HEALTH: NWNM Today, Reader Response #2A (December 30, 2002)

[Guest guest]

I found this interesting reading and thought you might too...

 

Mouse

***

 

December 30, 2002

 

Dear Friends,

 

Welcome to this " Reader Response " issue of NWNM Today.

 

We have received many, many responses to our issue on breastfeeding! We

have published all of your letters (with permission) in TWO supplemental

issues, of which this is the second. We hope that you will continue to

write to jockdoubleday with information, anecdotes, and ideas.

 

Subsequent issues of NWNM Today will address the following topics:

 

Vol. 3: CHILDBIRTH

Vol. 4: NATURAL IMMUNITY

Vol. 5: [READERS' VOTE]

Vol. 6: ORGANIC AGRICULTURE

Vol. 7: NUTRITION

 

Permission is given to all parties to reproduce, post, and distribute

all or any part of this newsletter.

 

In health,

 

Jock Doubleday

Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc.

http://www.gentlebirth.org/nwnm.org

jockdoubleday

 

* * *

 

Bumper stickers for the holiday season, created by Jock Doubleday:

 

TREES ARE PEOPLE TOO

 

ALL IS CALM, ALL BUSINESSES ARE BRIGHT

 

O COME ALL YE CONSUMERS

 

I AM THE WAY AND SO ARE YOU

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/10/02 6:13:05 PM, Olallie writes:

 

I am a nurse at Long Beach Memorial Hospital in Long Beach CA. I work in

mother/baby (which is such a lie, they keep the babies in the nursery

almost all the time, only bringing them out to feed on a strict schedule

that disregards the babies' feeding cues, not to mention their emotional

needs).

 

While they do have somewhat of a policy about encouraging and supporting

exclusive breastfeeding, I cannot tell you how often I have heard a

nursery nurse tell a mother that she would just " feel better if that

baby had a bottle. " It happens daily.

 

I'd like to also warn women away from that hospital because it appears

that they have about a 70% c section rate at this time.

 

You can print this in your newsletter but please leave my name off, for

job security reasons. You can print my email.

 

[name withheld by request]

Olallie

 

 

 

[Friends,

 

Regarding olallie's mention (above) of C-section rate:

 

The cesarean section rate for all U.S. hospitals now stands at 25%. This

number is an average. Some hospitals have very low rates, some hospitals

have very high rates.

 

The rate at Sierra Memorial Hospital in Nevada City, CA, (where I used

to live), for instance, is comparatively low:10%. Anyway, it is entirely

possible that the hospital where olallie works has a 70%

C-section

rate.

 

After all, once hospitals go above 3%--the highest rate that can be

medically justified--why stop at 25%? Why not go to 50%? Why not go to

75%? Why not go to 100%? Why extract only a little bit of a mine's gold?

 

Jock]

 

* * *

 

 

In a message dated 12/29/02 9:25:22 AM, ######## writes:

 

Dear Jock,

I've heard that, for mothers of adopted infants, they can put something

on their nipples that will steadily stimulate them. This supposedly will

cause the breasts to lactate. Is this possible? I know the pituitary

gland controls prolactin levels which controls breast milk secretion. .

.. . Anyway, is it possible for constant nipple stimulation to cause

breasts to produce milk?

Lisa

 

[Jock replies to Lisa's letter:]

 

Dear Lisa,

Yes, nipple stimulation can cause breasts to produce milk. The

" something " that a woman puts on her nipples to steadily stimulate them

is a baby. A husband or boyfriend or girlfriend, or just a friend, will

do as well

Best regards,

Jock

 

[Lisa replies to Jock's letter:]

 

In a message dated 12/30/02 10:05:13 AM, ######## writes:

 

I was referring to a device, not a human being, that some women of

adopted babies wear to prepare for the arrival. But I suppose the

effect is the same. That's a lotta stimulating. The older I'm getting

the more I realize what wild and wondrous things breasts are. And

they're right there, front and center.

Lisa

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/9/02 7:24:47 AM, mama2net writes:

 

Dear Jock,

 

Thanks for the breastfeeding chapter--I have breastfed six children for

a good long time, avoided shots with all but the first, and gave birth

to all but the first at home.

 

My family ranges in age from four to twenty three; the notable thing

about the older kids, ages 18, 21, and 23 is the level of maturity with

which they approach life, really looking before they leap into things,

doing their homework before committing to a course of action.

 

We also homeschool; when I let people know in the early eighties that I

planned to homeschool, people thought I was completely crazy. I am glad

I stuck out the tough times, because the time spent years ago is showing

up in the children's decisions as adults--all sound decisions, so far,

and likely to be so in the future.

 

Thanks for your work, and for providing support for my work at home. The

only comment I have echoes a comment made by an earlier letter writer,

who said the only change she would like to see is more information on

why women choose not to breastfeed.

 

I run into three reactions when I tell people I have breastfed all six

children.

 

The first comment is, Oh, that must be so HARD--I could never do that.

You are so brave.

 

The second is usually, My relative so-and-so tried that, and she did not

have enough milk. ( Unstated fear here... and neither will I...)

 

The third comment is that I must not have a life, get out of the house

much, have a life with my husband. Doesn't he object? Doesn't he find it gross?

 

Nobody grasps the concept of power, power to shape the thinking of a new

generation, to influence children's thinking simply by being present in

their lives. Nobody grasps the idea of PREVENTING teenage problems by

getting to know your children early, and building up areas where there

appears to be difficulty.

 

I'd like to see an exploration of those attitudes--why do so many people

think breastfeeding (read that, breastfeeding in infancy/toddlerhood,

after that, meeting needs throughout childhood) is prohibitively

difficult, therefore must be abandoned? People who readily grasp the

concept of investment of money offering a return, rarely even recognize

the concept of ROI with respect to time and children. People willing to

work a second job to fund a college account for an elementary schooler,

seem unable to grasp that what little Johnny might need is his parent's

time and acceptance.

 

Why do people seek out and embrace difficult long-term projects every

day--but oh, my, breastfeeding/parenting--that tough task should be

abandoned?

 

Thanks for the time and space to speak.

 

Kalli

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/8/02 5:56:51 PM, holmanart writes:

 

Dear NWNM,

 

I looked through American Baby Magazine this week (just wanting to keep

a pulse on the mainstream propaganda!) and was shocked at some of the

ads for baby bottles and formulas.

 

In the " Dr. Brown's Natural Flow " bottle ad, the statement " the vent

allows them to nurse without.... ingesting air bubbles. " Playtex goes so

far as to eliminate the word " bottle " from their packaging entirely,

calling the

bottle a " Nurser. "

 

Statements about breastfeeding include, " But sometimes, you just

can't. " , " ...using a bottle can give a nursing mom options. " ,

" ...using the Playtex Nurser can help ensure baby will stay interested

in the breast,... " (WHAT!?!?!)

and finally, " Using a bottle doesn't have to hurt your chances of

breastfeeding successfully. " Martek and Similac Advance both tout that

adding DHA and ARA gives their formulas the same qualities of

breastmilk, and with careful phrasing imply that babies given these

formulas can have brain and vision development equal to that of the

breastfed child.

 

One simple question... Aren't all of these statements grey areas in

false advertising? It seems that, as with herbs (if you can't beat em',

join em... now you can get gingko at the local Costco in bulk), these

companies are taking advantage of readers' growing knowledge about the

superiority of breastfeeding and have changed their approach from " we

are just as good as breastfeeding " to " heck, we are practically the same

as breastfeeding! "

 

I don't have an answer to the problem, but maybe your wonderful

newsletter can help those of us supporters of breastfeeding to be

effective in our combined efforts to protect the integrity of breastfeeding.

 

Thank you,

Laine Holman

 

(1 c-sec, 1 VBAC home waterbirth, two happy breastfed boys, one on the way)

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/9/02 10:12:34 AM, stubber writes:

 

Dear Jock,

 

I enjoyed your newsletter and am very excited about your upcoming book.

Will this be a self-published book or have you found a publisher willing

to promote such " radical " information?

 

You mentioned being interested in anecdotal stories and I thought you

might be interested in the following example of the typical lip service

that doctors give to breastfeeding.

 

Last month's Chatelaine Magazine--probably the largest circulation

women's magazine in Canada--contained a 4-page insert about Otitis Media

funded by Pfizer, a drug company.

 

Under the topic " 5 Tips for Preventing Ear Infections " is the following:

 

" 1. Breastfeed your baby for at least three months if possible. Studies

show that breastfed babies tend to have fewer ear infections.

 

" 2. Support your baby so that he or she is in a semi-sitting position,

not lying flat while nursing or bottlefeeding.

 

" 3. Don't smoke or allow others to smoke around your children. Exposure

to second-hand cigarette smoke increases a child's risk of otitis media.

 

" 4. Wash your hands and help your children learn appropriate handwashing

habits. Otitis media nearly always develops as a complication of an

upper respiratory tract infections, and these infections are nearly

always spread by direct hand contact. (To encourage children to do a

thorough job with the soap and water, have them recite the alphabet

while they wash.)

 

" 5. Vaccinate your children. [!!] Routine vaccinations for children

offer many benefits. Not only are specific illnesses such as measles

prevented but so are complications of these illnesses--including otitis

media. Another vaccine to consider is the influenza vaccine, which is

known to help prevent otitis media. [!!] In most places, this yearly

vaccine is not provided routinely to children, but your physician may

suggest it for children who are particularly prone to otitis media. "

 

Initially I was pleased to see that they mentioned breastfeeding first.

But on closer examination I noticed the wording: " if possible " . The

other tips don't use that wishy-washy statement. The 3rd point simply

says " DON'T smoke " . So... it's easier to quit smoking than to breastfeed

for three months?

 

I also noticed that vaccination is " known to " help prevent otitis media,

smoking " increases " risk, lack of handwashing " nearly always " spreads

infection...but breastfed babies merely " tend to " have few infections.

So while it's mentioned first, breastfeeding is clearly not emphasized

as being as important as handwashing and immunizations.

 

I learned to be this discerning many years ago at a talk given by E.

Sterken of the Infant Feeding Action Coalition. (www.infactcanada.ca

--go to this website and be greeted with the song " Give Your Baby the

Breast " ) Ms. Sterken showed us how sneaky the formula companies are in

advertising their product to doctors as well as the general public.

 

This discernment came in handy when our local LLL group began to hold

meetings in the Public Health office building. We asked the nurse to

remove her breastfeeding poster because it was funded by a formula

company and it undermined breastfeeding. She was a more than a little

surprised! The caption read " Breastmilk is the best food for young

infants. " We pointed out to this PH nurse (whose job was to make home

visits to new mothers) that the statement says:

 

a) that breastmilk is for YOUNG INFANTS (not for older babies?)

 

b) that it is " food " (Therefore not also drink? Therefore not necessary

once they get other food? Therefore not necessary if the baby was " fed "

90 minutes ago?) Furthermore, the picture showed a nursing mother in a

negligee. Not many of us can sit around in a negligee for very long

unless we have a long-term illness. Lactation is not a long-term illness.

 

I'm happy to say that we educated the public health nurses in ways that

they could not have imagined. They now post pictures of women

nursing--and laughing!--in a park.

 

Sheila Stubbs

author of " Birthing the Easy Way - Learning the Hard Way "

http://communities.msn.com/BirthingTheEasyWay >>

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/9/02 8:32:43 AM, SEMINERS writes:

 

Dear Jock,

 

Thanks for your excellent creation and your recent newsletter and

permission to reprint part or all of it. My name is Scott Miners and I

edit the Well Being Journal (www.wellbeingjournal.com for some of our

articles, etc.).

 

We would like to reprint most of your current newsletter in our Jan/Feb

issue, and we have also excerpted from the previous newsletter about

breastfeeding to make a whole piece about breastfeeding (and a little

about vaccines).

 

We will be referring our readers to your NWWM website and email address.

I have this question, though, and that is " What does the AAP acronym

stand for in full title? "

 

All the best

Scott Miners

seminers

 

 

[Jock responds to Scott's query:]

 

December 9, 2002

 

Hi Scott,

 

AAP is in this case the American Academy of Pediatrics, as referenced in

Kristine Severyn's article, " Profits, Not Science, Motivate Vaccine Mandates " :

 

" The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), a major supporter of

mandatory chicken pox and other vaccine mandates across the country,

shares incestuous financial ties with Merck. When constructing its new

headquarters in suburban Chicago, the AAP solicited funds from Merck,

and received $100,000 for its building campaign. " (Well Being Journal

Vol. 10, No. 2, Spring 2001

http://www.wellbeingjournal.com/profits-vaccines.htm)

 

Yours,

Jock

 

* * *

 

[Friends, Regarding the below . . . If you are interested in getting a

feeling for what life is like when one lives according to the wisdom of

nature, I highly recommend Peter Theobald's nonprofit newsletter, and

his web site www.transformationyoga.com]

 

* * *

 

In a message dated 12/23/02 2:31:44 AM, petert writes:

 

Hi Jock,

 

CYOGI is the Newsletter of Health Naturally--a not-for-profit

organisation dedicated to spreading the information about Natural Living

(based on natural hygiene) and Holistic Yoga.

 

We back away from fanatic and extreme practices, and share with you

practical information, that you can use today!

 

CYOGI is based on wholistic natural principles, yet backed by scientific

evidence.

 

To , send an email to cyogi- or

on the web from /groups/cyogi

 

To read the archive of past issues, visit /groups/cyogi

 

To view our website, visit www.transformationyoga.com

 

Merry Christmas!

 

Cheers--Peter

 

* * *

 

Friends,

 

Each issue of NWNM Today will be followed by at least one supplemental

Reader Response issue. Please feel free to write to me at

jockdoubleday with your questions, concerns, anecdotes, and ideas.

 

In health,

 

Jock Doubleday

Natural Woman, Natural Man, Inc.

A California Nonprofit Corporation

http://www.gentlebirth.org/nwnm.org

jockdoubleday

 

The information contained in this email is not a substitute for

professional

caregiver advice.

 

Jock Doubleday is the author of the book, Spontaneous Creation: 101

Reasons Not To Have Your Baby in a Hospital, to be published soon. He

is also active in the international endeavor to bring the dangers of

vaccination to

light.

 

=====

http://www.vaccine-info.com

Free Alan Yurko http://www.freeyurko.bizland.com/