as the EU and US economic crisis continues, the new ‘business of malnutrition’ – which has the potential for multi-billion dollar profits from exports to the developing world and is portrayed as a win-win solution for the economy and development – could lead to a marketing bonanza that, instead of improving infant and young child health, could harm it and drain family budgets.

. . . .

Read the full press release online at:
http://www.infactcanada.ca/whatsnew/codex-2011.html

Read the full press release in PDF format at:
http://www.infactcanada.ca/pdf/codex-2011.pdf

Read the related article in the Guardian, “Alarm as corporate giants target developing countries”:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/global-development/2011/nov/23/corporate-giants-target-developing-countries?INTCMP=SRCH

Elisabeth Sterken
Director INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
esterken@infactcanada.ca

Sending our toddlers off to school to learn to be good little automatons

2011-11-24T05:30:00.001-08:00

Two days ago an article was published that literally left me speechless, and gave me a serious case of Head/Desk.

*Thud*..... thud thud thud..... *repeat

The article entitled "Childhood education starting at age 2 would pay off big, new Canadian report concludes" on Yahoo.com states:

Forget about daycare, a new Canadian report recommends every child should start going to school starting at age two.The Early Years Study 3 , released Tuesday, recommends toddlers have access to publicly funded early-childhood education at their local school. The report says an "avalanche of evidence" indicates there's a big payoff for kids if they start learning earlier.
"Education is well-established and a well-valued system within our country, and it's a place we feel it should be attached to, to build on," Margaret Norrie McCain, who co-authored the report with the late Dr. Fraser Mustard and Kerry McCuaig," said in the Toronto Star ......recommendations should be easy to implement in Ontario, which already has a full-day kindergarten for children aged four and five.
"I would come down to three-year-olds, then two-year-olds and one-year-olds," Mustard said. "I'd move right down, and I'd pay (early childhood educators) well, and if you are telling me we don't have the money, I'd make the point that the risk for physical and mental health problems is actually set in early development."

The Early Years "Study" it's self says

"the three Early Years studies argue that if we truly wish to provide our children with an equal opportunity to maximize their potential, it is vital that we do everything we can to enhance their early development. Our survival as a species will depend on our children acquiring the skills they will need to cope with the social and environmental revolutions of the 21st century. Canada’s tomorrow depends on our ability to leverage what we know into policies and practices that support families and benefit children today."

As I said above, these articles literally left me with a raging headache and an inability to form the cloud of outrage in my head into simple words. But don't worry, because Jonathan McLeod seems to of taken all the anger and spluttering exasperation in my head and put it all together in a great package of words that echo my thoughts almost exactly.

*course language warning for those that are sensitive to those things

They’re Dirty Filthy LiarsJonathan McLeodNews agencies have been picking up on a new report on child, err toddler, education. The Early Years Study 3 has made some waves as the ~~researchers~~ propagandists behind it make the claim that children as young as 18 months need to be dumped into schools where they can start learning.The report is garbage.This isn’t some new study that has been released, it’s not even some meta-study, analyzing the results of various other studies. It’s a political manifesto dressed up academic garb. From the very beginning, the authors state an obvious, but insidious, agenda: their “progressive goal” to make society better. ‘Progressive’ is a funny term. It seems so beneficial, and can so easily be dropped in as a synonym for ‘liberal’, but that’s not what’s going on here. The authors have a political cause to push, and they will stop at nothing – nothing – to get disabuse you of any differing views of the functioning of society.The authors are quite clear in their intent and their concern. They aren’t worried about children; they aren’t worried about families. Yes, they dress up all their politics in fuzzy stories about trips to the library and immigrants finding a place in our cold, dark society, but their concern is only for society, not individuals and not families. Personal desires and preferences should never be a primary concern; the will of the individual should be subverted for the benefit of the state.Don’t believe me? The report bemoans the lost economic activity of stay-at-home parents. The parents, we are told, are not being productive or contributing to society. They need to be freed, apparently, from the chains of parenting so that they may serve a greater function. The report worries that if the current trend away from stay-at-home parents were to reverse, it could spell the economic doom of Canada. I’m. Not. Kidding.These people were sly. They’re incredibly dishonest, but they’re not dumb. The report (and there’s too much crap in there for me to fisk the whole thing) begins with discussions about child development, and throws in a nice anecdote about a new Canadian who needed the government to help her care for all her kids. How could you be against child development or new Canadians integrating into society? Early on, though, the fix is in. First off, when the authors begin comparing their preferred model of round-the-clock child care, they tip their hand by comparing the costs to that of other schools in the district (Toronto), but they’re only comparing a public institution to other public institutions. No private schools are ever mentioned. This is a theme throughout the entire report; education is the sole domain of the government.

To read the rest of Jonathan's excellent diatribe please click HERE

If this is the way that our government thinks we should nurture our children and "support families".... it makes me very happy to be a stay at home - homeschooling mom!!!

"Milksharing on Facebook: one year later"

2011-11-02T06:29:00.000-07:00

With the whirlwind of starting homeschooling and getting ready for Halloween, I completely forgot about our first anniversary! October 28th marked the first anniversary of the launch of a global milksharing network on Facebook!! I can NOT believe that it's already been 12 months- it seems like just weeks ago we were setting up pages and organizing hundreds of volunteers and pulling together press releases..... WOW!

Jodine's World's article "Milksharing on Facebook: One year later" sums it all up perfectly!!

It's been a whole year since Emma Kwasnica's Facebook milksharing network was launched. I can't believe it's been that long - seems like 10 minutes ago I was blogging about the six-month anniversary with my post, "A funny thing happened on the way to the milk bank."
Early on there were some bumps for global milksharing - understandable as 300 volunteer admins struggled to set up and run local communities using Facebook. Just as individuals struggle with the love-hate relationship with Facebook, so did the admins managing over a hundred community pages in 50 countries around the globe.
Then there were some personality clashes - the original Eats on Feets Arizona community page founder parted ways with the global network after asserting her rights to her name. The global group became Human Milk 4 Human Babies (HM4HB) and while moms just kept right on offering up surplus milk and babes continued to receive it, the name change has hampered the growth of this network. There are still some Eats on Feets pages around and families new to milksharing can't always find their active local communities. And these days the Eats on Feets website has been hijacked by someone peddling breast implants and pregnancy diets, creating the potential for confusion for individuals and even reporters looking to do a feature on the one-year anniversary of the movement.
But Human Milk 4 Human Babies hasn't lost any steam and in September it sponsored the first World Milksharing Week with broad worldwide participation from Australia to Arizona.
And although France joined the US and Canada with official warnings about the dangers of informal or Internet-based milksharing, three well-known academics published a supportive commentary in the International Breastfeeding Journal. "Milk Sharing: from private practice to public pursuit" has become the most accessed item on the IBJ website this year. Authors James Akre, Karleen Gribble and Maureen Minchin argue the risks of milksharing are manageable and conclude:

"this made-by-mothers model shows considerable potential for expanding the world's supply of human milk and improving the health of children." Akre, Gribble, Minchin, IBJ 2011

HERE to read the entire article on Jodine's World

So much has happened in the past year. Human Milk 4 Human Babies has grown bigger and faster and busier than we ever thought possible at this time last year. Mothers are coming together all over the world to create "communities" to support each other and insure that babies are getting the breastmilk they need to grow and be strong and healthy. This is the Vision and Mission of HM4HB: to promote the nourishment of babies and children around the world with human milk. We are dedicated to fostering community between local families who have chosen to share breastmilk.

Our Vision

HM4HB is a global milksharing network, a virtual village, comprising thousands of people from over fifty countries. We are mothers, fathers, adoptive families, grandparents, childbirth and breastfeeding professionals, volunteers, supporters, donors, and recipients that have come together to support the simple idea that all babies and children have the right to receive human milk. We use social media as a platform for local families to make real-life connections and come together as sustainable milksharing communities where women graciously share their breastmilk. HM4HB is built on the principle of informed choice: we trust, honour, and value the autonomy of families and we assert they are capable of weighing the benefits and risks of milksharing in order to make choices that are best for them. We hold the space for them and protect their right to do what is normal, healthy, and ecological.

Breastmilk, the biologically normal sustenance for humankind, is a free-flowing resource and mothers of the world are willing to share it. Milksharing is a vital tradition that has been taken from us, and it is crucial that we regain trust in ourselves, our neighbors, and in our fellow women. Feeding any breastmilk substitute is not without risk and we support the families who know there is another option. We are the bridge that connects local families and brings them together again as milksharing communities. Indeed, the future of humanity depends on our return to sharing in a local and tangible way with one another.

We want milksharing and wet-nursing to be commonplace and babies to be fed at women's breasts whenever and wherever they need it. We dream of a world where mothers from previous generations pass on the tradition of breastfeeding and are a wealth of knowledge and support. We can forsee a time when women protect each other and help one another feed their babies so that every mother feels whole and no mother feels broken or that her body is failing her. We imagine a world where family members, friends, lactation consultants, doctors, and midwives do not hesitate to recommend donor milk when it is needed. We envision a future where families come together to raise this generation, and the next, by nourishing human babies everywhere with human milk and unconditional love.

Every person of the world is invited to join HM4HB. Page administrators, members, donors, recipients, and supporters are all important for building local, real-life communities where acquiring donor milk is no different than asking a trusted neighbor for an egg. We hope that one day in the future all babies in the world will thrive and grow on mother's milk, and HM4HB will no longer be needed because wet-nurses and breastmilk are available on every street, village, town, city, and island around the globe.

For more information about Human Milk 4 Human Babies, please visit the website at: http://hm4hb.net/index.html Visit the global fan page on Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/hm4hb

"15 Tricks of Formula Companies"

2011-10-30T04:18:00.000-07:00

This is oh so brilliant that I have nothing to add- The Alpha Parent has covered pretty much every single thing that needs to be said!!!! This long article outlines EXACTLY what Infant formula companies do to convince you to use their product. Unethical marketing of infant formula has been going on a lot longer than most people think!!!!

It's Halloween!! Please Boycott Nestle!!!

"15 Tricks of Formula Companies"

Infant formulas were originally designed to be a medical nutritional tool for babies who are unable to breastfeed due to unfortunate circumstances such as maternal death or illness. Nowadays the formula industry accounts for US$20.2 billion (data for 2010). It doesn’t take Einstein to figure out that formula is now being used by more than the 2% of women who physically can’t breastfeed. What went wrong? Formula companies got greedy and laws didn’t keep up, that’s what. The greedier the company, the more strategic and underhanded their marketing becomes. This article exposes 15 tricks of the most popular formula companies, illustrating how greed is more powerful than concern for infant welfare.

Trick #1: Get your logo everywhere

FACT: Exposure to formula promotion increases signiﬁcantly breastfeeding cessation in the ﬁrst 2 weeks. Also, among women with uncertain goals or breastfeeding goals of 12 weeks or less, exposure to formula promotion results in exclusive, full, and overall breastfeeding duration being shortened (Howard C et al. Obstetrics and Gynaecology Vol 5, No 2, Feb 2000 p296-303).

This is bad news for babies, but great news for formula companies. The less women who breastfeed – the more formula is purchased. This means lots of wonga for the shareholders. To put this scenario in context, check out the following stats:

The advertising spend for formula companies in 2006/07 was £7,626,847, an increase of 36.6% on the previous year.

The UK Government budget for promoting breastfeeding was £729,011 in 2006/07, a decrease on the 2004/05 ﬁgure of £747,000.
(Figures published by Save the Children).

The key to successful product marketing is to get as much exposure as possible, and the formula companies have got this down to a tee. They’ve been churning out hard sell marketing for decades. Here’s a Cow & Gate advertisement published widely in 1940s and 1950s UK:

“The best possible start in life”? Looks like formula companies’ lack of accuracy is nothing new. Nowadays they just find more covert and underhanded ways to mislead parents. They advertise in parenting magazines and, more recently, fashion and celebrity magazines. Here is an advertisement from Aptamil (right) featured in Pregnancy Magazine April 2008. It is a stitched insert so that the magazine naturally falls open at that page. I’ll talk more about advertising to pregnant women bellow.

With so many formula companies paying vast amounts of money to parenting magazines, is it any wonder the deputy editor of Mother and Baby magazine wrote an article describing breastfeeding as “creepy” (The Guardian ).

Along with magazines, formula companies also place their advertisements on third-party websites, forums and blogs, promoting their infant formula brand name and encouraging mothers to visit their company website. One of the reasons I am reluctant to activate advertising on this blog is the inevitability that a formula company will detect the parenting content and submit their advertisements to the server.

Not content with bombarding your computer when you’re online, formula companies want dibs on it offline too. The idea is that every time you switch on your PC or laptop you’ll see their brand. Here’s Aptamil’s free desktop calendar:

You’ll also be targeted in supermarkets, where Cow & Gate branded gifts such as dummies and growth charts are distributed. This photo was taken in Sainsbury’s, September 2007:

And here they are at it again in Tesco, August 2011:

Aside from these examples, there’s also leaflets in health centres, email spam, snail-mail spam, supermarket ‘shelf talkers’ (plastic signs that flop out at you), pamphlets in Bounty packs, billboards, posters on public transport, internet pop-ups, TV commercials, radio advertisements, text messages, newspaper ads, social network advertising, YouTube video advertising, and several other gems I shall reveal bellow. Formula companies have an array of arsenal in their fight to line your baby’s gut, and more importantly, their pockets. The more cash they make, the more surplus funds they have to pump into their marketing arsenal. At this point you may wish to ponder what arsenal the breastfeeding movement has, and whose interests it serves.

Trick #2: Exploit the lazy

The rise of the bottle-feeding culture has fundamentally distorted our perception of the normal biology and psychology of new motherhood. It has produced a growing number of women who do not want babies’ feeds to dictate their lives. They cannot cope with the frequency of feeds required to maintain a good milk supply; that is, they cannot content themselves to sit and feed.

Why do a significant proportion of women now find that they 'can't cope' with something that's a biologically normal part of parenting? Women coped sufficiently well until formula marketing kicked off in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They also coped during the Second World War when formula was unavailable.

By claiming convenience, formula companies tap into the psyche of the lazy parent. However as I described in my article “10 (Selfish) Things I Love About Breastfeeding ”, formula feeding is anything but convenient and in many cases it’s tantamount to a pain in the arse.

No time is formula feeding more of a pain than during the night. Kettles to boil, powder to mix, milk to cool - it’s enough to wake the neighbours; so formula companies have produced ‘Goodnight Milk’. The name itself is an idealizing claim, as it suggests the milk is necessary for babies to sleep through the night. The suggestion itself is concerning, as sleeping deeper puts babies at higher risk of cot death. UNICEF has maintained that “Goodnight Milk is not necessary for any baby and there is no independent evidence to support the claim that they help babies settle or that they are easy to digest.” (UNICEF 2010 ).

Goodnight milks are thickened with cereals to make them harder to digest. Aside from the risk that they will be used to replace a night time breastfeed, another worry is that the products could encourage parents to put their baby to bed immediately after bottle-feeding which would rot a baby's developing teeth.

As with goodnight milk, the following SMA television advertisement plays on mothers’ insecurities and concerns about night feeding. It features a voice over from a man promising not to pretend to be asleep when his young baby wakes up and promising to do his share of night feeding. A scene from the ad shows a dad falling asleep next to a boiling kettle and a tin of SMA Progress in the middle of the night:

I’m sorry to burst SMA’s bubble but as Gabrielle Palmer (The Politics of Breastfeeding , 2009) has pointed out, “The reality is that few fathers actually do take the whole responsibility of infant care and most artificial feeding is still done by mothers”.

Click HERE to read the entire article on The Alpha Parent

Disney and Similac join forces to ruin breastfeeding.

2011-10-17T13:48:00.000-07:00

Yep, Disney has joined forces with Similac, to put together pediatric kits to be sent out to OB/GYN offices across america. These kits will of course contain samples of infant formula and baby bottles and coupons and some sort of Disney promotional paraphernalia. Over 2 million of these kits are heading out to mothers leaving the hospital with their new babies.

When I read this article I just about had a conniption. I"m not a Disney fan at the best of times, but now that they've joined forces with Similac, I've just discovered a new company to boycott!!!

..... Similac's latest conniving plan to interfere with breastfeeding mothers. I'm so mad.

I strongly suggest that we start a writing campaign to Disney. Unfortunately, after 30 minutes of searching, this is the ONLY way I've been able to discover to contact them in any way: https://register.go.com/disney/corporate/corporatecitizenship/index

In their 2010 Corporate Citizenship Report, on the topic of "Human Rights" Disney says:

In implementing our human rights commitments, we will focus on the following four areas.
Policy Statement:
Our policy statement is a first step in articulating our commitment. Our priority over the next year is to communicate this policy more widely within the Company and further engage our employees in upholding and implementing it.
Assessment:
We are enhancing our assessment of potential human rights impacts in targeted areas including our workplace practices, labor conditions in the supply chains making Disney-branded products and our role in promoting the well-being of children. Over the next year, we will refine our assessment process to ensure we are continuing to focus on the areas of greatest importance to our business.
Implementation:
We seek to identify ways in which we can adopt best practices and new approaches that enable us to enhance human rights considerations.
Reporting:
We will continue to share our progress in our biennial citizenship report.

I think that we can agree that jumping into bed with Similac pretty much goes

against their "role in promoting the well-being of children".

I think that "Jenn's World" gives a great run down of all that's wrong with this whole mess.

Disney and Similac Team Up to Undermine Breastfeeding for Moms

Reading this, I am absolutely horrified. First of all, the so called “Pediatric Kits” are nothing more than items designed to undermine breastfeeding. These kits are given out with coupons and formula and bottles so that mothers have them within ready access. If something is difficult with breastfeeding and the mom does not have the help they need to breastfeed, these “kits” come in handy. The middle of the night desperation is exactly what the formula companies are banking on.
The partnership idea is particularly gross to me because these companies add something else to the kit – something that is appealing to an even wider group. Breastfeeding mothers who would otherwise refuse the kit, may take it because of cereal, clothing, or Disney coupons or samples (things that have nothing to do with breastfeeding). Once that kit is in the house, the undermining of breastfeeding happens.
Finally, it is clear that this is all revenue driven because the release discusses the money that they are making! These kits are not about helping out new moms, they are about selling a product. The only way to sell formula is if people are not breastfeeding. A way to stop people from breastfeeding is to market formula in sneaky and underhanded ways like giving out “pediatric kits” in hospitals full of formula and coupons to Disney.

HERE to read the entire article

Cdn Gov planning to skip key international health conference

2011-10-15T14:23:00.001-07:00

Important Global Conference

Canadian Government Planning to Skip Key International Health Conference

The Government of Canada is currently refusing to send Ministerial representation to a crucial global health conference taking place in Brazil, from October 19-21, 2011. The World Conference on Social Determinants of Health is a gathering of over 100 member states of the United Nations, and will be attended by heads of state and Ministers of Health from around the world -- all coming together to discuss key national and global measures to improve health and well-being around the globe.

Please add your name to a new online petition calling on Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Government of Canada to “show up” for health by ensuring that Canada’s Minister of Health attends and participates in the conference.

Sign the petition at:
http://www.gopetition.com/petitions/tell-canada-to-show-up-for-health.html

Elisabeth Sterken
Director INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
esterken@infcatcanada.ca

New Study: Unvaccinated Children are Healthier

2011-10-11T05:50:00.000-07:00

I don't think I really have anything to add to this article, it pretty much speaks for itself: Unvaccinated children are healthier. 8000 vaccine free children were involved in this study- something that Big Pharma and our government health agencies will NEVER do, and refuse to do, which is why their so called "studies" to try to prove the safety of their vaccines will never mean anything. The only way you can really study the effects of vaccination is to compare the the health of the vaccinated public to the health of the unvaccinated public. Which is what they've done with this graph.

New Study: Vaccinated Children Have 2 to 5 Times More Diseases and Disorders Than Unvaccinated Children
Preventable Vaccine-induced DiseasesA German study released in September 2011 of about 8000 UNVACCINATED children, newborn to 19 years, show vaccinated children have at least 2 to 5 times more diseases and disorders than unvaccinated children.
The results are presented in the bar chart below. The data is compared to the national German KIGGS health study of the children in the general population. Most of the respondents to the survey were from the U.S. (Click on the chart to see it better)The data was collected from parents with vaccine-free children via an internet questionnaire by vaccineinjury.info and Andreas Bachmair, a German classical homeopathic practitioner. The independent study is self-funded and is not sponsored by a large “credible” non-profit or government health organization with political and financial conflicts of interest; hence Bachmair relies on Google ads and donations for revenue. Each one of the 8000 cases are actual cases with medical documentation. Three other studies had similar results according to Bachmair and are reported below.
No study of health outcomes of vaccinated people versus unvaccinated has ever been conducted in the U.S. by CDC or any other agency in the 50 years or more of an accelerating schedule of vaccinations (now over 50 doses of 14 vaccines given before kindergarten, 26 doses in the first year). Most data collected by CDC is contained in the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) database. The VAERS is generally thought to contain only 3 to 5 percent of reportable incidents. This is simply because only some immediate reactions are reported by doctors; but many are not admitted to be reactions to the vaccine. Most importantly, the VAERS numbers are only immediate reactions, which I would place with a few hours to a few weeks. Long-term vaccine-induced diseases and disorders are not recognized by parents or doctors when these conditions develop perhaps a few months to five years or more and would never be realized to come from multiple vaccinations. In other words, many children and adults have diseases and disorders that are vaccine induced and they never suspect they are from the vaccines, as this study indicates.

HERE to read the entire article

Prevnar causes pneumonia and antibiotic resistant ear infections

2011-10-07T09:34:00.000-07:00

This article is not much of shock to most people who've done any research on the Prevnar vaccine- reports of it causing severe antibiotic resistant ear infections and pneumonia are not new. What is new is that this article was reported in the main stream media, and THAT was a surprize to me!!!

Shot may be inadvertently boosting superbugs

Strains tied to kids’ ear infections flourish as vaccine fights common germs

CHICAGO — A vaccine that has dramatically curbed pneumonia and other serious illnesses in children is having an unfortunate effect: promoting new superbugs that cause ear infections.
It is a strain of strep bacteria not included in pneumococcal vaccine, Wyeth's Prevnar, which came on the market in 2000. It is recommended for children under age 2.On Monday, doctors reported discovering the first such germ that is resistant to all drugs approved to treat childhood ear infections. Nine toddlers in Rochester, N.Y., have had the germ and researchers say it may be turning up elsewhere, too.
Doctors say parents should continue to have their toddlers get the shots because the vaccine prevents serious illness and even saves lives. But the new resistant strep is a worry.
"The best way to prevent these resistant infections from spreading is to be careful about how we use antibiotics," said Dr. Cynthia Whitney, chief of respiratory diseases at the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Avoiding antibiotics when they are not needed is the best way to ensure they will work when they are, she said.....
The children had been unsuccessfully treated with two or more antibiotics, including high-dose amoxicillin and multiple shots of another drug. Many needed surgery to place ear tubes to drain the infection, and some recovered only after treatment with a newer, powerful antibiotic whose safety in children has not been established.......Big trouble One strain in particular, called 19A, is big trouble. A new subtype of it caused ear infections in the nine Rochester children, ages 6 months to 18 months, that were resistant to all pediatric medications, said Dr. Michael Pichichero, a microbiologist at the University of Rochester Medical Center.
Pichichero refused further comment because he has submitted a report to a medical journal. His work was paid for by antibiotic maker Abbott Laboratories and the Thrasher Foundation, which funds projects related to child health.
All 19A strep subtypes tend to be resistant to some drugs and have been growing in prevalence:
Scientists from a drug company and two labs analyzed more than 21,000 bacterial samples from around the nation and found 19A increasing. Among children 2 and under, the portion of samples that were this strain rose to 15 percent in 2005-2006, from 4 percent in the previous three years.
A British lab tracking respiratory infections in U.S. kids found that the 19A strain accounted for 40 percent of drug-resistant cases.
University of Iowa researchers found 19A accounted for 35 percent of penicillin-resistant infections in 2004-05, compared with less than 2 percent the year before the new vaccine came out.

HERE to read the entire article on MSNBC

This article gives lots more info about Prevnar, with tons of links to follow your own research:

Prevnar vaccine dangers
Search the Internet for Prevnar vaccine SAFETY and, surprise, surprise, you will get plenty of results about its dangers instead.I did such a search just out of curiosity. I had already learned that three babies in the Netherlands had died recently, at end-Oct / early-Nov 2009, after they were given this pneumococcal conjugate vaccine (PCV),
Also, I am familiar with data from Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS) - which include "coincidental" events as well as those truly caused by vaccines - that showed 28,317 adverse reactions since the Prevnar vaccine was approved in 2000. These included:
558 deaths
555 life threatening conditions
238 permanent disabilities
2,584 hospitalisations
101 prolonged hospitalisations
8,166 emergency room cases and
16,155 "not serious".
In addition, I had written in an earlier article about pneumonia vaccine side effects that the introduction of Prevnar and other pneumonia vaccines has led to:
an increase in the incidence of pneumonia caused by bacteria NOT covered by these vaccines
an increase in middle-ear infections due to bacteria not linked to pneumonia
the emergence of "superbugs" that are resistant to vaccines.
So I was already quite familiar with the dangers and side effects of PCV vaccines like Prevnar. I was curious what was being claimed about the safety of Prevnar vaccine. So I did a search on Google. I found...
Prevnar IS Safe - Have a look at the studies...
It tells about a new PCV-13 Prevnar vaccine trial in India that was stopped after a baby died. Looks like the title was just being sarcastic

VaccineRiskAwareness.com
... This is pretty straightforward, no sarcasm or anything of the sort. But I learn here that, oh, by the way, Prevnar has not been evaluated for any carcinogenic or mutagenic potential, or impairment of fertility (ie they donâ€™t know if it causes cancer, mutates into other illnesses or impairs peopleâ€™s ability to have children).

By law, vaccines are not required to be tested for any links to cancer. This itself is not necessarily a danger, just a (very) possible danger of the unknown.

HERE to read the entire article.

Occupation in Canada: Stand Up.

2011-10-06T09:42:00.000-07:00

With Occupy Wall Street well into it's third week, and Occupy Canada gearing up, I know that many of you in Canada might not think that "Occupying" Canada is important. Many here in Canada might think that since our government has policies in place to (hopefully) insure that our banks and money machines don't fall apart like has/is happening in the US that there is no reason to protest, that the protests planned in Canada's major cities are just an excuse to go out on the streets and wave signs and beat drums. Talking about the "Occupations" are not the usual topics that I tend to focus on, but I'd like to take a moment to explain WHY you should be standing up and telling the government that we're pissed off.

As a mom of 5, a breastfeeding and natural child birth advocate, and someone who spends hours a day researching subjects to do with health and family, I can tell you that we have a LOT to protest about. With two little sick boys today, I won't be able to get into huge details with lots of links, but I'd like to give you some basic thoughts to mull over and perhaps research for yourself.

I'm not an economist or a political science graduate, so I'm not going to get into those deep dark details of money and inflation. I want to point out those things that directly effect me and my family, and perhaps effect your family as well. I want to talk about what pisses me off and what's wrong with our current system.

Mega corporations are running our government.

Big Pharma: We are constantly bombarded with the government pushing the agenda of the mega corporations and we are faced with policies and regulations that have been set up to herd the public to do what the Mega Corps want. Examples? How about Big Pharma? You all know that I'm not a supporter of the vaccine schedule that Health Canada is pushing. But have you thought about the influence that Big Pharma has on our government- at all levels from municipal to federal? Have you thought about how their money and power is used to bend the government to push their agenda? Let alone the fact that Big Pharma has convinced Canada to add more and more vaccines to the "schedule" (the number of vaccines scheduled has doubled since 1980), lets talk about the massive waste of money of the H1N1 vaccine. Through the machinations of the major power players of the pharmaceutical world, the Canadian Government spent $1.5 Billion on Vaccines between Oct and Nov of 2009 alone! ... and near half of those doses sit expiring in storage. Oh and that doesn't include the money spent on the Tamiflu medication that (doesn't work) was stockpiled by the government. The taxpayers paid for those vaccines. Vaccines that were suppose to save us from a "Pandemic" that never happened and was a nothing more than a money grab for Big Pharma from countries all over the world.
...sorry, I'm ranting. The topic of Vaccines does that to me.

Lets talk about how the government lets Big Pharma get away with charging unbelievable amounts of money for life saving drugs. 5 years ago I had some serious migraine headaches and my doctor gave me a sample pill to take- she saved these samples for patients like myself who don't have drug coverage/insurance- because these pills were $75 EACH!! Even if these tiny pills were made with pure gold, they couldn't possibly be worth that much money! Cancer drugs, heart medications, drugs for debilitating diseases..... family loose their homes to save the lives of their loved ones. Yes, In Canada.

How about the pressure of Big Pharma to get the government to ban health foods and alternative medicines? They don't want you to know about simple cures that they can't make money on, and our government follows along in their agenda by creating laws that make health foods and alternative medicines difficult if not impossible to buy/market/use.

Infant Formula companies: Canada signed the World Health Organizations International Code of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes when it was adopted by the World Health Assembly in 1981. Since then the Canadian government has done absolutely NOTHING to promote the Code, or to protect the Code through the creations of laws. Infant Formula companies, like Nestle, give millions of dollars to our government, major health agencies and hospitals, and they use the power of their money to influence government policies. Earlier this year I organized a working group that wrote a detailed response to Health Canada's call for submissions on their Draft Document "Infant Nutrition- birth to 6 months". One of our biggest concerns, echoed by INFACT Canada, was that three of the members of the Committee in charge of writing and editing this draft doc were in the pay of infant formula companies!!! When Infant formula companies are allowed to do whatever they want, the health of our youngest citizens are in jeopardy.

Mega corporations are raking in the money hand over fist, and paying their upper management and CEOs ludicrous amounts of money..... that we pay for. Take a look at what the Ontario Hydro companies are paying and then ask yourselves why your electric bill so high. Take a look at what your banking executives salaries are and ask your self why you still have to pay fees every month for the banks to use YOUR money to make money.

Our provincial health care coverage is being chipped away every year. The cost of living is going up almost as fast as the cost of gold, yet our salaries pretty much stay the same. Our farmers are going out of business, yet the cost of flour has doubled in the last 3 years. The price of buying a house anywhere near a major population centre has increased to the point that only the rich can afford to even think about buying a house. The cost of rent has risen to reflect these costs and many families can barely afford to put a roof over the heads of their children. The price of gasoline continually jumps higher and higher making it harder and harder to afford to drive to work from outlying regions (but you can't afford to move any closer to work because the prices are too high). Food costs are soaring. Energy costs are soaring..... everything is soaring except the money in your wallet...... and taxes just keep going up and up.

Canada has the largest freshwater stores in the world, produces the most wheat, has more oil that Saudi Arabia, more arable land per capita than any other country. We have natural gas coming out the wazoo, every precious mineral known to man, the best fresh produce and livestock in the world.....

....Yet we are in debt up to our eyebrows, and one in 6 children in our great nation lives in poverty.

Now I don't know how you feel, but in my opinion this is WRONG. I don't know about you, but I'm planning on standing up to my government and telling them that I don't believe in them anymore, I don't want them any more, and things HAVE to change.

"How the Breastfeeding Industry is destroying Breastfeeding"

2011-10-04T09:57:00.000-07:00

I love reading an article that opens my eyes to something I've missed. As a mom of 5 who's been breastfeeding (this round) for almost 9 years solidly, I've always been a huge advocate of "less is more". I refuse to have a crib (ok, I lie, I did have one once.....it was very handy for storing all the clean bedding and receiving blankets!), never had a change table, usually use my stroller for carrying school bags and groceries, and preferred manual expressing over using a breast pump..... I guess I've been out of the loop on all of this. I've noticed all the ads but never really thought of it this way. Well done.

MONDAY, OCTOBER 3, 2011How the Breastfeeding Industry is destroying Breastfeeding.
I've spend 10 years (!!) as a loud, active protector of breastfeeding. I've worked within the breastfeeding community, as an LC, been the first person to connect babywearing & breastfeeding as public health issues, a writer & so much more. I've attended countless conferences, tradeshows, speakers' events & taught at just as many. I've been observing an unnerving trend and a concept that James Akre introduced to me over 4 years ago has crystalised of late.
A very large, capital I Industry has built up around "breastfeeding". What started as a small group of committed, WHO Code supporting companies has morphed into thousands of companies marketing "feeding products". Previously Code compliant companies have shifted their focus to "Feeding", offering little or no breastfeeding imagery, or products directly known to interfere with the success of breastfeeding. By creating an industry around the ostensible support of nursing mothers, companies have changed the culture around breastfeeding. The average new mother today is inundated with blog posts, ads, product samples and more more for things like breastfeeding cookies, bracelets, apps, creams, teas, menu plans, covers, hot/cold packs and so much more.
It's an individual's choice to purchase & use what they'd like, make no mistake. The sum total of the entire industry and it's rapid growth over the past few years has accelerated to give the impression to today's first time mother that breastfeeding is expensive, time consuming, requires a lot of paraphernalia & often doesn't work the way they'd planned. It's important to know that the vast majority of these products simply didn't exist even a few years ago. It's also important to note the changes:
-Lansinoh, a beloved product for nursing mothers long endorsed by La Leche League, now sells bottles & other "feeding accessories" in violation of the WHO Code.
-Boppy, one of the first commercial brands of nursing pillow, have rebranded as feeding pillows. There is currently not a single image of breastfeeding on their site or in their marketing.
-Medela, once a Code compliant supplier of pumps & accessories, is now marketing bottles & low quality pumps to mothers.
-Generically, many larger brands of nursing covers (a non-existent product category until about 10 years ago), have shifted their marketing from being a breastfeeding aid (which isdebatable) to providing a cover while pumping, bottlefeeding, or simply holding a sleeping baby. The imagery infrequently shows women actually nursing anymore.

HERE to read the entire article on Fierce Mamas

"Breastfeeding and possible low supply"

2011-10-04T08:41:00.000-07:00

This is an excellent article by "The Leaky B@@b". If there is one panic that almost every new breastfeeding mom feels its: "Is my baby getting enough milk?!?" TLB gives a great rundown of the signs of low supply, and tackles the many questions of new mothers when it comes to feeding.

I have a few things to add to this topic. Low supply has been my greatest stress with my youngest son Kael. I talk about my experience with my low supply, due to undiagnosed tongue tie, in my article "Milk Treats". I have talked to literally hundreds of women about low supply- whether real or perceived. The vast majority of women who experience a real drop in milk supply are usually having a problem with the babies latch. When moms milk comes in and is flowing freely, even a baby with a poor latch will usually get enough to grow and be healthy and satisfied, but one mom's milk supply begins to regulate itself, a poor latch can cause a serious dip in the supply chain! My first advice to every new mom that suspects she might have a low milk supply, is to get professional help from a certified IBCLC Lactation Consultant or a doctor that specializes in lactation management. No matter how many herbs you take or any other methods you use to increase your supply, if the latch still isn't good, the milk supply won't regulate.

It's ALLLLLL about the latch, in most instances.

Dr. Jack Newman has excellent resources for mothers looking for information about breastfeeding, milk supply, and latching methods in Information Sheets and Video Clips.

In my personal quest for building my supply I discovered a few things- these are my personal experiences, NOT professional advice!!

- WATER WATER WATER!!! If I drank less than 3 litres of WATER a day, my supply dipped quite drastically. Notice I said "WATER", not juice, not tea, not milk...... WATER

- Fenugreek and Blessed Thistle really boosted my supply immediately, and I found that the tinctures worked better than the capsules of dried herbs. BUT.... as with almost anything, you body becomes use to the herbal supplements and they begin to not work as well as they did. For this reason I rotated my herbs every couple of months- taking Fenugreek and blessed thistle for two months, then changing to Goats Rue.

-Oats really helped boost my supply and did it quickly. But like the herbs, the effects of the oats lessened after a while. I kept a stash of my milk treats granola bars in the freezer for those days when I had a sudden drop in my milk supply! They work within hours to bring my supply back up!!

-Coffee is NOT helpful for milk supply- if I had more than my usual 2 cups in the morning, by evening my milk supply would drop, and if I had a cup of coffee in the afternoon, I'd be in serious trouble by the middle of the night!

-Domperidone does work.... but there are some side effects that are not ...."fun". This is my OWN comments, not a list of risks of side effects of the drug from the manufacturer. Having been on the maximum dose of Dom for almost a year, I started to wean off of it. If you don't do it VERY slowly, your supply plummets, and it causes serious depression symptoms!! I've also discovered, through my own experience, and talking to many other women, that it seems to cause weight gain. All these things aside, it was still worth it to me for helping me continue to nurse my baby.

- And stress. Stress is the enemy of a nursing mother. I went through all sorts of extreme stress in the past year, and each and every time I got really stressed out, my milk supply would almost vanish. (which in turn made me even more stressed out!). Our society does nothing to support mothers and help them- breastfeeding mothers in particular NEED support!!

Every woman is different and everyone reacts differently to different things. Do you have a super duper milk supply increaser secret? Let us know!!!

Help, my milk supply is low! Or is it?OCTOBER 3, 2011 BY THELEAKYB@@B
By Tanya Lieberman, IBCLCEver wish your breasts had little ounce markings? If so, you’re not alone. One of the more confusing things about breastfeeding is determining how much milk you’re making. You can’t see how much is going into your baby, so how can you tell if your milk supply is enough for your baby?
On this page we share the best ways to determine if your milk supply is in fact low, and describe the many things that can make you think that your supply is low when it actually isn’t.

Below are some normal experiences that can trick you into believing that your supply is low:“My baby wants to eat all the time.” It’s normal for babies to eat frequently, generally in the range of 8 to 12 times in 24 hours for many months. This means many hours of feeding a day, and it may feel constant at times. It’s also normal for babies to “cluster feed” at times during the day. If your baby is feeding significantly outside of the 8-12 times range, contact a lactation consultant or other breastfeeding support person.
“My breasts feel softer than they used to.” Toward the end of the first month of breastfeeding many women notice that their breasts have decreased from the size they were when their mature milk came in. This is normal, and does not indicate anything about milk supply.
“I don’t feel that ‘let down’ sensation.” Some women have a “let down” sensation when they make milk, and some don’t. It doesn’t seem to have any bearing on the amount of milk a mother makes, so don’t worry if you don’t feel anything.
“My baby suddenly wants to eat all the time.” Babies go through growth spurts. They do this in order to increase your milk supply to meet an increased need for calories. To do this, they go on a feeding rampage for a few days – eating more often than usual and sometimes acting unsatisfied and fussy after feedings. During a growth spurt it’s common to question your supply. After a growth spurt you’ll find that you have more milk than ever!
“I can’t pump very much.” Pumping output is usually not a good measure of milk supply. Why? Because your body doesn’t always make milk for the pump (it has to be tricked into believing that the pump is your baby!) and when it does the pump doesn’t remove milk as well as your baby does. So don’t gauge your milk supply based on your pumping output. You almost always have more than you pump.
“My baby is fussy when she nurses.” There are many causes of fussiness at the breast. And while hunger is one of them, your baby may be fussy because of gas, pooping, a flow that is too fast or too slow, or a host of other reasons. If you believe that your baby is fussy because he or she isn’t getting enough milk, or if the fussiness is causing you distress, consult a lactation consultant or other breastfeeding support person.
“My baby is suddenly waking up at night a lot.” Night waking can be due to hunger, but it can also be due to teething or “reverse cycling,” (when babies eat less during the day and more at night, often due to a change in routine like a return to work, or distracted behavior during the day).

HERE to read the entire article on The Leaky B@@b

From the Bottom of my Heart: Thank You

2011-09-30T08:01:00.000-07:00

Let us remember that, as much has been given us, much will be expected from us, and that true homage comes from the heart as well as from the lips, and shows itself in deeds. ~Theodore Roosevelt

A thankful heart is not only the greatest virtue, but the parent of all the other virtues. ~Cicero

Next weekend Canadians celebrate our Thanksgiving Day. I was going to write this article to celebrate that day of thanks, but instead I think it should be read today- on the last day of World Milksharing Week.

Today I want to write about thanksgiving. Not about turkeys and stuffing, but about gratitude and deep heart felt thanks, about the appreciation that comes with recognizing when we have been given an amazing gift. The gift of breastmilk.

Today I want to say "Thank You" to an incredible group of women: Our Milk Donors.

Having been involved with milksharing for a long time, I have had the honor to get to know many of these wonderful women. I've heard their stories, learned about where they come from, why they do what they do, and what inspires them to keep doing what they are doing. I am always in awe of their ability to give something so precious.

These wonderful women come from all walks of life, all races, all religions. Some of these women are single mothers who are struggling to raise children by themselves, yet they take the time out of their day to pump or express milk for other babies. Some of these women are working moms, who take their pumps to work so that even there they can continue to give milk to other families in need. Some of these women have struggle with milk supply issues themselves and have turned around and become donors to other mothers once they've built their supply up again. Some of these mothers have continued to provide milk for their "milk babes" even though they are going through tough times: divorce, death in their family, loss of jobs, or many other terrible experiences. Just last week I read a post from a donor mother who was being rushed into hospital for emergency surgery, who took a last second to ask others in her local community to help get milk to the baby she was pumping for, because she didn't want this baby to go without milk while she was in the hospital. Earlier this week I wrote about Jennifer, who is donating hundreds of ounces of liquid gold to babies in need after birthing her sleeping baby.

These women give a gift that is priceless, and they give it willingly, out of love and out of an altruistic need to share and help other babies thrive. They deserve our gratitude and recognition for the incredible work that they do to give human milk to human babies.

I would like to ask everyone to take a moment to think about our donor mums, to think about their sacrifices, and maybe think of a special way to say "Thank you".

And tell us about it!! Next week on Thanksgiving Day, I will post out a special message from all of my readers to all the wonderful women who are giving the most precious gift they can: the gift of their own breastmilk.

WMW: Milksharing Stories for Thursday

2011-09-29T08:15:00.000-07:00

Welcome to World Milksharing Week- Thursday edition!

As I have a cold that's left me feeling like my head is the size of a boulder, and has barely left me capable of mustering enough coherent thought to be able to tie my son's shoes this morning, writing a well thought out and brain stimulating article is just not in the picture for today. Sorry. Instead I will post a couple of links to some great milksharing stories and will repost out the lovely story of one of my fellow HM4HB admins.

One of my favorite sites, "The International Breastfeeding Symbol" has also been writing milksharing articles all this week in honor of World Milksharing Week. Here is a list of links to their articles about mothers coming together to feed each others babies. I know that you'll enjoy them as much as I have!

WMW- Sara's Story

WMW- Michelle's Story

WMW- Kristi's Story

WMW- Cindy's Story

WMW- Angela's Story

WMW- Recipient & Donor Story

And now I'm going to cheat and copy an article that I wrote last December. Forgive me: the body is willing but the mind is weak, lol.

Infant Formula: It's not "Good Enough"

Before the formula lynch mob hangs me for the following comment, I just want to say something: This is not about guilt. This is not about trying to make mothers who've used formula feel guilty. If you want to debate the "Guilt Issue" go read my article "Breastfeeding: guilt, statistics, support, and making a choice" (and the article I wrote last week: "The little voices called "Guilt" & "Shame") and then we'll talk. This is not about feeling guilty for using infant formula. This is about not having to "choose" to use infant formula. This is about actually having a choice and making the best choice for your baby and your family.

When breastfeeding is difficult, or when it goes terribly wrong, it can be absolutely devastating for mother and baby. Mothers who have done their research and made the choice to exclusively breastfeed their babies already know that "breast is best", they know that breastfeeding is NORMAL. More importantly they know about the risks associated with feeding your baby infant formulas. So when nature throws moms a curve and forces them to have to rely on something other than their own breasts to nourish their child, it can be completely overwhelming.

The first thing moms need to do is to get professional help. See a certified Lactation Consultant/IBCLC to try to work through the problem: Is it a poor latch? Why is baby's latch not good enough? Is baby tongue tied? Does mother simply need help with positioning? For most situations if you fix the latch you fix the supply problems.

But what if the problem isn't so easily fixed? What if the problem is one that is unfixable? What then? Babies need to be fed and when the mother is not able to produce enough milk to exclusively breastfeed, then they have to turn to another source of nutrition. Up until the last 60 or 70 years, the natural thing to do would be to use donor milk or a wet nurse- whether it was your sister, cousin, aunt, mother, friend or another local mother who was already breastfeeding her own baby. Mother to Mother milk sharing and tribal nursing was so common that is was the accepted method of feeding babies who needed milk.

Now of course we are living in the era of commercially prepared infant formulas. "Wet nursing" is a word that's fallen out of fashion and tribal nursing, if done at all, is done behind closed doors. Now if a mother is unable to produce enough breastmilk the medical machine automatically hands her a can of formula and sends her on her way. WHY? Why formula instead of donated breastmilk? Because infant formula is a huge industry and pays out millions of dollars in advertising and promotions, sponsors medical associations and medical schools, buys doctors fancy briefcases and sports cars, sends hospital executives on Caribbean cruises and gives maternity wards thousands of cans of their product to use and give away. Money talks, and "Breastmilk" doesn't have any executives to pay off government officials to use their products.

Up until the 1980's there were breastmilk banks scattered all over North America to facilitate the feeding of preterm and fragile infants in hospital NICUs. Then came the AIDs scare and the vast majority of milk banks closed their doors- leaving just 10 banks in the US and one lonely milk bank in Canada. I plan on doing some investigating into the closure of these milk banks because I'm a firm believer that money talks and if doors were closed, then someone somewhere told them to close and paid for them to stay that way. There is only one industry that stood to gain anything from the closure of breastmilk banks. Call me a conspiracy theorist, but if it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck, I'm going to call it a duck.

Recently the Canadian (and US) governments have been talking about the need for Breastmilk Banks, about how vitally necessary breastmilk is to our most fragile citizens. Dr. Sharon Unger was quoted inThe Toronto Star in November as saying:

“We’ve long, long, long wanted a milk bank in Ontario,” says Dr. Sharon Unger, a Mount Sinai neonatologist.
“Our hope is that we would supply milk to all of Ontario, so we’d have depot sites or collection sites throughout the province and we’d be a central processing plant,” says Unger, who is medical director of Toronto’s Milk Bank Initiative.
The group is currently in negotiations with the provincial health ministry to fund the project. Unger says a final price tag has not been determined, but that it would be a multi-million-dollar venture.
“It does of course cost more to process human milk than cow’s milk,” she says.

...and as I said at the time:

Applause, yes applause. It's a wonderful thing that the media has jumped on the band wagon and is making public announcements like this, I mean, any publicity is good publicity KWIM? Horray for Breastmilk!
But I have to admit that it irks me. Mothers and Doctors, like Dr. Jack Newman, have been crying out for Milk Banks for Years- YEARS!!!! Not only that, but Canada does have a Milk Bank in Vancouver BC... a milk bank that they have been trying to close down for years!! I wrote an article on the topic just a couple of months ago: Canada Needs Milk Banks!!!

And I still agree, We NEED milk banks!!! But you know what? If we wait around for the government to get off their bureaucratic asses to build even ONE milk bank.... I'll probably already be a grandmother!!! And when we get milk banks, will they help the babies that are healthy but need milk? Will they give milk to mothers with low supply? Adoptive mothers? Mothers with babies that have special needs like Anaya? NO, they won't.

So we return to the original topic: What if the mother isn't able to exclusively breastfeed? What if she has low supply? What if the problem isn't so easily fixed? What if the problem is one that is unfixable? What then? Up until recently your only choice would of been feeding your baby infant formula. Not much of a choice is it?

Now you can choose to feed your baby donated human milk. Mothers have had enough of waiting for the bureaucrats and money grubbers to build milk banks. Now mothers have taken back their autonomy and are supporting other women and families. Milk Sharing is the wave of the future. Milk sharing is making a difference and helping families and babies. And Human Milk 4 Human Babies is leading the way!!!

Here is another amazing story of one mothers struggle to breastfeed her baby and how milk sharing made a huge difference in her life!!!

Ruby's Story
By Kim Parent

"I can’t remember when I made the decision to breastfeed my daughter – I just know that notbreastfeeding never occurred to me. There were many compelling reasons to nurse, including cost, health benefits, and convenience. My partner and I collected books about breastfeeding during pregnancy and we educated ourselves about the subject. I learned what myths and traps to look out for, and prepared myself to stand up against the well-meaning medical staff who might want to supplement my baby with formula. Fortunately I had a trouble-free birthing experience.

However, within the first week it became obvious that something wasn’t right. Ruby would not keep her latch for more than a minute or two. She would unlatch, crying and screaming, over and over again. After several tearful days, we called an IBCLC. She was finally able to tell me why my daughter was so upset: I have breast hypoplasia, also known as IGT (insufficient glandular tissue). Hypoplastic breasts never fully develop, and they lack an adequate amount of milk-producing mammary glands. I was heartbroken.

My lactation consultant wrote a plan of action that would hopefully allow me to increase my supply while supplementing my daughter. With great effort, I was able to approximately double my milk production, to a maximum of a few ounces per day - not nearly enough to meet Ruby’s needs. We were supplementing with approximately 20 ounces of formula per day. We were not prepared to accept that formula was “good enough”, being fully aware of the risks associated with artificial feeding. We could see that her little body was having trouble digesting the formula. She was very constipated, and she would scream and cry for hours. We tried many different brands, but her symptoms were always the same. I turned to my lactation consultant for advice on donated breast milk.

In all of Canada, there is only one milk bank, located in Vancouver, BC. Currently they cannot keep up with the demands of their own NICU. Even if there was enough milk available, the cost can easily be prohibitive. At $1.25 per ounce (which is much less than the cost of banked milk in the U.S.), it would cost us at least $750 per month to feed Ruby exclusively breast milk.

For our family, the answer was informed, mother-to-mother milk donation, not unlike wet nursing. We found several online resources to facilitate this, including the Human Milk 4 Human Babies Global Network on Facebook. Thanks to fifteen generous women, my daughter has received thousands of ounces of breast milk. She has not had a drop of formula in over three months! She is a different baby now – no more colic, spitting up, or constipation. She is hitting all of her developmental milestones and is just a radiantly beautiful and happy little girl. I still grieve the exclusive breastfeeding relationship that I had planned to have with her. However, I finally feel confident that she is receiving the best nutrition that I can possibly provide for her. I am eternally grateful to the amazing families who have helped us and for the support I have received from those around me.


Ruby at 3 weeks old

Ruby at 3 weeks old - at this point she had been supplemented with formula for over 2 weeks

Ruby at 3 months

Ruby at 3 months old, exclusively breastfed!


At 6 months old-

A beautiful healthy Ruby at 6 months old!!

WMW- The Ultimate Gift

2011-09-28T18:41:00.000-07:00

I would like to share the heart breaking and heart warming story of an wonderful mother, who is giving, in my opinion, the ultimate gift: Her breastmilk.

Jennifer Coias is an amazing activist for the rights of babies and children and writes many articles for "Peaceful Parenting", and is an admin for HM4HB in Brazil. We were all so excited to hear that she was going to be having another baby, and many of us enjoyed seeing her photos of her growing belly, and reading about her plans for a peaceful HBAC (Home Birth After Cesarean section). Her enthusiasm was almost contagious.

Then at 35 weeks the unthinkable happened and we learned that Jennifer's baby had died. Tears flowed throughout the Facebook Peaceful Parenting universe as we cried for her, for her family, and for her baby.

Peaceful Parenting wrote a lovely article "From Despair to Donation: A mother looses her baby and shares his milk", about Jennifer, and said that when she is ready, Jennifer will tell her own story.

"No one could do justice to the story that Jennifer Coias has to share: her hope-filled pregnancy, VBAC waterbirth plans, the loss of her baby at 35 weeks, subsequent weeks of waiting for him to arrive on his own (induction post-cesearean is dangerous), being dropped by both her midwife and OB, struggling to find someone to take an ultrasound picture of her baby, being dropped by her birth photographer, her subsequent gentle HBAC (home birth after cesarean) with a midwife found at the last minute, all the while living in a South American country far from home, friends and family, in an area where few understood or supported her belief in birth and trust in her body and her baby. No one could tell her story of all that she has endured, overcame, processed, learned, and continues to struggle through today - 9 days postpartum. No one, that is, except for Jennifer herself. She is writing, and plans to share with the peaceful parenting community when the time is right. But for now, without detailing all the momentous moments that have led up to this week, we'd like to celebrate the amazing gift that Jennifer is giving back to the world. Even in the midst of tears and pain, liquid gold flows forth, and through this, Jennifer is saving the lives of babies around her.

Today marks the beginning of World Milksharing Week. It is also the day Jennifer has pumped the most milk yet to share -- milk that was meant for Jude, but that which is now graciously given to babies in need, in his honor. A few days postpartum, a local Brazilian milk bank made its first stop at Jennifer's house to drop off bottles and pick up bags which she'd filled. While there are many milk banks across Brazil, actual pumps and pumping supplies are hard to come by, and very expensive when available. Most mothers who donate milk do so from hand expression and do not have a significant amount to give. Milk bank workers were astonished the following day when Jennifer had not only filled all their containers, but additional bags as well. This type of gift does not happen often, and everyone was thrilled at the quantity and quality of little lives that would be powerfully impacted as a result."

I won't presume to write about Jennifer's story and will wait, like everyone else, to hear it directly from her. Instead I want to talk about the amazing gift that she is giving to fragile babies in need: The Ultimate gift of breastmilk. The road to donating hasn't been easy for Jennifer, because while milk banks are plentiful in Brazil, breast pumps are few and far between and very expensive. Even to have one shipped from America is incredibly costly because of the heavy duties involved, on top of the shipping expenses themselves! Using her broken pump Jenn is filling the containers that the milk bank has given her faster than they can replace them.

* If you have unused breastmilk bags that you can send to her, your gift would be hugely appreciated.*

It is an awesome woman who takes the time and effort and diligence to pump milk to donate to another baby. It takes an incredible woman- a true hero- to do all of this after the loss of her own baby. The words of over 2000 women can be read on the facebook page created to support Jenn and her family- I highly suggest reading some of the comments so many people have written. Awe Inspiring.

Just like Jennifer.

WMW- Tuesday's Milksharing stories!

2011-09-27T19:00:00.000-07:00

Today I read 4 wonderful stories about milk sharing from two different blogs- "Gilligan's All Natural Island" & "The Crunchy Side of Me".

Carlie, author of "Gilligan's All natural Island" writes about her journey to inducing lactation for her new born adoptive daughter in her article "Adoptive Breastfeeding".

"At first, I didnt get anything out. Not even a drop. I was a little stressed, but all along I told myself not to have any expectations. After a few days of pumping, I started getting drops..then we got the call that the baby was going to be born!..We jumped on a plane to NYC, ready to meet our baby. Since I didnt have much time to pump (protocol calls for 1 month to build up milk supply), we took a cooler full of donated breast milk with us. Trying to educate ourselves on how to pack it, and finding a place to stay with a full size freezer is a whole other story in itself. Somehow, someway, everything totally fell into place.
I continued pumping every 3 hours, taking my domperidone, and herbs. We were unsure of how the hospital was going to go, we assumed the baby would get formula for a few days, and then hopefully be able to switch over to breastmilk. Well, Hallie's birthmom graciously decided to breastfeed her for the first 3 days of life, so it made the transition very smooth. She knew exactly what to do when I nursed her for the first time. (in the bathroom of the hospital lobby, while waiting on our car to arrive:)
I quickly realized once we got her back to our rented NYC apt and settled, that she was not satisfied with what she was getting. So, we pulled out the good ol' SNS. Supplemental Nursing System. Its a device where you put the breast milk in a container, then you attach these 2 small tubes to the breast with a piece of soft tape, and the baby sucks. That way they are still nursing at the breast, but getting more than what the breast can provide.
It worked great! Joe was such a good helper. He would get it set up every single time, warm the milk, and just do whatever he could...I would nurse Hallie Rose (we joked it was her appetizer), while he got the SNS all set up. We worked as a team. Hallie was doing great and so was I. Jalen was definitely exposed to alot of things(boobs) he had never seen or known about. He did great and has learned alot though."

HERE to read the entire article.

And Carlie continues her story about feeding her daughter donated breastmilk in her article "MilkSharing":

"I pump twice a day, and usually get about 6-8 oz each time (see my entry on adoptive breast feeding). All of her other feedings are that of donated breast milk from generous women in our area.
We have a deep freezer FULL of it!!
I know, some of you are thinking, "thats gross", or "what about the risks involved"?
To those people, I would ask, "do you think it's gross to drink milk that was expressed out of a cow"?..An animal of which is not even close to the size of a human, and who's milk is made for baby cow's.
And "do you not think there is a risk in feeding your baby formula, of which was made in a factory, and has been recalled numerous times because of infant DEATHS, bug particles found in the formula, and tons of other negative aspects to it"?
To be honest, in our opinion (and the opinion of LOTS of other women and men out there), the benefits of feeding our baby donated breast milk, far out weigh the risk.
These women who donate, **do not ask for a dime**. They do it solely out of the kindness of their hearts.
They are feeding the same milk to their own baby, and most of them are VERY health conscience.
A Dr's screening is provided, if requested by the recipient, showing that the donor mother does not have any illnesses, and is healthy.
I feel very confident we are doing the right thing by giving our daughter donated milk. She is very healthy and happy."

HERE to read the entire article

The Second blog I read today is from "The Crunchy Side of Me" . The first article is Amber' story of how she struggled with fertility issues due to PCOS, and then began the rocky road to nursing her twin daughters , over coming all obstacles and not only succeeding in breastfeeding them both, but became a Breast Milk Donor for two other babies!!!!

"My girls turned one year and I still had this crazy stash of milk. I was so afraid it would go unused. I just wanted all my hard work to be for good. My girls were still being breastfed and I knew they would never use what was left. I was producing exactly what they needed and we didn't ever need all the pumped milk. I posted on Human milk for Human babies and found a 4.5mo old in need. I donated the remaining 110 bags. Her mom breastfeeds her but needs to supplement as well. She didn't want to use formula and was desperate to find her baby breastmilk. Another bonus was that the remaining bags were all dairy free because my girls had a dairy sensitivity early on. Her daughter did as well. We were a perfect match! Her mom is so sweet and lets me know that her daughter is thriving on my milk. She says its such a relief to open her freezer and see that her daughter will be fed.
I am so proud of what I have accomplished when the odds were so against me. My twins are 17 months and breastfeeding is still going strong. I get many comments from people wondering when we will wean and to be honest we have no end date! My girls are so healthy and I'm just so thankful of what my body has been able to do. I always felt like my body let me down with all my infertility issues but now I feel like some how I beat it all. I have nourished not only my twins but two other babies. I am so happy that I have been able to do this and only wish I could do more! I always share my story with others because I would love to break the taboo of milksharing. To be honest I would have never thought of donated breastmilk for my girls in the beginning...I probably would have gone to formula. Ick. I love how women can unite and help one another. It's time to break the silence and bring back what was done since the start of time."

HERE to read the entire article "Nourishing Her Twins and Two Other Babies!"

Having enjoyed reading the first article on The Crunchy Side of Me so much I decided to peruse their page and read this next story.....and I strongly suggest a tissue or two! Erin's story is one that resonated with me so strongly, because her experience mirrored what I went through with my youngest son: Tongue Tie and the massive drop in milk production that follows when the babies latch just isn't right. Erin's story of her fight to help her baby boy Gryphon gain weight and get a REAL diagnosis for his latch issue is inspiring!!!

"The next week he had a 2 mos check up and I brought up the tongue tie again, I said "Look, I know you said that he doesn't have it, but I think he does. Our symptoms match up, I mean EVERYTHING matches up, and from what I've been reading you can't base your complete diagnosis on JUST the appearance of the tongue, but you have to look at the mother baby pair, the mother's nipples (mine are flat) and their experiences." She said, "No, he doesn't have one, I think there might be something wrong in his esophagus because he's not really sucking well from the bottle either. I will give him a barium swallow test with speech so they can look at his mouth just to tell you that it's fine." I was okay with this, because surely they would see that his mouth was NOT fine, and then I got the referral... barium w/out speech. I had had it with her. I was done, unfortunately at this point so was my milk, so I reached out to other Mamas on facebook, and immediately that night I had 40 oz of donated frozen breast milk and the link to HM4HB. I wasted no time in posting, and was instantly rewarded with another 150 oz of donated breast milk. Through the networks I was able to find a short term "Milk Mama" for my little boy.
On human milk by son thrived, and grew and became happy and healthy and gained weight, LOTS of it very fast. In three weeks he'd gone from 8 lbs 6 oz, to 11 lbs!! He has since continued to receive donor milk from Mamas all along the east coast, we've driven to get milk, we've had milk shipped to us and we've even tried wet nursing. Through HM4HB I gained a whole lot more than just breast milk, I got my son back, I gained a whole network of friends; supportive, loving and wonderful amazing women who are selfless in donating to make sure that MY son is healthy and that he is getting what I cannot provide for him. As of today, my son is 4 mos old and weighs about 14 lbs. During all this time I never stopped fighting to get him the help that he needed for his tongue and when he was 14 weeks old we were finally able to find a doctor who would clip it (after two peds, three states, four lactation consultants and a conversation with Dr. Kotlow in Albany NY)."

Gryphon starting to thrive on breastmilk - Left 7 weeks & Right 10 weeks

Please click HERE to read all of Erin's wonderful story in "Thriving due to donor milk" on "The Crunchy Side of Me"

I hope you enjoyed these stories! If you have your own story about a personal adventure into the land of milksharing, feel free to tell me about it! Leave a comment here and I'll get in touch with you asap!! I'd love to post it here as we continue to celebrate World MilkSharing Week!!!!

For more information about World Milksharing Week please go to
http://www.worldmilksharingweek.org/

And for more information about donor breastmilk- either as a donor or a recipient- please go to:
http://hm4hb.net/

Milksharing Monday!

2011-09-26T17:58:00.000-07:00

Happy Monday of World Milksharing Week!

This week is going to be all about the amazing stories of milksharing that we've witnessed and heard about through the different Human Milk 4 Human Babies communities over the past year. I've written several blogs about babies in need of breastmilk since starting Informed Parenting.

One of my favorite stories is about little Anaya in BC Canada, because her's is one that shows the power of community- even when it's not local. In the past year Anaya's mom Camara has received breastmilk donations from all over North America to feed her beautiful yet fragile daughter. http://iinformedparenting.blogspot.com/2010/10/breastmilk-for-anaya-in-nelson-bc.html
http://iinformedparenting.blogspot.com/2010/10/update-on-anaya-we-still-need.html

Another one of my favorite stories is about baby Jayden.

JAYDEN AT 10 WEEKS. BLIND AND DEAF.Jayden was born cocaine and alcohol addicted, with congenital syphilis, at 31 weeks gestation. She had no skin on the palms of her hands or feet and had to have skin grafts. They could find no formula that Jayden could tolerate well, but settled on the one that she had the "least severe reaction to."
When she was about eight weeks old, she was assigned a foster parent, who came to do kangaroo care with her for eight days before she took her home. Jayden was completely blind and profoundly deaf, and would need to be accustomed to "mom's" smell and touch before they sent her home. When she went home, she was the most critical discharge they have ever had from that NICU, which routinely sees the sickest of babies. Basically, with tears in their eyes, the nurses sent Jayden home to die. Jayden was insulin dependant (with critically unstable blood sugars, typically either below 60 or above 400), on oxygen 24 hours a day, and set off her apnea monitor 6-10 times a day. In order to set off a monitor, she would have to not breathe for many seconds at a time. She had gained and lost the same three ounces since birth, and was no more than four and a half pounds. Her foster mother asked over and over again of anybody who had authority why this baby couldn't be on breastmilk, shouldn't this baby be on breast milk, what did she have to do to get this baby on breastmilk? Over and over, she was basically told that this was a medicaid baby and that the state wouldn't PAY for banked milk (which costs a minimum of 4 dollars an ounce, and has been pasteurized) for a MEDICAID baby. Finally, one day, when Jayden was literally activly dying, an infectious disease doctor looked at her foster mom (who is a friend of mine because of foster work and doula work) and said, "I won't tell you NOT to give her breastmilk. We know that it would give her the best chance!" So, we got her some frozen breastmilk.

With her first bottle of human milk, Jayden's blood sugar regulated. She is typically somewhere around 120 now. Within the first three weeks, she regained her sight and hearing. Her new pediatrician says that when somebody is actively dying their brain will shut off all non-essential functions--and hearing and sight are non-essential functions. The first week on breastmilk she started to only set off her apnea monitor during the night's deepest sleep...and only then typically once a night. Within three weeks, they took it off of her completely, because she just didn't set it off any more. The first week she gained and KEPT ON four ounces. The next week three. The next week SEVEN. At this point, the new pediatrician put her arms around the Foster Mom's shoulders and said, "If you hadn't given that baby human milk when you did, she would be dead today. You are a hero." Eight weeks later she had gained nearly four pounds. When she was nearly nine and a half months old she was eleven and a half pounds! We now have full cooperation with her new pediatrician and the state to give her donated human milk, no questions asked.
With her first bottle of human milk, Jayden's blood sugar regulated. She is typically somewhere around 120 now. Within the first three weeks, she regained her sight and hearing. Her new pediatrician says that when somebody is actively dying their brain will shut off all non-essential functions--and hearing and sight are non-essential functions. The first week on breastmilk she started to only set off her apnea monitor during the night's deepest sleep...and only then typically once a night. Within three weeks, they took it off of her completely, because she just didn't set it off any more. The first week she gained and KEPT ON four ounces. The next week three. The next week SEVEN. At this point, the new pediatrician put her arms around the Foster Mom's shoulders and said, "If you hadn't given that baby human milk when you did, she would be dead today. You are a hero." Eight weeks later she had gained nearly four pounds. When she was nearly nine and a half months old she was eleven and a half pounds! We now have full cooperation with her new pediatrician and the state to give her donated human milk, no questions asked.

I also love the story of a good friend of mine Lynn, and her son Liam, Who struggled with supply issues. Lynn documented the changes in her little man, growing from a thin little waif to a chubby rollypolly happy baby after being fed breastmilk that had been donated by some wonderful women.

Liam- two hours before being admitted to CHOP....

"Our pediatrician was uncomfortable with the EBM at first. She warned me about viruses and diseases and I told her I was more comfortable with the EBM then the Formula. I also told her we screened our donors. She asked me a few questions and smiled. She wanted to make sure we were being smart. And I would like to hope that todays mothers ARE being smart.
In June my son weighed 8 lbs.In September 14 lbsIn October 17 lbsAnd now (Dec 2010) weighs almost 20 lbs"

Liam's pic taken two weeks ago!

Breastmilk: It's in you to give!!!

2011-09-24T15:36:00.000-07:00

Happy World Milksharing Week everyone!!! In honor of this event, and to help spread the joy of donating and receiving breastmilk, I will be posting lots of Milksharing stories and articles from other blogs and news events..... everyday this whole week. This week, it's all about the breastmilk, baby!!!!!

Last Thursday I wrote about the father, Curtis, who was drinking his wife's frozen breastmilk in the Blog article "Breastmilk: It does a body good. Anybody!" Earlier in the day I had been contacted by journalist Andrea Gordon from the Toronto Star to talk about Curtis' breastmilk diet (You can read the STAR article HERE) and I told her pretty much exactly what I told you in the article, that I thought that their "experiment" was bringing to light the health benefits of breastmilk and shines a bright light on the fact that formula just doesn't measure up.

While Health Canada and all the pediatric societies chant the same Om of "Breast is best", we are still a culture that sees formula feeding as normal. We hear about the health benefits of breastmilk, yet rarely does the media really report on the reality of the risks of formula. We know that breastmilk is better for babies tummies, yet hospitals, doctors, nurses, and other health care providers still turn to formula as the answer to most breastfeeding problems, without really giving a serious thought to the effects of formula on immature stomachs.
Now suddenly, we have a grown man, with a history of all sorts of stomach ailments, drinking human breastmilk- ONLY human breastmilk. Three days in and his belly problems are gone. No more reflux, no more vomiting, no more bowel movement problems- not even diarrhea that several people said he'd have. Here's a grown human, with the ability to speak and reason, telling us how much better his digestive system is feeling.....
....Imagine the difference on a small infant? Incapable of speaking and explaining how their tummy hurts.

After I published the article I went back to check on the links (I'm a bit OCD about that, lol) and the link to Curtis and Katie's blog was dead: they had removed their blog completely. I spoke with Emma Kwasnica about their blog and the situation and was thrilled to know that Katie had contacted Emma to talk about donating some of the massive volume of breastmilk that they had stored in their freezer......

.....And in Honor of the first day of World Milksharing Week I thought you'd like an update on the story: Emma helped Katie find the perfect family in need: Quadruplet baby girls born last June!!!! Andrea Gordon has also spoken to Emma and Katie and the mother of the Quads and is writing another exclusive article about this match made in heaven tomorrow!!! I will edit to add a link to the article tomorrow morning.

*edited*
Here is the link to the Toronto Star Article about this wonderful milky match story: http://www.thestar.com/living/article/1059288--internet-nourishes-with-mother-s-milk

It's all about Breastmilk. It's all about sharing. It's all about community, and families coming together to support each other.

It's all GOOD!!!

Breastmilk: It does a body good. Any body!

2011-09-22T18:48:00.000-07:00

This week a blog, called "Don't have a cow, man." took the "lactivist" world by storm when a family announced that the husband was drinking his wifes breastmilk....ONLY breastmilk, no solid food, no other drinks.

Katie, who is a doula, childbirth educator, and lactation educator is one of those amazing women with the ability to pump large quantities of breastmilk. Because of pumping for her preterm baby, born 9 months ago, she has amassed thousands of ounces of liquid gold in her freezer. When commentors asked why she had kept the milk and hadn't donated it Katie replied:

"About milk banks, they do not want the milk because it is too old, I took Motrin after giving birth, I took Tylenol a few times for headaches, and because I took nutritional supplements. Sick babies on other medications use the donor milk and they are concerned about drug interactions or side effects.
Why don't we pay to ship the milk to another mom? We can not afford to spend the hundreds of dollars that it would cost to ship just a portion of the breast milk. Shipping will be very expensive because it needs to be kept frozen. We are like many other families and are just trying to get by."

So when the family planned a long move and realized the magnitude of trying to move all this milk to another State, her husband Curtis decided to drink the milk himself.

"My wife has hundreds of bottles of frozen breast milk in the freezer that our baby will never have a chance to drink before they get too old. Since breast milk is healthy and we have plenty of it, why not just drink it all myself? In fact, why not drink only breast milk and see how long I can happily make it with no other food?
And yes, I know how weird this may sound, it is kind of weird to me as well but why not? I mean cow milk was made for baby cows, why not drink human breast milk that was made for baby humans?
The rules:Nothing to eat or drink except breast milk.Blog daily about how I am feeling and how it is going.See how many days I can make it without other food."

I have read their blog, and several other blogs that have commented on it this week, and of course the commentary moves from "yuck dude!" to "that milk should be going to babies in need" , but in my mind few have really talked about the issue that stood out for me: The obvious health benefits that Curtis has gained from this "experiment". Curtis has a history of stomach and digestive problems- from reflux, to vomiting and problems with bowel movements (due to hernia surgery scaring)

Here's the thing: While Health Canada and all the pediatric societies chant the same Om of "Breast is best", we are still a culture that sees formula feeding as normal. We hear about the health benefits of breastmilk, yet rarely does the media really report on the reality of the risks of formula. We know that breastmilk is better for babies tummies, yet hospitals, doctors, nurses, and other health care providers still turn to formula as the answer to most breastfeeding problems, without really giving a serious thought to the effects of formula on immature stomachs.

Now suddenly, we have a grown man, with a history of all sorts of stomach ailments, drinking human breastmilk- ONLY human breastmilk. Three days in and his belly problems are gone. No more reflux, no more vomiting, no more bowel movement problems- not even diarrhea that several people said he'd have. Here's a grown human, with the ability to speak and reason, telling us how much better his digestive system is feeling.....

....Imagine the difference on a small infant? Incapable of speaking and explaining how their tummy hurts.

I, like many others have said, would love to see this breastmilk going to a baby in need. I've even messaged Curtis and his wife to ask where they are located to see if I can't guide them find a recipient through Human Milk 4 Human Babies in their area. But even if a family in need isn't found that can afford the shipping and packaging of the milk, I still think that this experiment that they have done has opened doors to other people- to seriously think about the validity of the tremendous health benefits of species specific breastmilk in the area of healing. Not just in the case of cancer, like the amazing story of Howard Cohen , who was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1999 and has used only breastmilk as his cancer treatment and kept his cancer in remission for 10 years!! , but the healing it can do to the digestive system- especially the digestive systems of fragile infants. More so, it might make more people aware of the importance that human breastmilk plays on the health of humans of all ages, and give further insight into the dangers of commercial infant formulas. Parents are constantly inundated with formula ads that grandly announce "Closest formula to breastmilk!".... but when it comes to the health of our babies, is "closest" really good enough?

The little voices called Guilt & Shame

2011-09-19T12:13:00.000-07:00

If you've been following along here for the past week or so, or have been actively reading the latest news in the world of breastfeeding advocacy, then you're probably well aware of the battle of words that raged last week during the Babble Debacle. If you missed it, you can catch up by reading the 3 articles that I posted HERE, HERE and HERE. I"m not going to get into all the details of it all, but I do want to address the ever present topic of "Guilt" and "Shame" that seems to haunt just about every parenting debate.

Babies don't come with an owners manual. They don't come with instructions. They don't come with even a rudimentary FAQ to refer to when you suddenly have a desperate question to ask. It's up to each and every parent to figure it out all on their own. Now, having said that, we do have the option of doing research to help us along the way to making the best choices we can. Some times we learn things in advance of necessity, sometimes we learn things in hindsight. And sometimes, in hindsight, we learn that we screwed up. And we feel guilty. Sometimes even shame. That's life, and it sucks, but the reality is that we have to learn to live with our mistakes and get on with it.

But here's the kicker: In order to "get on with it" and learn to live with our mistakes, you need to own it. The mistake, that is. Because if you can't OWN your mistake, if you can't admit that you made a mistake, then you will never learn from your mistake.

Here's the thing about Guilt. Guilt is not something that happens to you from outside sources. Guilt is internal. Guilt is an emotion that we feel in response to something that we have said or done, or even thought about. No one can MAKE you feel guilty. No one can FORCE you to feel guilty. If you are completely confident in your choices and actions, if you feel in your heart that you have done exactly the right thing..... you will not feel guilty..... no matter what any one says to you!!! Only you, or at least, only that little voice in the back of your head, can make YOU feel guilty. A good friend of mine once said this about guilt:

~On guilt~
No one can make any one else FEEL guilty. Guilt comes from within. You either feel it, or you don't. And actually, guilt is a very good thing! It causes us to re-evaluate things, lets us know when we are no longer in line with our own principles, our core values. It tells us that something is off, motivates us to......change whatever it is we're doing. In other words, guilt makes us uncomfortable for good reason!Rather than blaming OTHERS for making us "feel guilty", we really need to look within ourselves for the answers, and stop deflecting our issues away from ourselves, stop projecting our issues onto others. We need to be 100% accountable for our feelings, we need to OWN them. Because they are no one else's *but* our own." Emma Kwasnica

"We need to be 100% accountable for our feelings (such as guilt and shame), we need to OWN them"

NO ONE IS PERFECT. Not one of us is the perfect parent. Not one of us has raised our children perfectly without making a single mistake. Making a mistake is really hard, and sometimes emotionally devastating, but it gives us the opportunity to do better. It gives us the opportunity to learn and to try to make better decisions the next time. We all make mistakes- what sets us apart as parents is what we do with that knowledge and how we deal with our mistakes. Guilt guides us to DO BETTER.

The same with Shame. No one can make you feel ashamed. No one can force you to feel Shame. Shame is a part of your internal watchdog and shares the same house with Guilt.

I'm not a perfect parent- not even close- and I have made some horrible mistakes in my life.

- when my eldest son was 3 days old, I allowed him to be circumcised. It was years later before I truly realized the magnitude of the mistake I made that day. When the realization came, I was emotionally devastated and I still live with the guilt in my heart.
-when my son was 12 weeks old I allowed him to "Cry it out" all night long.... because that's what my mom told me to do. I sat on the floor in the hallway, outside his room, and cried and cried and cried along with him.
- when my eldest son was 6 weeks old, I started giving him bottles, because that's what I was told to do. Suddenly at 4.5 month old, he refused to nurse. After struggling for over a day, I finally went to my doctor, who told me that my son had "weaned" himself and that he only wanted bottles now. I was crushed. I cried on and off for days. It was even worse though when I discovered a book in our Library called "The womanly art of breastfeeding" and found out that my baby hadn't weaned, he had classic nipple confusion, and that if I'd gotten help/support, I could of got him back on the breast again.

Just typing this out brings tears to my eyes, even though my eldest son is now 20 years old.

Guilt.
Shame.

Yes, I feel them both. BUT.....I have accepted my guilt and my shame. I do not blame others for my shame and guilt. When a good friend sat down and explained to me exactly what "Male Circumcision" was, and what it does, and how it's done, at first I wouldn't believe her. I couldn't believe her, so I researched, and realized that she was right. And I felt intense guilt. I was horrified and I felt completely ashamed. BUT.....

When "Intactivist" post articles about the truth of Circumcision I don't say to them "Stop!! You're making me feel guilty!!"
When "Lactivists" post articles about the risks of formula feeding and the truth that infant formula is a vastly inferior substitute to breastmilk, I don't yell "NO! Don't tell me this! You're making me feel shamed because I formula fed my son!!!!"
When AP parents post studies that show that CIO methods cause permanent emotional damage to babies, I don't throw my hands over my eyes and say "Don't show me that!!! You're making me feel guilty and ashamed because I let my son CIO as a small infant!!!"

Just because they are telling the facts- cold and hard- doesn't mean that they are "making" me feel guilty.

Yes, I feel guilty, and I feel ashamed of some of my decisions that I've made as a parent, but I accept that guilt and that shame and have turned it around. I have learned from it. I have dedicated myself to helping others to NOT make the same mistakes that I did. I OWN that guilt. I will never make those mistakes again, because I have fully accepted my guilt and shame.

Here's another thing about Guilt and Shame. Rarely are we the only ones responsible for our mistakes. I made mistakes but I also acknowledge that I can't shoulder ALL of the blame. I was let down by a system that didn't support parents to make informed choices. That's another emotion that goads me forward: ANGER.

So if you feel the emotions "Guilt" & "Shame" over parenting decisions you've made in the past, put it to work for you. Move forward and onward. Make the changes necessary to get rid of the guilt. Own it.

....Don't blame others for it. It's not their fault that you have emotional baggage to deal with. Blaming them doesn't make the truth go away.
........and it doesn't make you feel any better.

Vaccines: Making you far sicker than you ever thought

2011-09-17T09:21:00.000-07:00

I was planning on writing today about "Shame and Guilt", in continuation of the Babble Debacle, but an article crossed my computer screen today that I feel is more important.

You all know that I'm seriously against vaccines, and that I feel that they are far more dangerous than the diseases they are supposedly protecting us from. I've talked about the dangerous chemicals used regularly in vaccines- chemicals like Mercury, Aluminum, Formaldehyde, MSG, etc... and the fact that there are other substances in vaccines that are highly questionable- live viruses, eggs, peanuts, aborted embryo cells, cells from multiple animals. For anyone who's spent any time researching and reading about vaccines and their risks and side effect, this is old news. But what you may not know, is about the diseases that are being discovered IN the vaccines.

Gardasil. One of the most dirty words in my vocabulary. I've talked about the huge risks associated with this vaccine, the deaths of young girls and women directly caused by this vaccine, but did you know that there is something even more scary that you should know about Gardasil?

In seeking answers to why adolescent girls are suffering devastating health damage after being injected with HPV vaccines, SANE Vax, Inc decided to have vials of Gardasil tested in a laboratory. There, they found over a dozen Gardasil vaccine vials to becontaminated with rDNA of the Human Papillomavirus(HPV). The vials were purchased in the United States, Australia, New Zealand, Spain, Poland and France, indicating Gardasil contamination is a global phenomenon....

The rDNA that was found to be contaminating Gardasil is not "natural" rDNA from the HPV virus itself. Rather, it is agenetically engineeredform of HPV genetic code that is added to the vaccines during their manufacture.

As Dr. Lee, the pathologist who ran the laboratory tests identifying the biohazard contamination of Gardasil said:

"Natural HPV DNA does not remain in the bloodstream for very long. However, the HPV DNA in Gardasil is not 'natural' DNA. It is a recombinant HPV DNA (rDNA) -- genetically engineered -- to be inserted into yeast cells for VLP (virus-like-particle) protein production. rDNA is known to behave differently from natural DNA. It may enter a human cell, especially in an inflammatory lesion caused by the effects of the aluminum adjuvant, via poorly understood mechanisms. Once a segment of recombinant DNA is inserted into a human cell, the consequences are hard to predict. It may be in the cell temporarily or stay there forever, with or without causing a mutation. Now the host cell contains human DNA as well as genetically engineered viral DNA."

HERE to read the entire article

Reading this article led me to another article by Natural News about the Polio vaccine. Now let me tell you, the polio vaccine is one of the biggies that everyone brings up when you say that you don't vaccinate: "But look at the polio vaccine! It wiped out polio!!"..... except that it didn't. I won't get into that right now, but if you really want to know about the polio epidemic and the vaccine, read THIS page..... make sure you have lots of time on your hands because once you start reading , it's kind of like a train wreck and you can't look away or stop reading!

No, What I want to focus on is the fact that AIDs was introduced into western society through the Polio vaccine.

Seriously.

Dr. Maurice Hilleman of Merck (aka Big Pharma), openly talks about how they introduced the AIDs virus and cancers into the bodies of men women and children while inoculating them to prevent polio. From Natural News:

One of the most prominent vaccine scientists in the history of the vaccine industry -- a Merck scientist -- made a recording where he openly admits that vaccines given to Americans were contaminated with leukemia and cancer viruses. In response, his colleagues (who are also recorded here) break out into laughter and seem to think it's hilarious. They then suggest that because these vaccines are first tested in Russia, they will help the U.S. win the Olympics because the Russian athletes will all be "loaded down with tumors." (Thus, they knew these vaccines caused cancer in humans.)
This isn't some conspiracy theory -- these are the words of a top Merck scientist who probably had no idea that his recording would be widely reviewed across the internet (which didn't even exist when he made this recording). He probably thought this would remain a secret forever. When asked why this didn't get out to the press, he replied "Obviously you don't go out, this is a scientific affair within the scientific community."
In other words, vaccine scientists cover for vaccine scientists. They keep all their dirty secrets within their own circle of silence and don't reveal the truth about the contamination of their vaccines.

Taken from the transcript (available to read HERE)

Dr Edward Shorter: Tell me how you found SV40 and the polio vaccine.

Dr Maurice Hilleman: Well, that was at Merck. Yeah, I came to Merck. And uh, I was going to develop vaccines. And we had wild viruses in those days. You remember the wild monkey kidney viruses and so forth? And I finally after 6 months gave up and said that you cannot develop vaccines with these damn monkeys, we're finished and if I can't do something I'm going to quit, I'm not going to try it. So I went down to see Bill Mann at the zoo in Washington DC and I told Bill Mann, I said "look, I got a problem and I don't know what the hell to do." Bill Mann is a real bright guy. I said that these lousy monkeys are picking it up while being stored in the airports in transit, loading, off loading. He said, very simply, you go ahead and get your monkeys out of West Africa and get the African Green, bring them into Madrid unload them there, there is no other traffic there for animals, fly them into Philadelphia and pick them up. Or fly them into New York and pick them up, right off the airplane. So we brought African Greens in and I didn't know we were importing the AIDS virus at the time.
Miscellaneous background voices:…(laughter)… it was you who introduced the AIDS virus into the country. Now we know! (laughter) This is the real story! (laughter) What Merck won't do to develop a vaccine! (laughter).....
Dr Maurice Hilleman: …but, anyway we knew it was in our seed stock from making vaccines. That virus you see, is one in 10,000 particles is not an activated… (unintelligible) …it was good science at the time because that was what you did. You didn't worry about these wild viruses.
Dr Edward Shorter: So you discovered, it wasn't being inactivated in the Salk vaccine?
Dr Maurice Hilleman: …Right. So then the next thing you know is, 3, 4 weeks after that we found that there were tumors popping up on these hamsters.
Dr. Len Horowitz: Despite AIDS and Leukemia suddenly becoming pandemic from "wild viruses" Hilleman said, this was "good science" at that time.

Dr. Len Horowitz uncovered this interview from the national archives, and got it released so the public can learn the truth behind the deadly vaccine industry. You can watch the video of this HERE

AIDs and a whole bunch of cancers.....all from the polio vaccine.

..... How do you feel about the oh so wonderful polio vaccine now?

Follow the money trail!

2011-09-16T06:33:00.000-07:00

So the Drama is never ending it would seem. More Guilt. More Shame. More horrible "lactivists" emotionally emasculating mom's because of their choices for infant feeding. This seriously is getting ridiculous.

Last night the Toronto Globe & Mail Newspaper publish a blog article by Tralee Pearce entitled "Why do "Lactivists" want to ban baby formula advertising?". It would seem to be a valid question. Why DO breastfeeding advocates want infant formula advertising banned? And if the article was really serious about discussing this topic, I would whole heartedly join in the conversation and gladly discuss the WHO Code and the ramifications of formula advertising on breastfeeding rates and longevity....

But that's not what the article is about at all. No, this article is yet another attempt to play the "oh woe is me" card using the media to incite yet another mothering riot, pitting the breastfeeders against the formula feeders, and vice-versa.

The article starts off by quoting Babble blogger Catherine Connors about the recent Babble debacle:

“The message at the core of the ‘ban all formula advertising’ platform is simple: formula is bad. You should not use it. You should not even think about using it. You should not look at words or images that in any way suggest that you are not a terrible mother if you choose it. Giving your baby formula is akin to sticking a cigarette in her mouth. If you use formula, you are a bad, bad mother.Influential Canadian blogger Catherine Connors characterized the anti-advertising stance this way:
“This is nonsense. This is pernicious nonsense that is harmful to mothers, inasmuch as it undermines mothers’ powers of self-determination and calls into question their ability to make the best choices for themselves. It is harmful, because it shames mothers.”

This is such a load of bull crap!! At no point in time during the conversations between Emma and Babble owner Alisa was this discussed. At no point did any "lactivist" make any references comparing formula to cigarettes. At no point did breastfeeding advocates call mothers who formula feed bad mothers. It never happened. Apparently Catherine has a very active imagination. Or could it be that she has an agenda that she is pushing? hmmmmm..... Catherine works for Babble.com. Babble takes money from infant formula manufacturers. Infant formula manufacturers place ads all over Babble's site and together they promote the use of Similac's "breastfeeding experts", who really are just infant formula salespeople in disguise, as I pointed out yesterday. So Babble hires writers, like Catherine, to write articles for their site, and pays them from the money they receive from infant formula manufacturers, like Similac, who use their website as a platform to sell moms their formula. Now their writers, like say.... Catherine for example, go to the main stream media, with a story of how "Lactivists" are torturing moms, making them feel guilty about using infant formula.... oh the SHAME of it all!....

Does anyone else see the hidden link here?

And just two days ago, on her own blog, Catherine talked about infant formula, and formula advertising/marketing:

I disagree with the hard line of many breastfeeding activists that any and all formula advertising is by definition – because it is the advertising of formula, full stop – bad. I disagree with the position that any and all advertising of formula is uniquely deceptive and sinister; I disagree with the claim that the very existence of formula advertising meaningfully undermines breastfeeding. Yes, I know that the World Health Organization recommends against the advertising of formula. But the WHO recommendations were developed primarily to address real problems with the marketing of formula to vulnerable communities – problems that are being widely addressed by most formula companies. Mothers in the North America are not, by and large, a vulnerable community. And the choice to formula feed, freely made, is not an terrible one, nor is any mom who cannot for any reason breastfeed and is therefore compelled to formula feed harming her child.

(Edited original article to add these two points)

Can Catherine tell me the difference between "vulnerable communities" and non-vulnerable communities? What is she trying to say? That women/mothers in developing nations, like China and the Philippines, are not as smart as mothers in developed nations, like Canada and the US? That they are stupid and therefore require the World Health Organization to create a Code of conduct for formula manufacturers just to protect them? But not to protect women and mothers in Canada and the States, because they're smarter than their poorer counterparts in Asia?

You know what the difference is between the marketing strategy of infant formula companies in the Philippines vs America? In the Philippines, the formula company pay medical professionals to go out into the community and tell new moms that infant formula is just as good as breastmilk. Then they give these new mothers just enough free formula to make sure that their breastmilk supply dries up, thus forcing them to BUY the company's formula to feed their baby. In North America the formula company pays someone pretend to be breastfeeding professionals, and they sit in front of computers talking to mothers in their virtual community. And they tell them that "Good quality infant formula is just as good as breastmilk" and they send the mother enough free formula to insure that they have the family hooked on the bottle, so that then the family is forced to buy their infant formula from the company.

And women from both the Philippines and North America fall for this marketing tactic. Every. Single. Day.

...yes, formula companies are "addressing" the problems of infant formula marketing in NON-vulnerable communities by creating pretend "breastfeeding help lines" staffed by pretend "breastfeeding support" people. And that is supposedly ok. And the breastfeeding advocates are apparently suppose to sit back and not comment on the conflict of interest. And "Lactivists" are not allowed to point out that the horrific advice given by these fake breastfeeding support people (who are really formula salespeople in disguise) is.... HORRIFIC and WRONG on all levels, because if they do, then they are causing "SHAME" and "GUILT". And Gods forbid that a breastfeeding mom happens to mention the risks of using infant formula to another, non-breastfeeding mom!!!! THE ABSOLUTE HORROR!

Why is it that the formula companies can promote their product all over the place, yet breastfeeding advocates can't promote their product? Why is it that formula pushers continuously point out that so many women fail at breastfeeding and they Need to feed their babies formula? Why don't they recommend that these women feed their babies species specific donated breastmilk?

Yes, Why DON'T they recommend that women who cannot breastfeed use donor milk? WHY?!

....Because formula companies don't make any money off breastmilk- whether it comes from a donor or directly from the mother.

It all comes back to the almighty dollar. Would Babble make such a big issue about this if they weren't getting paid from a formula company? Would writers, like Catherine Connor, make such a big stink about it all if they weren't getting paid by formula companies dirty money? Would the major media outlets continuously flog this battle between breastfeeders and formula feeders if it didn't mean money in their pockets?

In their reality, money makes the world go round, not the truth. The truth is easily verifiable. It takes a google search less than 2 seconds to pull up articles about the risks of formula feeding, about the multitude of studies done that have proven over and over again that formula is NOT a healthy substitute for human breastmilk, and that formula advertising directly negatively impacts breastfeeding. Babble and Catherine and the media bulldogs can hide their heads in the sand (along with their ill gotten money), and pretend it's not true, but that doesn't change the facts.

I still haven't said all that I want to say on this topic, but my baby needs to nurse.

Tomorrows topic "GUILT & SHAME"

oh yes, I will go there!!

More Babbling about the Babble Debacle

2011-09-15T09:09:00.000-07:00

Yesterdays article "Breasts, Babble, Boycotts and Bashing: Baffled?" was a long one, and after many hours of reading, researching and writing I finished it up.... even though I hadn't really said all that I wanted to say on the topic. I woke up this morning, toying with the idea of writing a second article to further expand on my thoughts..... but not today.

Then I fired up my computer this morning and the first thing I read on my Facebook feed was this post by Emma Kwasnica:

"‎Jamie called the Similac hotline just to see, folks. Nice "support" she got from them. :/
"So, just now out of curiosity, I looked up the "Similac Feeding Hotline" number, and gave them a faux compliant. I said my 8 month old (true) isn't seeming satisfied after nursing (false). Their immediate solution? "Why don't I take your address and we can overnight you some samples, and then we can put in an order to ship direct to you? Then its just as convenient, you won't even need to leave the house!" When I said that I wanted to continue breastfeeding, they said (direct quote here): "Your baby has all the benefits breastfeeding offers. After 6 months, breastfeeding and feeding quality formula are exactly the same.""

WTF!?!?!

This, my friends, is why I am so outraged at Babble and their never ending infant formula ads that are all over their website. As I said yesterday, Babble owners Alisa and Rufus might want to claim that the Similac ads on their breastfeeding and infant feeding sections are allowing women to make a choice on how they will feed their infant, but I will point out that making a choice based on an ad by a company is NOT making an Informed Choice. And saying that women can make a choice based on receiving so called "breastfeeding advice" from a company that makes money off of women that don't breastfeed...... well that just plain stupid.

As Jamie learned this morning, Similac's so called "breastfeeding experts" have no interest in helping women breastfeed. Why would they? They are being paid out of the money that Similac makes from selling families infant formula. Anyone who thinks otherwise is living in Never Never Land and sniffing too much pixie dust.

THIS is WRONG!!!

THIS does NOT help women breastfeed.

THIS is one reason that North America's breastfeeding rates are so pathetic.

Breasts, Babble, Boycotts and Bashing. Baffled?

2011-09-14T18:02:00.000-07:00

.... And so it begins. Or maybe I should say "So it continues". Throwing around words like "guilt" and "shame" in the world of breastfeeding activism is not a new thing, but this week it's reached epic proportions. I've been following the conversations between the different parties that are involved and I've been involved in several discussions on the ethics and rights that are being called into question.....I cannot understand what people do not understand. It's very clear cut and completely black and white:

Infant Formula Advertising and Marketing Is BAD.

I guess that this weeks foray into the realm of lactivist bashing and oh so dramatic exclamations of

"Oh the SHAME of it all!! You're making me feel so GUILTY!"

...all started just over year ago when PhD In Parenting author Annie wrote an article entitled "Similac and Babble team up to Dupe breastfeeding moms." Talking about the fact that yet again an infant formula company is preying on tired new moms and pretending to have their best interests at heart.... when in fact both Babble and Similac are both more interested in the bottom line. Money.

"...if you were an online media property that is trying to turn a profit, would you be willing to sell-out your breastfeeding readers, by feeding them a wolf in sheep’s clothing? Would you be willing to partner with Similac, an infant formula company, on your Breastfeeding Guide?I wouldn’t. But apparently Babble and Similac see nothing wrong with this scenario.
Most of us (including Dou-la-la and I) realize that infant formula companies are not really there to support breastfeeding moms, they are there to sabotage them. The Similac sponsorship of the Babble guide goes beyond simple advertising and takes things to a whole new level. The Common Breastfeeding Problems section of the Breastfeeding Guide is clearly marked as being “brought to you by Similac“. It includes a large banner at the top encouraging you to call a Feeding Expert for your baby’s breastfeeding problems. They indicate that “lactation consultants” are available, but I doubt they are International Board Certified Lactation Consultants (IBCLC), since their Code of Ethics would prevent them from working for an infant formula company."

Fast forward a year later and Babble.com announces that they are going to give out 10 prizes of $5000 to their top "mominated" moms in 10 different categories, and they want people to nominate those amazing women who deserved the recognition for the work they do. A friend of ours, Jodine Chase, nominated Emma Kwasnica, founder of Human Milk 4 Human Babies, Lactivist and empowered birth activist, to Babble.... and we all cheered. No one deserved recognition for her outstanding contributions to society and the empowerment of women and babies more than Emma, and within a few short days, Emma's "momination" had her in third place with over 700 votes without any self-promotion at all.

But then we had a reality check. Babble was a notorious abuser of the WHO (World Health Organization) International Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes, who accepted money from Infant formula companies and allowed their ads to air even in the middle of their breastfeeding advice section of their website. This REALLY concerned Emma. We talked about whether or not good could come from accepting this soiled money if she won. Could we use it to fund an event to highlight the impact of WHO Code violations and how infant formula marketing effects breastfeeding? After many agonizing hours of discussion with many concerned supporters and friends Emma decided that she could not allow her nomination to continue, and she requested that her name be dropped from the Babble competition. Jodine writes about this decision and gives an outline of what took place in her article "Babbling about Breasts Again"

But also within a few hours Emma and I were pinged with PMs. Did I know about the controversy that erupted last year over Babble.com's acceptance of ads from Abbott's infant formula brand, Similac? Did I know that Similac ads for their breastfeeding support hotline appeared alongside Babble.com breastfeeding advice? Did I know that when you search for the word "breastfeeding" in Babble.com's search window, the first result that appears is a page describing horrific breastfeeding problems, and right alongside there is Similac's ad, offering to help?
I didn't know this. Up here in Canada the ads displayed on Babble.com's website were for things like juice and batteries.
The last thing in the world I want is for Emma Kwasnica's good name to be tainted. And tainted it could be, through association with a formula company seeking to increase market share by offering self-serving advice and understanding to women with breastfeeding problems. Or worse, a company that combats a stagnant market for its product by countering proven public health advice and offering what some say is sabotage disguised as support.

Annie, from PhD in Parenting, wrote another article in support of Emma withdrawing her nomination, and sums up the question about using soiled money very clearly:

Recently, I wrote a blog post questioning whether good cancels out evil. There is no question that the $50,000 that Babble will be giving to inspirational moms will go to excellent causes. But if that money came from duping breastfeeding moms, can it make up for the damage that is done? The cost of formula feeding is significant. In terms of the price of formula alone, I saved around $2400 by breastfeeding both of my children. Beyond the cost of formula, a significant study last year found that the United States incurs $13 billion in excess costs each year and also suffers 911 preventable deaths because of low breastfeeding rates. Suddenly, the $50,000 in “blood money” that Babble is handing out seems like nothing compared with the significant cost that comes with sabotaging a mother’s ability to breastfeed her child successfully.

Apparently Babble is not taking this withdrawal very well. Instead of taking a good look at their website and the ethical ramifications of taking money from formula companies and allowing them to place ads all over their site, instead of making changes that would insure that mothers got the best possible advice about breastfeeding and that they would received support that wasn't hell bent on making money off them, Babble decided to launch their own campaign to play the "Oh woe is me" card. Instead they played on the emotions of "Shame" and "Guilt".

Babble writer Catherine Connors writes:

Because herein resides the problem: I’m not against formula advertising. I’m just not. I’m against bad formula advertising: I’m against misleading formula advertising, and formula advertising that actively and explicitly undermines breastfeeding, and I’m against formula advertising to vulnerable communities.

...and she launches into a diatribe about "the shame" of it all.

I hate to tell you this Catherine, but regardless of your opinion about "good or bad" formula marketing and advertisements, the truth is in the studies: ALL formula advertising and marketing directly interferes with breastfeeding initiation and longevity rates- world wide. Hence the creation of the WHO Code. ....and Shame? Really? Do we shame families when we tell them to keep their baby rear facing in their car seat? NO, we are just relaying the facts: rear facing is safer. It's not about "Shame". It's about acknowledging the facts and stating the truth. Formula marketing directly affects breastfeeding. Truth. You can dispute it, or put a fancy name on it, or misdirect it all you want. Truth is truth. Just as it is truth to talk about the risks of infant formula, risks that are conveniently swept under the rug by Babble and their formula manufacturing accomplices. Even a vacuum can't hide the fact that infant formula is vastly inferior to breastmilk in every way. Read "The fourteen risks of formula feeding" for the real information. Read "Breastfeeding protection and the International Code" to fully understand the ramifications of formula marketing on our children's health.

In response to Catherine's blog Jodine goes on to summarize the "shame" issue perfectly in her next article "Shame is the new guilt" :

For a while founder Rufus Griscom hung out on Annie's site, answered a few questions and tried out his rationalizing messaging, now more finely tuned and apparent in Catherine's writing. Here's how it goes: the winner in the infant formula market share race will be the one who makes moms feel the most warm, the most fuzzy, when they need to turn to formula after their breastfeeding plans have gone awry. Offering the very best and most supportive breastfeeding advice is clearly the way to make moms feel all warm and fuzzy.
In addition to refining the warm fuzzies messaging, there's a new angle. Here's the spin: mothers make their own choices and decisions about breastfeeding. If for any reason they have chosen infant formula, and especially if that was a difficult choice because they really wanted to keep breastfeeding, any attempt to talk about formula company marketing tactics, and the harm they cause, is shaming mothers.
Did you catch that? The winning infant formula company will be the one that succeeds in making moms feel warm and fuzzy. Talking about the harm caused by these marketing tactics makes moms feel shame.

It's all very nice that Babble wants to convince us that formula advertising is all ok. That Babble owners

"believe in the right of mothers to make individual choices with all information available to them and that includes information about different formula options, provided both by our writers and advertisers themselves."

...and even went so far as to offer Emma a position on their imaginary board of breastfeeding advocate advisers to review the Breastfeeding resources they will make available to women on Babble. But as Emma responded to Alisa and Rufus, "The only way I would consider working on an advisory board for Babble, is if Babble were to instigate a zero tolerance policy for all formula advertising across the site --no exceptions. This is a question of ethics; the advertising of formula to pregnant or new mothers, in any capacity, is unacceptable." A question of Ethics, NOT Shame.

A long while ago I wrote an article called "Breastfeeding: Guilt, Statistics, Support, and making a choice", where I said:

This is the story that we hear constantly. Parents-to-be take a class in childbirth, read books about all the important things you're suppose to know about babies, they give birth to these wonderfully beautiful beings and are sent on their way home to enjoy their new family life...
Mothers know they're suppose to breastfeed their babies. They know it's the healthiest choice and will give their babies the best start in life- offering them some of their mothers immunities and some vital protection from diseases, lessening their risks of diabetes, certain cancers, obesedy, and maybe even increase their IQ by a few points along the way. As an added bonus, mom's are offered some protection from breast & ovarian cancer, post partum depression and might even loose that baby wieght a bit faster!! And it's FREE!! Over all it's a "win-win" situation, right?
But what happens when that mother gets home? She probably tired, maybe sore from the birth, perhaps dealing with unexpected trauma from the birth of her baby: inductions, forcept/vacuum assisted birth, episiotomy, Caesarean section..(all of which are known to have a negative effect on breastfeeding)..? Is the baby sleepy because of medical interventions used during his birth? "How is he feeding? Does he have a good latch?" are the questions a new mum might hear, but how the hell is a new mom suppose to know?! One book said that breastfeeding is hard and it can hurt, another book said that breastfeeding is natural and only hurts if there is a problem with the baby's latch. One book says to nurse the baby for 10 minutes on each side every 2 hours, one book says to nurse the baby on demand when ever they want to eat. One web site says that this is the best nursing position, one site says that that position will cause blocked ducts and will cause problems because you can't see the baby's latch. One nurse in the hospital told her to use this method to get the baby to latch, but the night time nurse told her that it was wrong and she should use this method instead. This is what we call a recipe for failure- before this baby is even a week old, he's already on the road to bottles of formula because his exhausted stressed out mother is unsure of anything to do with breastfeeding. She can't get any support to make breastfeeding work for her or give her the confidence to persevere and keep nursing regardless of any issues that might arise. The emotionally wrung out mother goes to the doctor with her crying baby and begs for help and advice. The doctor is affraid to cause her guilt about breastfeeding, or has no interest/education in lactation management, so instead of sending her to the right people to get proper support and advice, he pats her on the back and tells her it's ok, some women/babies just can't breastfeed and that formula feeding would be so much easier because then her husband/mother/sister could feed the baby and let her sleep. He gives her a perscription for some sleeping/anti depressants/anti anxiety pills and sends her on her way with a gift pack of formula samples and a book of coupons for free baby bottles and matching diaper bag.
Then the Media make s a big production about how women are MADE to feel guilty about not breastfeeding.
Guilt?! The last thing this mother should feel is guilt!!!!
This woman should be rip roaring mad!! She should be stomping her feet and demanding WHY she didn't have the support and information she needed to do something that women have been doing for a millennia!! She has nothing to feel guilty for- she was failed by every single person and place she went to to look for information and support and advice!

Guilt and Shame are not something that is projected onto you. Guilt and Shame is something that you take on yourself. Emma's words echo true:

"‎~On guilt~
No one can make any one else FEEL guilty. Guilt comes from within. You either feel it, or you don't. And actually, guilt is a very good thing! It causes us to re-evaluate things, lets us know when we are no longer in line with our own principles, our core values. It tells us that something is off, motivates us to......change whatever it is we're doing. In other words, guilt makes us uncomfortable for good reason!
Rather than blaming OTHERS for making us "feel guilty", we really need to look within ourselves for the answers, and stop deflecting our issues away from ourselves, stop projecting our issues onto others. We need to be 100% accountable for our feelings, we need to OWN them. Because they are no one else's *but* our own." Emma Kwasnica

Truth is Truth. Facts are Facts. People can stand on their soapboxes as long as the want and they can shout their opinion about Breastfeeding or Formula feeding, or about the effects of Infant Formula Marketing....... but it's only words if you don't have the facts to back it up.

We have the facts.

ALL INFANT FORMULA ADVERTISING IS DETRIMENTAL TO BREASTFEEDING AND DOES NOTHING TO HELP MOTHERS MAKE AN INFORMED CHOICE ABOUT INFANT FEEDING.

...and THAT's the TRUTH.

INFACT- WHO Code: Action Alert

2011-09-09T03:21:00.000-07:00

Time to rally together again to stop another Infant Formula manufacturer from blatantly breaking the World Health Organizations International Code of Marketing Breastmilk Substitutes. This time it's Mead Johnson who is trying to pretend that they are educating about infant health, when in fact it is just a marketing and sales ploy for their company.

Please take the time to write a letter or email to the powers that be at the Royal Victoria Hospital- tell them that we are watching them and that this can not and WILL NOT be allowed!! Take the time to do this because every single voice counts. We have rallied together many times in the past and stopped this sort of sneaky marketing by Infant Formula companies before- the voices of the masses start with just one voice- YOURS. It all starts with one, and every single voice makes a difference.

Royal Victoria Hospital in Barrie:

Seminar Would Promote Infant Formula to Paediatrics Department Staff

In marketing, recruiting new customers is important. If you’re in the business of marketing infant formula one of the best ways to recruit new customers is a hospital paediatrics department: where new mothers come looking for guidance. And how could you influence the doctors and nurses, make them think that your product is scientifically advanced, that it’s getting closer to breastmilk, and that it’s OK. How about a one-hour infant formula infomercial masquerading as a scholarly seminar?

Well, that’s what infant formula maker Mead Johnson was thinking when they arranged for Dr. Marianna Mitchell to speak at the Barrie Royal Victoria Hospital paediatrics department.

Have a look at an excerpt from the seminar flyer:

Please join us as we welcome our speaker:

Dr. Marianna Mitchell, FAAP, FRCP(C), Lakeridge Health Corp., Oshawa site, Department of Paediatrics

The topic:

“Leading the Way: Bringing Infant Nutrition Closer to Breast Milk Function and Composition”

Objectives:

Explore the role of prebiotics in supporting GI health in infants
Examine advances in infant nutrition to more closely approximate the nutritional and functional properties of breast milk
Review the importance of DHA and ARA in cognitive and visual development and in immune health

View the entire flyer: Mead-Johnson-Royal-Victoria-Hospital.pdf

The words ‘infant formula,’ purposely do not appear, but in fact the seminar is all about infant formula. Prebiotics, ‘approximating breastmilk,’ DHA and ARA, with bogus unsubstantiated claims, are all infant formula marketing strategies. Throughout the flyer ‘infant nutrition,’ is simply a euphemism for ‘infant formula.’

This seminar is clearly a violation of section 6.2 of the World Health Organization International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes and Resolution 63.23(4).

So, if Mead Johnson can make the doctors and nurses who work with new mothers think their formula is OK, or at least a viable alternative to breastfeeding, that thinking will affect the mother’s decision to breastfeed and her breastfeeding duration.

Help cancel this very blatant violation of the WHO Code and WHA Resolutons. Send a letter to Janice Skot, Executive Director, President and CEO of the Royal Victoria Hospital and ask her to cancel the Mead Johnson promotion of formula to pediatric staff. Let her know that you expect the Royal Victoria Hospital to abide by the World Health Organizations recommendations banning formula promotions in health care facilities and that she has a pubic mandate to protect the highest attainable standard of health for mothers and children in the facility she manages.

Ms. Janice SkotExecutive Director, President and CEONorth Simcoe Muskoka Royal Victoria Hospital

Mailing Address:Royal Victoria Hospital201 Georgian DriveBarrie, ON L4M 6M2

Email: skotj@rvh.on.ca

Elisabeth Sterken
Director INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
esterken@infcatcanada.ca

Vaginal Birth After Cesarean Section: the REAL risks

2011-09-06T07:29:00.000-07:00

I haven't written on a Birthing topic for a while..... since having my own VBA3C almost 19 months ago, I've been more focused on issues to do with raising babies (and children), than birth. I continuously get asked about VBAC (Vaginal Birth After Cesarean section) birthing, so when I read this article I fired up the blog: This information is VITALLY important to making a fully Informed Choice about how to give birth to your child.

Picture from About.com

Birth Without Fear blog brought this to my attention (check out their amazing articles HERE).

The original information comes from a Medscape article published in May 2010, which can be read in it's entirety HERE.

For Generations, women and families have been told that "Once a Cesarean Section, always a Cesarean Section". Even during the 90's, when VBAC births were starting to become more encouraged, mothers were told horror stories of their risks- both to themselves and to their babies. The buzz word used has always been " Uterine Rupture", a term designed to scare the bejesus out of any woman.

From the Medscape article:

"Uterine rupture in pregnancy is a rare and often catastrophic complication with a high incidence of fetal and maternal morbidity.... uterine rupture is defined as a full-thickness separation of the uterine wall and the overlying serosa. Uterine rupture is associated with (1) clinically significant uterine bleeding; (2) fetal distress; (3) expulsion or protrusion of the fetus, placenta, or both into the abdominal cavity; and (4) the need for prompt cesarean delivery and uterine repair or hysterectomy."

Just the word "uterine rupture' is enough to scare most people, enough so that hospitals and doctors,especially in the States, won't even allow a woman with a previous uterine scar to have a TOL (Trial of Labour). But how common is it really? Hospitals (and their insurance companies), and Doctors (and their insurance companies) have led women to believe that the risks are so high, that only an insane person would want to take the chance. So much so that VBACs are actually banned in many many areas of the States. In Canada trying to find a doctor- or midwife- to support your wish to have a TOL for a VBAC birth is very difficult, and even if you do find one, there is a good chance that they will throw so many "necessary" interventions into your labour that your chances of succeeding are slim.

Back in July 2010 I wrote an article about ACOG's new guidelines for VBAC birth:

ACOG states that VBAC is a safe and reasonable option for most women, including some women with multiple previous cesareans, twins and unknown uterine scars. ACOG also states that respect for patient autonomy requires that even if an institution does not offer trial of labor after cesarean (TOLAC), a cesarean cannot be forced nor can care be denied if a woman declines a repeat cesarean during labor.

WHY has ACOG changed it's tune so drastically? Because the statistics show that the real risks of uterine rupture are actually VERY low!!!

The Medscape article goes on to say this:

Incidence and risk factors
Meta-analysis of pooled data from 20 studies in the peer-reviewed medical literature published from 1976-2009 indicated an overall incidence of pregnancy-related uterine rupture of 1 per 1,536 pregnancies (0.07%). When the studies were limited to a subset of 8 that provided data about the spontaneous rupture of unscarred uteri in developed countries, the rate was 1 per 8,434 pregnancies (0.012%).

Yes, the Risk of Uterine Rupture is not 1%, not even .1%, but .07%!!!!!!

Birth Without Fears article: Uterine Rupture: A Look At 20 Peer-Reviewed Publications Goes on to say this:

Risk FactorsCongenital uterine anomalies, multiparity, previous uterine myomectomy, the number and type of previous cesarean deliveries, fetal macrosomia, labor induction, uterine instrumentation, and uterine trauma all increase the risk of uterine rupture, whereas previous successful vaginal delivery and a prolonged interpregnancy interval after a previous cesarean delivery may confer relative protection. In contrast to the availability of models to predict the potential success of a TOL after a prior cesarean section, accurate models to predict the person-specific risk of uterine rupture for individuals are not available.

There are many factors taken into consideration in the .07% including uterine anomalies, myomectomy, number and type of cesarean births, induction and more. That’s right, it’s not even just about cesareans. In that .07%, it includes complications for anomalies, traumas from car accidents or falling and INDUCTIONS!

So for all of you out there struggling to get the birth that you want, desperately searching for a care provider to allow you the Right to birth normally and naturally, arm yourself with KNOWLEDGE! Show the STUDIES to your doctor or midwife. Show them that you are an educated human, not an automaton that blindly follows orders. It's your body. It's your birth.

My final note is for my Canadian friends. Remember this: you have the RIGHT to birth as you wish. No hospital or doctor can FORCE you to have a repeat cesarean section. KNOW your Rights and stand up for yourself and your child.

For more info about my VBA3C birth in Cambridge Memorial Hospital, please read my story HERE..... read it and educate yourself about the support you need and the mistakes I made that you do not want to repeat!!

(Side note; sorry about the white highlighter in the end of the article.... I can't figure out how to get rid of it, lol)

New US Report MMR Vaccine Causes Serious Conditions

2011-08-28T08:59:00.000-07:00

This is a very important article to read for all parent before choosing to Vaccinate, or continue to vaccinate, their children. Natural News might not be a "medical journal" but their extensive links to professional papers and published articles stands for itself. Please take the time to read the article and follow up by reading the links provided. The lives of our children depend on us parents doing research for OURSELVES.

(NaturalNews) The Institute of Medicine, which has long functioned as a front group for the pharmaceutical industry and receives tens of millions of dollars in annual funding from drug companies and global elitists (like Bill Gates, Ted Turner, etc.), has issued a report that declares the MMR vaccine is not linked to autism. This is now being widely reported in the conventional (controlled) media, which isn't telling you the real story behind this report.

What's the real story? That this IOM report, even though it goes out of its way to excuse vaccines and dismiss safety concerns, still openly admits thatvaccines cause measles, febrile seizures, anaphylactic shock and other potentially fatal side effects. It also admits that other vaccines are linked to a whole host of bizarre side effects, including skin lesions, difficulty breathing andlive virus infections(see complete list, below).....

The real conclusions of the Institute of Medicine report on vaccine adverse reactions

Here are some of the other conclusions of the IOM's report, which the old dinosaur media outright refuses to tell you because they are all controlled by pharmaceutical interests:

• MMR vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causingmeasles. (Just as we told you here on NaturalNews, the vaccine is what's causing the disease.)

• MMR vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causingfebrile seizure, just as we also reported here on NaturalNews.

• MMR vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causinganaphylaxis, a life-threatening allergic reaction that can result in death within minutes. This is what kills many young children who are injected with MMR vaccines.

• MMR vaccine is likely linked to causingtransient arthralgia in women and children.

• Varicella vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causingDisseminated Oka VZV, a viral disease (Varicella Zoster Virus) which causesskin lesionsand can also infect the lungs and brain. The fact that this vaccine is causing VZV infections is proof that the vaccines containlive viruses!

• Varicella vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causingVaccine Strain Viral Reactivation, meaning the vaccine contains live viruses that are reactivated in the human host, multiplying and causing widespread infections.

• Varicella vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causinganaphylaxis, the life-threatening allergic reaction mentioned above.

• The influenza vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causinganaphylaxis, which is why influenza vaccines have killed so many children (http://www.naturalnews.com/029586_A...).

• The influenza vaccine likely causesOculorespiratory Syndrome, a vaccine reaction described as causing "bilateral conjunctivitis, facial edema, and upper respiratory symptoms." Once again, this is proof that the vaccine itself isdangerousto humans.

• The Hepatitis B vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causinganaphylaxis.

• The HPV vaccine (for cervical cancer) is also likely linked to causinganaphylaxis.

• The TT (Tetanus Toxoid) vaccine is also likely linked to causinganaphylaxis.

• The Meningo-Coccal vaccine is "convincingly" linked to causinganaphylaxis.

• Vaccine injections (of all kinds) are "convincingly" linked to causingDeltoid Bursitis(severe pain and swelling at the injection sight) andSyncope(loss of consciousness). These are no doubt caused by the toxic chemicaladjuvantswhich are added to vaccines to invoke an immune reaction. These adjuvants are known neurotoxins (http://www.naturalnews.com/026717_v...).

When will we have a truly independent review of vaccines?

If you want to seriously investigate the safety of vaccines, you needan independent reviewof the evidence; meaning you need reviewers fromoutside the systemto look into all the evidence, including interviewing the parents of autistic children and, of course, comparing the outcomes of vaccinated children versus non-vaccinated children.

That's something the vaccine industry has absolutely refused to do, not surprisingly. Any honest comparison would immediately reveal vaccines to be harmful and even deadly. Plus, they simply don't work. Most outbreaks of infectious disease happenamong those children already vaccinated.

And that's no coincidence, either. As it turns out, vaccines almost always containlive viruses that spread disease. Vaccines, ultimately, are a public health hoax through which infectious disease is introduced to the population so that more people can be made sick, thereby killing some (Bill Gates' population control agenda) while sending the rest to the hospital for treatment (satisfying the corporate profit agenda).

The IoM, in releasing its conclusions on vaccine adverse events, only cements its position in the history of medicine as anobvious pharmaceutical co-conspiratorwith absolutely zero scientific credibility.

The entire article is here: http://www.naturalnews.com/033447_Institute_of_Medicine_vaccines.html#ixzz1WJ61Yvpy

INFACT Canada:UN and baby food industries

2011-08-25T04:04:00.000-07:00

Stop Unhealthy Partnerships

Ask the UN to stop partnering with the baby food and junk food industries

Everyday we read or hear about unhealthy foods - foods like infant formula, processed/packaged industrially made infant foods, junk foods, foods with high levels of starch, transfats, highly processed foods, which increase our risk of getting cancer, heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, obesity, and other non- communicable diseases (NCDs). We also know that breastfeeding of children for two years, with exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months, significantly reduces the risk of NCDs.

CLICK here if you want to protect your and your children’s health. Ask the UN to stop partnering with manufacturers of unhealthy foods to develop strategies to control NCDs.

Yet makers of infant milks, infant foods and other unhealthy foods bombard us every day with unethical advertising and false health and nutrition claims - images and words presenting their foods as safe, as healthy, as good, as the right choice.

TAKE ACTION TO STOP PROMOTION OF UNHEALTHY FOODS. Ask the UN to stop partnering with the baby food and junk food industry.

Click here to send the petition to the President of the United Nations General Assembly!
The UN is currently developing a “Political Declaration” and preparing for the High Level UN Summit on NCDs to be held in September in New York. The declaration proposes partnerships with the private sector for its future work. That means manufacturers of unhealthy foods including infant foods and junk foods will be able to influence future strategies. That is an UNHEALTHY PARTERSHIP, you need to take action to stop it.

Sign the petition at:
http://www.onemillioncampaign.org/view_campaigns/stop-unhealthy-partnerships-0

We believe that the strategies to prevent NCDs should put strong emphasis on support to women to continue breastfeeding up to two years, especially exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months and end promotion of all foods for infants, and children. Therefore manufacturers who market unhealthy foods should not be allowed to participate in developing strategies or making decisions regarding healthy foods and prevention of NCDs, as it is a clear case of conflict of interest.

TAKE ACTION TO STOP UNHEALTHY PARTNERSHIPS. Ask the UN to stop partnering with the private sector to develop strategies to control NCDs. Click here to send the petition.

Thanks!!

Elisabeth Sterken
Director INFACT Canada/IBFAN North America
esterken@infcatcanada.ca

Breastfeeding and Religion and NIP in the church

2011-08-23T14:50:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine has written this fabulous letter to her local pastor to explain about breastfeeding and the rights of babies to eat when they're hungry. Doula Harley Jeannette has also written a note asking for help from concerned mothers to help her write up some good information and scripture information to support her letter. If you can help, if you have some support and encouragement for her, Please write me a comment and I will forward it all to her!!!

A letter to my church about breastfeeding

Thank you for trying to look out for me as a sister. I won't cover up but I am willing to come to a middle ground. The reasons I won't cover are I feel it perpetuates bottle feeding as being the norm and further sexualizes women as things, as opposed to us being humans, daughters of Yahweh and puts more of a stigma on breastfeeding.

If it is his sin, I question WHY was it easier to say something to me when I am doing no wrong as opposed to him who was obviously sinning? Shouldn't a brother in Christ help him be accountable? We would be doing a disservice to him if we didn't.

Also, he is going to see women breastfeeding no matter where he goes. He needs to learn to deal with it and what better place than in our church, a safe place? If he isn't being held accountable by us aren't we just enabling him in his sin thus helping him continue it as opposed to us giving him a hand up?

What I am willing to do is for us to make seating arrangements where he sits in front of me. If I am behind him, he will not have that diversion. I also ask that the brothers talk with him and help brainstorm with him ideas on how to handle situations where this is not an option. If he is facing me in a conversation, I will not nurse in front of him because then I can understand the scripture reference of "not making him stumble". However, for me to cover up as a whole when he is around, I believe is taking the scripture out of context. Alcohol is a choice... my baby eating is not. Would you eat with a blanket over your head in the heat? It is hot in the cafe for sure. Besides I normally have 3 other children to mother over and a fidgety baby that is not use to covering.

Additionally, I believe it was inappropriate to ask me to cover up as opposed to asking him to move into a different position. This really does say how our culture still sees women and how breastfeeding is seen, even in our well intentioned church. It sends the message that breastfeeding is still a little "dirty" and something that should be hidden. The option I suggest is, "Hey Mama. There is a gentlemen that has an issue with pornography and does have difficulty with breastfeeding as well. What action you take while you are breastfeeding is up to you but it is appropriate that you know so that you are protected."

We are a small and new church. Because we are new and small, we have the chance to really set the precedence in how these types of situations are going to be handled from here on out. The person with the pornography addiction has the chance to learn appropriate boundaries in a safe environment with a mother that is willing to work with him AND we are encouraging breastfeeding which is the way Yahweh designed women and intended human babies to be fed. Win-win situation.

We can help the health of those mothers and babies. Breastfeeding literally saves lives by dramatically reducing breast cancer. Breastfeeding also reduces SIDS by at least 50%. Do we really want to dissuade mothers from this? Our culture has issues with how they view women. With our culture's problem, our church can be part of the solution. I am thankful this situation has arisen and that Yahweh chose me to handle this. I get to help set our church's viewpoint and really make a positive change!

Lastly, I wanted to say - Jesus was breastfed. Would one of you really go to Mary to ask her to cover while she fed our Saviour or would you take a more protective role of her motherhood?

Here is Jeannette's Facebook note looking for help:

As you can see, I have had a run-in with my church about breastfeeding without a cover. Look at my "a letter to my church about breastfeeding".

So my pastor/friend said he has an open heart about breastfeeding .. and I think he will listen if I present him with good information and scripture based information. So far I have these 2 links that I am going to print out for him to read:http://www.drmomma.org/2010/05/breastfeeding-in-public-christian.html#comment-form

and

http://breastfeedinglaws.uslegal.com/state-laws/georgia-breast-feeding-laws/

and

http://texas-midwife.com/breastfeeding.htm

and

http://www.openbible.info/topics/breastfeeding

What I need from all of are ALL POINTS FOR OR AGAINST COVERING WHILE NURSING IN PUBLIC .. as much SCRIPTURE BASED as possible. ANY information that you think might be beneficial from statistics about whatever to situations. Please ladies.. DO NOT debate this on this thread. I really need the focus on presenting information. Also, PLEASE keep this POSITIVE. I am not going to change my church's stigma of breastfeeding (especially not covered nursing in public) with berating and bullying. I need to focus on their hearts.

THANK YOU AHEAD OF TIME!! In the end, what I am wanting is a "package" that all women can use to present to their churches that is factual and scriptural based so it would be beyond contestation. Please put all the information in the thread on my profile where the document is so I have the information centralized. Also.. PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE share this anywhere and everywhere you think people could help with this mission to make a real difference.

Vaccines Don't Cause Autism

2011-08-01T17:17:00.000-07:00

I made a new friend today on facebook. Another good friend of mine "share" this note and I knew immediately that I needed to "meet" Marcella and beg her to let me share her article. She said "Yes", so without further ado I'd like you all to meet Informed Parenting's Guest Blogger, Marcella!

Vaccines Do Not Cause Autism

by Marcella Piper-Terry

Okay, I give up.

Vaccines do not cause autism.

Autism is a behavioral diagnosis. In order to receive the diagnosis of "Autism" a child must exhibit a certain number of behaviors over a certain time frame. If he or she does not do so, the diagnosis of "autism" is not warranted.

There is no blood test for "autism."

"Autism" can't be confirmed or "ruled-out" by laboratory analysis. It's strictly a behavioral diagnosis.

Therefore, anything that causes physiological damage cannot directly "cause" autism.

Ergo... vaccines cannot "cause" "autism."

Vaccines cause other stuff.

Vaccines cause encephalitis.

Vaccines cause seizures.

Vaccines cause immune system deficiencies.

Vaccines cause gastrointestinal problems.

Encephalitis causes mood swings.

Encephalitis causes extreme pain.

Encephalitis causes inattention and impulsivity.

Encephalitis causes aggression.

Encephalitis causes balance problems and difficulty relating to one's environment.

Seizures cause mood swings.

Seizures cause inattention and impulsivity.

Seizures cause alterations in conciousness.

Immune system deficiencies cause children to have more frequent bacterial infections, such as ear infections, upper respiratory infections (URIs), sinusutis, and strep infections.

Immune system deficiencies cause children to have more frequent viral infections, such as stomatitis, "fevers of unknown origin," "viral rashes," hives, conjunctivitis, and gastrointestinal viruses that cause vomiting and diarrhea.

Immune system deficiencies cause children to be more vulnerable to "everything that's going around" and to have a tougher time getting over things than their peers.

Gastrointestinal damage from vaccines causes diarrhea.

Gastrointestinal damage from vaccines causes nausea, reflux, vomiting, and the recently discovered "disease" now known as GERD (Gastro-Esophageal Reflux Disease).

Gatrointestinal damage from vaccines causes increased vulnerability to viruses and bacteria, which leads to increased administration of antibiotics, which leads to overgrowth of pathogenic yeast.

Pathogenic yeast overgrowth leads to intestinal hyperpermeability ("leaky gut syndrome").

Pathogenic yeast overgrowth leads to constipation.

Pathogenic yeast overgrowth leads to food allergies.

Pathogenic yeast overgrowth leads to skin eruptions, "drunken, silly behavior," inattention and impulsivity, and cravings for bread, sugar, ice cream, milk, and carbohydrates.

Technically, vaccines do not cause autism because techincally there is no such thing as autism.

Vaccines cause the underlying physical conditions that result in the pain, neurological damage, immune system disorders, gastrointestinal damage, and yeast overgrowth - all of which combine to produce the behavioral symptoms that result in the "autism" diagnosis.

Gastrointestinal damage is the most obvious result of vaccine damage.

When a previously healthy child suddenly starts having multiple episodes of watery and extremely stinky diarrhea every day, and this happens shortly after receiving vaccinations, it is notable as a "vaccine injury." What is not so obvious is that when the child's gut is permanently damaged, he or she is no longer able to absorb nutrients necessary to produce neurotransmitters necessary for proper brain function. So when the child develops mood swings, sleep difficulties, and learning disabilities several months later, these issues are not recognized as being related to the vaccine injury because the initial damage occurred many months earlier.

Please re-read the previous paragraph.

This is why Dr. Andrew Wakefield is such a threat to the pharmaceutical industry.

Dr. Wakefield NEVER said vaccines cause autism.

Dr. Wakefield is a gastroenterologist. He saw a number of children with gastrointestinal problems who also happened to be diagnosed with autism. Dr. Wakefield reported his observations. He never claimed that the MMR "caused" autism. He merely reported that a number of children he had seen had BOTH gastrointestinal problems AND autism, and according to parental report, these issues developed within a short time of when the children received the MMR vaccine.

Why is Dr. Wakefield such a threat to the pharmaceutical industry?

Hint: Not because vaccines cause autism - they don't.

Vaccines cause gastrointestinal damage.

Gastrointestinal damage causes malabsorption of nutrients necessary for proper brain function.

Malabsorption of essential nutrients causes immune system disorders, seizures, encephalopathy, etc... and THAT's what leads to the ultimate diagnosis of "autism."

If Dr. Wakefield's observations are correct, SOMEONE, SOMEWHERE will eventually draw the connection between vaccines and the domino-effect that leads to the "autism" diagnosis. From the perspective of the pharmaceutical industry, better to "nip it in the bud" now, which means discrediting Dr. Wakefield to the extent that no one will look further into the science.

Has this ploy worked?

Not for me. And not for many of the very intelligent parents I know.

Only time will tell if there are enough of us to make a difference.

Note: For more on vaccines and encephalitis: (http://www.whale.to/v/buttram.html)

Vaccines and seizures: (http://www.politicolnews.com/flu-vaccine-stops-in-australia/ )

Vaccines and immune system deficiencies: (http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2008/04/01/the-dangers-of-excessive-childhood-vaccinations.aspx)

Vaccines and gastrointestinal problems: ( http://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.1527482994864.69858.1468367643#!/photo.php?fbid=1527483714882&set=a.1527482994864.69858.1468367643&type=1&theater )

If you believe the above links are biased, then please, get it straight from the horse's mouth and check out the vaccine inserts (direct from the manufacturers) for yourself. Link: http://www.vaccinesafety.edu/package_inserts.htm

Educate before you vaccinate!

Supplementing at the Breast

2011-07-11T08:20:00.000-07:00

This is a Brilliant article about using an At-The-Breast supplementer. Dou-la-la writes all about using a supplement system for feeding babies expressed or donated breastmilk, or if that is not available, infant formula, AT THE BREAST.

Why is this so important? Why struggle with having to learn a whole new process to feed your infant? There are three basic reasons:

1- While there are those people out there that will tell you that there's no such thing as "nipple confusion" I will damn well stand on my soapbox and tell you that it's true, it DOES exist!! I went through it with my eldest son, and have seen many many mothers struggle to get babies back on the breast and latching properly after the baby has been fed with bottles. No, not just "bottleS", sometimes even after a single bottle!! Hungry babies will take whatever is easiest to fill their tummies, and if a flowing bottle that does the chugging for them is offered, many will decided that they don't want to work for their dinner after all. Hence the reason that it's so important to not allow hospital's to push bottle supplement feeding on newborn babies- who are especially vulnerable as they haven't learned how to latch and feed from the breast yet.

2- Supplementing a baby AT The Breast stimulates the mothers breast and encourages milk production.

3- Babes love boobs. Breastfeeding is not just about "feeding", it's not just about getting breastmilk into little tummies... its about cuddling, smelling, and holding. It's about the baby being with her mother- skin to skin if possible- and developing a strong bond that will last a lifetime. Nothing facilitates bonding as much as breastfeeding IMO.

This article talks about the difference between the two big commercial brands of At-The-Breast supplementers, talks about technique and most importantly shows a video of how to do it your self!!!! This is coming from a mom who achieved her goal of getting her baby back on the breast. Her words about her journey back to the breast are inspiring.

Lact-Aid Demo: In which I take one for the team and bare it all for the greater good.

People often commend me for sticking it out the 5 months it took to get Lily nursing, and I appreciate that and do take it in, but honestly, the stubbornness that I tapped into to get her ON the breast is the same stubbornness that made me resist using the Lact-Aid, and therefore held up our progress much longer than was probably necessary. I just had to get to the end of my rope, my absolute wit's end, the point where I was truly on the edge of just giving up altogether and EPing for her. I was trying to figure out how I could make my peace with this decision, and I realized that the only way I would ever be able to be okay with giving up on breastfeeding is if I truly KNEW that I had tried everything. And the Lact-Aid was the final frontier. If things didn't work after that, then I would be able to forgive myself, knowing that I had done my very honest best. But only then.
So I took the proverbial deep breath and threw myself into it. And it was tough for a few days, but after that, grew progressively easier - and I saw progress. Real progress. Within 3 weeks she was only taking about 2 ounces per day from the supplementer (I used it at every feed, but only released the flow of the tubing when she was starting to slow down). I kept using it for another week, just to be on the safe side, but really, we had made it. We had crossed over. And it was totally the Lact-Aid - and those who convinced me to try it - that did it.

Please click HERE to read the entire article and to watch Dou-la-la's excellent video.