Breastfeeding

[Magdlyn]

Yes there are cells (and with the cells DNA) in breast milk but drinking the breast milk doesn't incorporate that DNA into the child's system. The cells are simply digested and become nutrients for the child.

Derby, are you a La Leche League Leader or lactation consultant (IBCLC)? I am both. Just my credentials.

I have seen research which is very compelling. Many siblings took part in a study where one sibling was an organ donor to another. In all the cases, the 2 sibs who both breastfed from the same mother had much better success with the recipient not rejecting the donated organ. The conclusion was 2 breastfed siblings had more in common genetically than 2 sibs born of the same mother but not both breastfed by her.

[Derbylicious]

Derby, are you a La Leche League Leader or lactation consultant (IBCLC)? I am both. Just my credentials.

This is off topic, but let me address your post. I have seen research which is very compelling. Many siblings took part in a study where one sibling was an organ donor to another. In all the cases, the 2 sibs who both breastfed from the same mother had much better success with the recipient not rejecting the donated organ. The conclusion was 2 breastfed siblings had more in common genetically than 2 sibs born of the same mother but not both breastfed by her.

I'm a public health nurse. Siblings tend to be fairly similar genetically anyway, usually closer than to either of their parents. All the DNA that you're ever going to have you get at the moment of conception. Breast milk contains lots of antibodies that do no end of good for someone's immune system and it doesn't matter who the source of the breast milk is.

[Magdlyn]

I'm a public health nurse. Siblings tend to be fairly similar genetically anyway, usually closer than to either of their parents. All the DNA that you're ever going to have you get at the moment of conception.


This does not hold with current research.

You disagree with the findings of the organ donation study that found mutually breastfed children were more genetically similar than 2 non-breastfed siblings? How would you explain it then? Just a rhetorical question.

[Tonberry]

This does not hold with current research.

You disagree with the findings of the organ donation study that found mutually breastfed children were more genetically similar than 2 non-breastfed siblings? How would you explain it then? Just a rhetorical question. We can further discuss in PM if you'd like.
I believe Derby was saying that the study might simply have proven that being breastfed is beneficial and helps your body accept organ donation better, and have nothing to do with their DNA being more similar. Stop me if I'm wrong here.

[Magdlyn]

The study showed that even if the recipient was breastfed, they accepted the organ better if the donor was also breastfed by their shared mother.

[Derbylicious]

OK OK. A mod can split these posts out. The study showed that even if the recipient was breastfed, they accepted the organ better if the donor was also breastfed by their shared mother.

Was the recipient being breastfed during the organ transplant period? I can see how the organ could be better accepted. I'm just having a hard time understanding how it would still happen years after the children had both been weaned.

[Magdlyn]

This *might* be the study.

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/24730/1/0000152.pdf

[Derbylicious]

So I read the article last night. Here are the points that I got out of it.
1. Organ rejection is an immune response which the body initiates when it identifies "forign" material.
2. If a baby is breastfed they are exposed to the mother's antigens early in life and their immune system becomes hyporesponsive to them.
3. If that baby (once grown) then has an organ transplant from someone who has those same antigens (someone related to them maternally) they are less likely to reject the organ.
4. There isn't enough evidence to say whether or not it matters if the donor is also breastfed as in most families all children from the same mother are breastfed (in the study there were only 2 out of 39 where the recipient was breastfed and the donor was not therefore statistical significance couldn't be shown).

All in all another fabulous reason to breast feed your children, but it doesn't change your basic genetic makeup.

[Magdlyn]

Yes, I stand corrected. As I said, I first heard of that study over 10 years ago (if it is the same study). I see it was done in 1985. Is it possible no further studies were done in the 25 years since?

I also slogged through those findings yesterday. So, it's an immune response thing, not a DNA thing.

Oddly I first joined La Leche League in 1985. In the years since I have worked with dozens of mothers who did not breastfeed their first child (or only did for a day or 2), because of lack of education or support, but went on to nurse subsequent children for much longer. It would be easy to find families like that for more research.

Anyway, my first point was that if babies are breastfed in a tribal situation by women other than their biological mother, they will then become more like those other women, immunologically at least (if not genetically)... The implications are enormous if you think about it.

[Derbylicious]

Oddly I first joined La Leche League in 1985. In the years since I have worked with dozens of mothers who did not breastfeed their first child (or only did for a day or 2), because of lack of education or support, but went on to nurse subsequent children for much longer. It would be easy to find families like that for more research.

Anyway, my first point was that if babies are breastfed in a tribal situation by women other than their biological mother, they will then become more like those other women, immunologically at least (if not genetically)... The implications are enormous if you think about it.

It's a little more difficult to find these families though where the second child has recieved an organ transplan from the first child (and a little unethical to perform unnesecery(sp?) organ trasplants on healthy individuals.

I was also wondering if the risk of rejection would go down further if a child was to recieve breast milk from a paternally related woman as a baby if the risk of rejection would go down even further in sibling to sibling transplants. I think I'm going to look into this some more and see if there has been any further research done because this is really interesting.

Maybe in the future they might be able to look at people who were fed with banked breast milk from a variety of sources to see how that impacts organ rejection. Although I don't know how often you would get a case that would fit those parameters.

[Tonberry]

unnesecery(sp?)

Unnecessary.

It's all extremely interesting. I don't know much about breastfeeding, except for the fact that even though I don't want biological children, if I adopt a child who is still young I want to breastfeed them, so I looked into inducing breastfeeding without a pregnancy a bit. But that's pretty much as far as I went.

That, and until fairly recently, I actually thought the only cases when babies weren't breastfed were when they were allergic to breast milk (my younger brother was so we fed him formula instead).

[BlackUnicorn]

A baby can have a heart condition that prevents them from sucking hard enough to 'order' their rations of milk from the boobies. That's at least how I understood the trouble in one family I know.

Also, for whatever reason, not all women really produce enough milk. Can Magdlyn or Derbie or someone else in the know explain why?

[Tonberry]

A baby can have a heart condition that prevents them from sucking hard enough to 'order' their rations of milk from the boobies. That's at least how I understood the trouble in one family I know.

Also, for whatever reason, not all women really produce enough milk. Can Magdlyn or Derbie or someone else in the know explain why?

Well, what I meant is, I used to think formula was only for babies who couldn't breastfeed for whatever reason (allergy being the one I was most familiar with). Then I learned that the huge majority of non-breastfeeding had nothing to do with that. A bunch are because the mother doesn't want to for whatever reason (the most stupid I've heard was "that would be incest!") ranging from practicality (the mother works full-time and doesn't want to stop or pump her milk out for someone else to feed the baby) to some weird things ("formula is better for the baby because it's artificial!" lolwut?)

[nycindie]

Well, what I meant is, I used to think formula was only for babies who couldn't breastfeed for whatever reason (allergy being the one I was most familiar with). Then I learned that the huge majority of non-breastfeeding had nothing to do with that. A bunch are because the mother doesn't want to for whatever reason (the most stupid I've heard was "that would be incest!") ranging from practicality (the mother works full-time and doesn't want to stop or pump her milk out for someone else to feed the baby) to some weird things ("formula is better for the baby because it's artificial!" lolwut?)

Or they don't want their breasts to sag, or have breast implants, which I believe is not good for breastfeeding, or just believe that breastfeeding isn't necessary if there's formula that does the "same" thing. When I was 19, I remember my boyfriend's sister putting ice packs on her breasts because they were so swollen and heavy with milk but she wasn't breastfeeding. I never knew why not.

[Tonberry]

Right, there is a whole variety of reasons, some based on the child, some on the mother, some on both. I used to think of breastfeeding as happening unless there was a medical reason not to, then realised it was often down to personal preference.

I learned something similar about C-section. There again, I thought it only happened when there were going to be complication with a natural birth, but learned that it is most commonly used for completely different reasons without being medically required at all.
I learned about that completely by accident, by the way, when seeing figures that in pretty much all western countries, there is a higher death rate for both the mother and the kid if the birth happens in the hospital vs in other contexts such as home. The main reason turned out to be that C-section are more likely to result in the death of the mother, kid or both than natural birth did, with the paradoxical result that parts of the countries that didn't have as much access to hospital had a lower death rate when giving birth.

Note that it's a comparison in western countries, where the pregnant woman still had access to medical attention throughout the pregnancy, lived in an environment less prone to infections and usually had a midwife, doctor or nurse around for the birth.

[BlackUnicorn]

I don't know much about breastfeeding, except for the fact that even though I don't want biological children, if I adopt a child who is still young I want to breastfeed them, so I looked into inducing breastfeeding without a pregnancy a bit.
Still, I can't help but to wonder - is it easy for women who have not given birth themselves to induce lactation? I'm super-sensitive to all sex hormones, so are there strong side affects to taking whatever it is you need to take for that to happen?

[BlackUnicorn]

I learned something similar about C-section. There again, I thought it only happened when there were going to be complication with a natural birth, but learned that it is most commonly used for completely different reasons without being medically required at all.

I believe we've gone off-topic enough to split the thread, at this point.

Maybe a 'Pregnancy and Breastfeeding' thread?

C-section up here is proscribed to women who have severe anxiety related to giving birth. I have only heard really horrible pregnancy and giving birth stories, so I think I would qualify at this point :eek:.

[Tonberry]

Still, I can't help but to wonder - is it easy for women who have not given birth themselves to induce lactation? I'm super-sensitive to all sex hormones, so are there strong side affects to taking whatever it is you need to take for that to happen?

Not everyone will be able to, and not everyone who does will produce enough milk. The main goal though is to create more skin contact between the adoptive mother and the child, since the kid had to go through being abandoned and needs to recreate strong links. The breasfeeding becomes a very bonding experience even when it's supplemented with other sources (either formula or other breastmilk from someone else).

You can actually induce lactation without hormones at all, although it's even less likely to succeed. The breast needs to be constantly stimulated (I don't mean non-stop, I mean several times a day) and will eventually start producing the milk.

When the adoption is going to be on a newborn, typically you're given hormones during the bio-mom's pregnancy so you can start breastfeeding right away. It's apparently easier if you've been pregnant before. I assume it would also be easier if you have breastfed before, whether you were pregnant or not, but nothing I read stated so specifically.

[nycindie]

I learned something similar about C-section. There again, I thought it only happened when there were going to be complication with a natural birth, but learned that it is most commonly used for completely different reasons without being medically required at all.
Yes, usually to accommodate the doctor's schedule. Can't let a birth interrupt a golf game! :p

[Magdlyn]

...if I adopt a child who is still young I want to breastfeed them, so I looked into inducing breastfeeding without a pregnancy a bit. But that's pretty much as far as I went.

Many women can nurse an adopted baby. the factors that make it more successful are having a younger baby (since older ones will have become accustomed to bottle nipples), and pumping one's breasts frequently in the months preceding the adoption (ie: every 2 hours around the clock, with one 4 hour rest at night).

That, and until fairly recently, I actually thought the only cases when babies weren't breastfed were when they were allergic to breast milk (my younger brother was so we fed him formula instead).

Babies can't be allergic to breastmilk, it's much more likely he was sensitive to certain foods your mom ate, that passed into her milk.

A baby can have a heart condition that prevents them from sucking hard enough to 'order' their rations of milk from the boobies. That's at least how I understood the trouble in one family I know.

Ill babies, or premies, can have trouble being strong enough to suckle properly, but can be taught to as they grow. The mother can pump milk and give it by another method (syringe, spoon, small cup) until the baby grows stronger. A heart condition would be a really good reason to breastfeed, or provide the mother's pumped milk at least. If he needs surgery, human milk will greatly speed recovery.

Also, for whatever reason, not all women really produce enough milk. Can Magdlyn or Derbie or someone else in the know explain why?

Actually it is much more common to have an oversupply. Rarely a mother may have this or that condition, a congenital abnormality, or breast reduction, or retained piece of placenta, which can reduce supply. It's much more likely she thinks she doesnt have enough, because you can't measure it as you can with bottles. But you can weigh a baby before and after a feed to see how much he took. Also sufficient diaper output can be checked.

Giving bottles of formula or pacifiers can of course, reduce a good supply.

Or they don't want their breasts to sag, or have breast implants, which I believe is not good for breastfeeding,

Actually it's fine to breastfeed with implants, esp the way they are done nowadays.

or just believe that breastfeeding isn't necessary if there's formula that does the "same" thing.

sigh...

Still, I can't help but to wonder - is it easy for women who have not given birth themselves to induce lactation? I'm super-sensitive to all sex hormones, so are there strong side affects to taking whatever it is you need to take for that to happen?

It's very rare women take oxytocin nasal spray. As I said above, to make milk, stimulate your breasts as frequently as the baby would nurse. Google Supplemental Nursing System, which can deliver a supplement while the baby nurses. Most adoptive moms do not produce a full supply, but will produce some. Every drop of white gold helps!

[nycindie]

Hey Mags, I was wondering. A friend of mine had two siblings who were "developmentally slow." In other words, although they were in their 40s, they were very much like children of about 10 or 12. I don't know about their intellects, they both seemed intelligent enough to function in the everyday world, have simple jobs, pay bills, etc. (anything with a routine), but were socially immature, didn't grasp a lot of deeper meanings of things, and had very childish interests and ways of interacting. My friend told me that her mother had breastfed them both but afterwards they were told that both siblings were allergic (or sensitive) to some enzyme (or something) in her breastmilk and that caused some problem related to their development. Does that sound possible? My friend was also breastfed but did not have this sensitivity and came out "normal." I always wondered if this was some flim-flam they were told.

[Tonberry]

Babies can't be allergic to breastmilk, it's much more likely he was sensitive to certain foods your mom ate, that passed into her milk.

That's possible. He's still allergic to a variety of things. I only remembered it as a kid as him being allergic to the milk, but I suppose he was allergic to something that was in it. It might have been considered too risky to "experiment" and see what he reacted too since he had a very strong reaction, so he was fed formula instead.

I have a question slightly related to milk allergy. I don't tolerate milk, be it cow milk or goat milk (I think I've also tried sheep and buffalo with the same results. I've been told horse milk exists, but I find it easier to just avoid milk).
I believe I react poorly to casein and whey. Are they present in human milk too? Wouldn't it be possible to tolerate it poorly due to that reason?

I didn't have a problem being breastfed personally, but I'm curious.

[Magdlyn]

Hey Mags, I was wondering. A friend of mine had two siblings who were "developmentally slow." In other words, although they were in their 40s, they were very much like children of about 10 or 12. I don't know about their intellects, they both seemed intelligent enough to function in the everyday world, have simple jobs, pay bills, etc. (anything with a routine), but were socially immature, didn't grasp a lot of deeper meanings of things, and had very childish interests and ways of interacting. My friend told me that her mother had breastfed them both but afterwards they were told that both siblings were allergic (or sensitive) to some enzyme (or something) in her breastmilk and that caused some problem related to their development. Does that sound possible? My friend was also breastfed but did not have this sensitivity and came out "normal." I always wondered if this was some flim-flam they were told.

I'd need a lot more information to understand what this problem could be. Babies fed formula generally don't develop to their full potential and end up a few points lower on the IQ scale than if fed their mother's milk.

[Magdlyn]

I have a question slightly related to milk allergy. I don't tolerate milk, be it cow milk or goat milk (I think I've also tried sheep and buffalo with the same results. I've been told horse milk exists, but I find it easier to just avoid milk).
I believe I react poorly to casein and whey. Are they present in human milk too? Wouldn't it be possible to tolerate it poorly due to that reason?

I didn't have a problem being breastfed personally, but I'm curious.

The casein and whey in human milk is species specific. It breaks down much smaller than the casein in cow's milk, and is easily digested by infants and toddlers. Formula co's try and treat the proteins in cow's milk formulas to break down smaller, but the substance is still more rubbery than human milk curds.

So, you don't think you're just lactose intolerant, but actually sensitive to the proteins in cow's milk? How do you do with yogurt? The bacteria in that sort of predigests the proteins.

[Tonberry]

So, you don't think you're just lactose intolerant, but actually sensitive to the proteins in cow's milk? How do you do with yogurt? The bacteria in that sort of predigests the proteins.

It only causes asthma, nothing more serious, so I don't avoid milk completely, but I'm been trying to avoid it when I can, and yogurt is actually not something I like enough to miss it much, so I haven't experimented much with it. I know that I react to lactose-free products too, and that cheese tends to be the worst. I also react to soy cheeses, and that's why I ended up figuring it was the casein, because they use it in "milk-free" cheeses too.
Then again I got triggered by some things that have whey in it. Avoiding both in products has worked for avoiding allergic reactions.

Sometimes it's a bit hard to tell though, for instance I had a reaction to chips once, I got confused and checked the ingredients, and outside of the potato, salt and pepper it said "milk products". It's obviously hard to know what exactly that refers to.

[TheBlackSwede]

You can actually induce lactation without hormones at all, although it's even less likely to succeed. The breast needs to be constantly stimulated (I don't mean non-stop, I mean several times a day) and will eventually start producing the milk.

I've heard this numerous times, but none of the women I was with as a teenager started lactation, despite near constant stimulation. :rolleyes:

[Tonberry]

I've heard this numerous times, but none of the women I was with as a teenager started lactation, despite near constant stimulation. :rolleyes:

It's possible they were too young, or that it wasn't the right kind of stimulation, or that there wasn't enough of it. As far as I know, it needs to be very regular, in order to reproduce the pattern of a baby breastfeeding. (Magdlyn said every 2 hours all day round, every day for months, with a 4 hour break at night). I doubt it was that regular, that often and over such long periods of time.

(I realise it was probably simply a joke, but I thought I'd address it anyways).

[Magdlyn]

I've heard this numerous times, but none of the women I was with as a teenager started lactation, despite near constant stimulation. :rolleyes:

Every 2 hours for 20 mins (10 mins per breast) 24/7. My gf claims to have brought her last gf's milk in a bit while they were in NRE. heh

[Magdlyn]

Have you all seen this?

Breast milk ice cream goes on sale in Covent Garden

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011

[Derbylicious]

Have you all seen this?

Breast milk ice cream goes on sale in Covent Garden

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-12569011

I saw an article on breast milk cheese too. I think it was being served in a resteraunt somewhere in the states (or at least they were trying to, I think they were having some trouble getting it past the FDA).

[Tonberry]

I think it's cool, but I also have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, I think it makes more sense to drink human milk than milk from another species, on the other hand I wonder if donating it for women who don't produce enough milk wouldn't be a better cause, so that it does to babies who do need it, and not adults who don't. Then I wonder if there is a chance of exploitation, of women being used like cattle is, for their milk, pushed to produce more than is probably good for them, etc. And on the other hand I would think it good for women to be able to decide to sell their breast milk if they want to.

So, lots of feelings. But mostly, good impression, and something I certainly would enjoy trying.

[Magdlyn]

I think it's cool, but I also have mixed feelings about it. On the one hand, I think it makes more sense to drink human milk than milk from another species, on the other hand I wonder if donating it for women who don't produce enough milk wouldn't be a better cause, so that it does to babies who do need it, and not adults who don't.

Well, lots of women with large milk supplies do donate their milk for babies in need. With the AIDs scare, milk banks got scared and many closed, sadly. This is changing again, however.

Then I wonder if there is a chance of exploitation, of women being used like cattle is, for their milk, pushed to produce more than is probably good for them, etc.

Well, who is going to force a woman to sell her milk? In this day and age of increasing empowerment of women, I find that scenario unlikely. Also, no woman will produce more milk than is good for her. There is a limit. Most women can fully breastfeed triplets without much trouble, as long as they are well-nourished, well rested and hydrated.

And on the other hand I would think it good for women to be able to decide to sell their breast milk if they want to.

So, lots of feelings. But mostly, good impression, and something I certainly would enjoy trying.

I'm sure it's yummy. Human milk is higher in sugar than cow's milk, so I wonder if the makers of this ice cream even need to add extra sugar in its manufacture.

I've know moms who froze their milk into ice pops for teething toddlers. I've also read of cultures where breastmilk is given to elderly and/or ill people who have low appetites or trouble digesting other foods.

[TheBlackSwede]

I'm sure it's yummy. Human milk is higher in sugar than cow's milk, so I wonder if the makers of this ice cream even need to add extra sugar in its manufacture.

I'm not afraid to tell you that it is indeed yummy.

[redpepper]

I had a lesbian couple for friends when I was on maternity leave with my boy. One of them had their baby girl and the other learned how to breast feed. They both breastfed their daughter... now the one who learned is a man however, which is why I say "had." They are also not together any more....

I had a friend that wanted to breast feed my child while she baby sat. She had babies herself and thought it was a great idea to sooth him. He refused however and I was not cool with it.

I don't see why poly tribes/families can't breastfeed their children together. Even learn it to feed their metamours babies. Its an idea and has made me wonder about poly relationships that could or do share the responsibility of breast feeding.

[Magdlyn]

Oh, so the mods did decide to split the thread after all!

RP, it's interesting your transman acquaintance was willing to induce lactation when he was presenting as female. Many dykes won't breastfeed their partner's baby. I've worked with lesbian moms of twins, even, and the non-birth mother partner won't do this. I mean, it's understandable. Many dykes with kids ID more as "Daddy" than Mommy. But it would be convenient to have 2 lactating women in the house, especially in the case of a multiple birth (which happens with fertility treatments lesbians often use, such as in vitro).

[redpepper]

Even more interesting that she is now a man.

[nycindie]

I don't see why poly tribes/families can't breastfeed their children together. Even learn it to feed their metamours babies. Its an idea and has made me wonder about poly relationships that could or do share the responsibility of breast feeding.

Yes, resurrect the old tradition of wet nurses!

[Magdlyn]

OK, as a La Leche League Leader, I am here required to say, LLL is officially against shared breastfeeding. The objections are to disease transmission (esp HIV/AIDs, where the link between transmission of the virus through breastmilk is not yet fully understood), and the risk to the lessening of the primary mother/child bond.

That said, if you were in a poly "tribe" and fully trusted your sweetie or metamour in the area of safe sex, and she didnt feed your baby *more* than you did, or share sleep or care for more hours in the day than you did, I can see it working.

[Tonberry]

Is it really a problem if they do it more? In a poly relationship, if there is no hierarchy, then all the parents could be parents on equal terms. With fathers, it happens that nobody knows who the bio father is, or cares. With mothers, you know for sure, but it seems to me having more people take care of the kid shouldn't take anything away...
And in a lesbian relationship, both are equally the mother, it seems to me. I understand that the child needs bonding and only knows the person he's been inside at first, but if they can be adopted, shouldn't they be able to be raised by several moms? Is it important to have one person take care of the majority of the feeding?

I ask because although I wanted to induce breastfeeding in case of adoption, my boyfriend and I both agreed that he would also feed the baby so they'd bond with him too. (Not breastfeed the baby. Feed them formula, most likely, or if I happen to produce enough milk, then breast milk).
We wanted it to be shared as equally as we could, but are you saying that there needs to be one parent doing it more? In that case, does it have to be a female? He'd probably be much closer to the baby than I would, as he wants a child more than I do, so it wouldn't seem fair to create more bonding with me than with him. I think it would make both of us uncomfortable with the situation.

[Derbylicious]

Interesting side note, lactation can be induced in men as well.

[Magdlyn]

Is it really a problem if they do it more? In a poly relationship, if there is no hierarchy, then all the parents could be parents on equal terms. With fathers, it happens that nobody knows who the bio father is, or cares. With mothers, you know for sure, but it seems to me having more people take care of the kid shouldn't take anything away...
And in a lesbian relationship, both are equally the mother, it seems to me. I understand that the child needs bonding and only knows the person he's been inside at first, but if they can be adopted, shouldn't they be able to be raised by several moms? Is it important to have one person take care of the majority of the feeding?

Good question, and one that can be decided upon individually in each family/tribe.


I ask because although I wanted to induce breastfeeding in case of adoption, my boyfriend and I both agreed that he would also feed the baby so they'd bond with him too. (Not breastfeed the baby. Feed them formula, most likely, or if I happen to produce enough milk, then breast milk).
We wanted it to be shared as equally as we could, but are you saying that there needs to be one parent doing it more? In that case, does it have to be a female? He'd probably be much closer to the baby than I would, as he wants a child more than I do,

You don't know this yet. You might get more bonded with your infant than you think! Oxytocin is a powerful hormone!



so it wouldn't seem fair to create more bonding with me than with him. I think it would make both of us uncomfortable with the situation.

Well, that is a whole 'nother topic, and a much more common one. Many new mothers I've worked with in LLL come to meetings saying that they want to pump and have their partner (male) feed the baby often.

First of all, if you have a full supply of breastmilk, you have the hassle of finding time to pump. Of course, if you were a working mom and the dad was the stay at home caregiver, this would be only practical. However, if you're staying home with the baby for say, the first year, you'll be doing the majority of the feeding. When your h got home, you'd need to pump all evening and at least once in the night, if he was going to then take that, fill bottles and feed the baby. You might even need to find time to pump during the day in between feeds. Then you'd need to wash those bottles and nipples too, deal with storing the milk, then warming it, etc. Most dads lose interest quick, because it's so much easier for the baby to get it straight from the tap!

Dads can and do bond with their breastfed babies by holding them, walking the floors, changing them, bathing them, taking them for walks in the sling or stroller, and later, playing with them or feeding them their solid foods.

[Tonberry]

Interesting side note, lactation can be induced in men as well.

Yes, I was aware of it, which is why I specified we weren't interested in making him breasfeed the kid. I think there is too much room for it having bad repercussions both for him and the child (mostly as far as outside reactions to it are concerned, and regarding his own feelings of being less of a man, that kind of things).
However, I though not all men would be able to produce milk in the end. Did I misunderstand, was it actually that although they can produce a tiny amount, some never produce enough for anything to drink it?

[redpepper]

I didn't want my friend to breast feed my boy because she smokes btw. I am lead to believe that chemicals would of been passed on.

[Tonberry]

You don't know this yet. You might get more bonded with your infant than you think! Oxytocin is a powerful hormone!

That's true! And I wouldn't even consider having a child if I was only lukewarm, I know that if/when I have a child I want to devote myself to that, and I'm sure I would love the child immensely. It's just that he's wanted to be a father much more while I would really be fine either way, and it would feel like "stealing his thing" if in the end the child had a close bond with me and less of a bond with him, or really my main concern was that he would feel left out.


But you're right:

Dads can and do bond with their breastfed babies by holding them, walking the floors, changing them, bathing them, taking them for walks in the sling or stroller, and later, playing with them or feeding them their solid foods.

There are lots of ways to bond with a child, just like fathers can bond with a kid during pregnancy by talking and touching the kid through the womb, etc. There will be a lot of room for the bonding either way, so we probably should cross that bridge when we reach it and not worry too much about things that might not even come up in the end.

About the pumping, how long can the milk be kept? And I mean in a regular home's conditions, so possibilities of freezing it if it doesn't damage it, but not in an industrial-quality freezer. If freezing is a bad idea, then how long does it keep in a fridge?

[redpepper]

I used to pump and keep it in the fridge for 24 hours before delivering it to the milk bank at the hospital. I don't know how long they kept it. No one asked me to get tested for anything come to think about it.

[LovingRadiance]

I froze it. Just be sure you write on the bag the date so you can use them in order. The bags come with lines for all of that.


Great thread. :) Much enjoyed reading it.

Tonberry-my youngest can't handle casein from dairy. My sister can't either.
We've gone dairy free in our home because now it looks like the new grandbaby can't either!

In both the kids it causes them to projectile puke. I'm talking as a newborn (under a month) 3-6 feet projectile.
The breastfeeding support people at WIC tried to tell me I was wrong-until she did it in their office. Then they understood that I really wasn't exaggerating. Odd, yes. Impossible, obviously not.

Ironically-formula would have been a worse nightmare, because neither can handle soy either. So breastmilk and mama avoiding all forms of dairy was the key.

i was SO annoyed to find that the "dairy free cheese" had casein from COW MILK added to it. It's so aggravating!

Mag-I think it's awesome that you are so talkative about this stuff. :)

FYI-grandbaby is doing good. They did get dairy on accident on the plane ride down which resulted in a couple days of misery for them both. But, they're doing good together now. :)

[Tonberry]

I was SO annoyed to find that the "dairy free cheese" had casein from COW MILK added to it. It's so aggravating!

Yes, it seems to defeat the point! I believe that's so the cheese melts, though.
I've been using mixes of sesame and nutritional yeast to reproduce cheesy flavours. None of it melts though.

[LovingRadiance]

I would reckon you are correct Tonberry. We've found a few vegan cheeses-and they don't melt as you noted. :(

I was just telling GG today that I'd LOVE a plate of nachos. He commented "no cheese". Well DUH, but that doesn't mean I can't wish!
;)

[Morningglory629]

I used to pump and keep it in the fridge for 24 hours before delivering it to the milk bank at the hospital. I don't know how long they kept it. No one asked me to get tested for anything come to think about it.

Never thought to do this. Pumping. It's been so long and this may sound ridiculous because I haven't thought about it in 13 years but could I have frozen it? BTW loved breastfeeding and did so for 6 months with each of the three older kids, and a year for the youngest. I think it is probably the most important bonding/nurturing thing to do for your child, aside from the obvious nutritional value. That's my 2cents.
I never thought of donating it. Hmmm "food for thought.":D

[LovingRadiance]

you can freeze it. They make bags just for freezing it.
You can donate it to. Our NICU here takes donations for the preemies.

[Magdlyn]

I'm surprised RP wasn't screened when she donated her milk, 8 or so years ago!

In US milk banks, you'd definitely be required to be tested for various diseases, be a non-smoker, etc.

Fresh breastmilk is alive. Freezing kills of some of its properties, but of course, it's still superior to anything created from pasteurized cow's milk, sucrose and some added chemicals.

Human milk storage guidelines can be found here:

http://www.kellymom.com/bf/pumping/milkstorage.html

Interestingly, since human milk (and all mammalian milks) contain live antibodies, milk that is expressed into a clean, fairly sterile (as in washed in hot water in a dishwasher) container, which is left out at room temperature, will, when tested several hours later, have less bacteria in it than when first expressed. Some of the bacteria from the mother's skin and from the container will be killed by the properties in the milk.

[MrFarFromRight]

Yep, the breast-feeding part, while not exactly a problem, is a bit of a challenge right now, because when the baby needs to eat, Mum is the only one who can provide atm.Many people would feel freaked out at the idea, but it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation. AH, if it were only possible for a man!:(:(:(
:eek::eek::eek:
:o:o:o

[BlackUnicorn]

I know, I had this inadvertently happen with a gf once or twice. Too much stimulation -> WOW :eek:! Thank ye gods I was pre-informed that this might happen and didn't freak out.

[redpepper]

Yes it is. I know a lesbian couple where the other woman, who didn't have the child learned how to breast feed. After a couple of years she decided she was really a man and has now transitioned... yup, its all possible. :D

[Mohegan]

Many people would feel freaked out at the idea, but it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation. AH, if it were only possible for a man!:(:(:(
:eek::eek::eek:
:o:o:o

Actualy it is totaly possible for men to lactate.

[Tonberry]

Many people would feel freaked out at the idea, but it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation. AH, if it were only possible for a man!:(:(:(
:eek::eek::eek:
:o:o:o

Actually it is totally possible for men to lactate.

I was just about to say that. Don't expect to produce buckets, but you can get yourself to lactate. The issue usually is less of biological impossibility and more of pride issues (men worried it makes them less of a man or something like that).

[nycindie]

Many people would feel freaked out at the idea, but it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation.

I always thought this is pretty much common knowledge. I wouldn't think anyone would freak out about it.

[Magdlyn]

When I was still cycling, I was always able to express a few drops of "milk" (colostrum) from my breasts in the week before my period. I think this is fairly common.

But there is documentation of grandmothers past menopause taking over nursing babies when the mother dies.

[TheBlackSwede]

I was just about to say that. Don't expect to produce buckets, but you can get yourself to lactate. The issue usually is less of biological impossibility and more of pride issues (men worried it makes them less of a man or something like that).

It actually DOES make them less of a man, that's a valid concern. Lower Testosterone, increased Estrogen. ...and along with that, the myriad increased health risks - prostate cancer, heart disease, stroke, even lower IQ. What's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander. ;)

[Magdlyn]

It actually DOES make them less of a man, that's a valid concern. Lower Testosterone, increased Estrogen. ...and along with that, the myriad increased health risks - prostate cancer, heart disease, stroke, even lower IQ. What's good for the goose is NOT good for the gander. ;)

Um, where did you get that information from? It's a scientific fact any man that spends his life with a pregnant woman becomes more in tune with her hormonally. His prolaction and oxytocin levels go up, and this is natural and healthy, to increase the bonding experience with his baby once it's born.

Those diseases you warn against with regards to male lactation seem spurious to me, as breastfeeding is temporary. And I've never read anything about women's testosterone going down when lactating, just that her prolaction levels go up. A man's estrogen wouldn't go up during lactation, as estrogen controls ovulation, not lactation.

A man's IQ wouldnt go down just because he lactated!

[TheBlackSwede]

Um, where did you get that information from? It's a scientific fact any man that spends his life with a pregnant woman becomes more in tune with her hormonally. His prolaction and oxytocin levels go up, and this is natural and healthy, to increase the bonding experience with his baby once it's born.

Those diseases you warn against with regards to male lactation seem spurious to me, as breastfeeding is temporary. And I've never read anything about women's testosterone going down when lactating, just that her prolaction levels go up. A man's estrogen wouldn't go up during lactation, as estrogen controls ovulation, not lactation.

A man's IQ wouldnt go down just because he lactated!

Women and men are built differently - while lactation may not cause a drop in T for a woman, it requires increased estrogen in men and E is antagonistic to T in men. Even if a man were to stop lactating after a short while, the damage to his hormones would take longer to repair. A Man's T drops low enough already post pregnancy without lactation thrown in.

This is from a friend of mine who studied endocrinology extensively. It's plenty healthy for men to bond with their children, just not to have the Estrogen levels required for lactation.

[Magdlyn]

Well, I don't know about that, or the actual risks associated with that, and it's all a bit moot anyway. If a man had a baby in a 3rd world country, and no female to feed it, and no income for formula, or clean water to mix it, the benefits of his milk for his baby would outweigh any possible risks to his health because of the horrors of estrogen, I am sure.

[TheBlackSwede]

Well, I don't know about that, or the actual risks associated with that, and it's all a bit moot anyway. If a man had a baby in a 3rd world country, and no female to feed it, and no income for formula, or clean water to mix it, the benefits of his milk for his baby would outweigh any possible risks to his health because of the horrors of estrogen, I am sure.

I think that's precisely the situation where male lactation would be important and indeed necessary. My point was merely that it's not simply an issue of pride - it's actually not healthy for men.

And I don't mean to paint Estrogen as being the evil of the world, but increased Estrogen levels in men do pose significant health risks, along with the obvious lack of er, functionality. In fact, it has been theorized that xenoestrogens are responsible in a large part for many of the health problems that have seen a significant increase in the male population over the past 50 years, and there is fascinating data on the subject as well. Anyhow, sorry for the off-topic tidbits.

[MrFarFromRight]

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight
Many people would feel freaked out at the idea, but it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation.I always thought this is pretty much common knowledge. I wouldn't think anyone would freak out about it.Common knowledge? See BlackUnicorn's reply. "Freaked out" is perhaps too strong a term. I certainly think that some people would find the idea of one woman breastfeeding another woman's child to be... unnatural, even distasteful. (There are some [especially among the men and children] who find the whole "female processes" - especially menstruation - to be rather shameful, or at least embarrassing.)

[MrFarFromRight]

Originally Posted by MrFarFromRight
[...] it is possible for a woman who has never been pregnant to induce lactation. AH, if it were only possible for a man!:(:(:(Actualy it is totally possible for men to lactate.I don't mean to paint Estrogen as being the evil of the world, but increased Estrogen levels in men do pose significant health risks, along with the obvious lack of er, functionality. In fact, it has been theorized that xenoestrogens are responsible in a large part for many of the health problems that have seen a significant increase in the male population over the past 50 years, and there is fascinating data on the subject as well. Anyhow, sorry for the off-topic tidbits.More information on both of these facets, please!

I got interested in the subject of men breastfeeding over 30 years ago while reading my favourite novel, "Woman On The Edge Of Time" by Marge Piercy. In this utopia, social and cultural imbalances between the sexes have been - as far as possible - removed. The word "father" does not exist. Each child has 3 mothers - who can be of either sex - and usually 2 of these (again: independent of sex) decide to share the responsibilities and joys of breastfeeding. I was enchanted by the idea, but a medical-student friend of mine warned me of the health risks, without being specific.

I'm old enough not to worry about dying young, I have virtually NO male pride, and I would gladly trade some "er, functionality" for the deep bond that breastfeeding would bring. But just how high ARE the risks? And how would a man provoke enough lactation in himself to be useful?

[nycindie]

I certainly think that some people would find the idea of one woman breastfeeding another woman's child to be... unnatural, even distasteful. (There are some [especially among the men and children] who find the whole "female processes" - especially menstruation - to be rather shameful, or at least embarrassing.)

Then I guess those people never heard of wet nurses. I feel like I've known about it, like... forever.

[NeonKaos]

I certainly think that some people would find the idea of one woman breastfeeding another woman's child to be... unnatural, even distasteful. (There are some [especially among the men and children] who find the whole "female processes" - especially menstruation - to be rather shameful, or at least embarrassing.)

That was invented my the patriarchal misogynistic judeo-christian establishment in order to "keep women in their place".

If you read anything about Paganism, Celtic culture, and other non-"western" histories, you will find plenty of examples of where the "female processes" are celebrated as a source of power and strength because they represent fertility and the continuation of the species .

On the flip-side of the argument, there are also folks who think that breast-feeding one's OWN child is "unnatural, even distasteful".

So, poo-poo on your argument from both sides of the fence, yo.

[Magdlyn]

More information on both of these facets, please!

I got interested in the subject of men breastfeeding over 30 years ago while reading my favourite novel, "Woman On The Edge Of Time" by Marge Piercy. In this utopia, social and cultural imbalances between the sexes have been - as far as possible - removed. The word "father" does not exist. Each child has 3 mothers - who can be of either sex - and usually 2 of these (again: independent of sex) decide to share the responsibilities and joys of breastfeeding. I was enchanted by the idea, but a medical-student friend of mine warned me of the health risks, without being specific.

I'm old enough not to worry about dying young, I have virtually NO male pride, and I would gladly trade some "er, functionality" for the deep bond that breastfeeding would bring. But just how high ARE the risks? And how would a man provoke enough lactation in himself to be useful?

MrFFR, congrats on a post with no smilies, no brackets, no bolding, no underlining, no italics, no large fonts, and no colors! Refreshing!

[nycindie]

MrFFR, congrats on a post with no smilies, no brackets, no bolding, no underlining, no italics, no large fonts, and no colors! Refreshing!

<giggle>

[Tonberry]

Then I guess those people never heard of wet nurses. I feel like I've known about it, like... forever.

I know! It seems to me it used to be the norm for rich women NOT to breastfeed their own kids, and have someone else do it.

[MrFarFromRight]

That was invented my the patriarchal misogynistic judeo-christian establishment in order to "keep women in their place".

If you read anything about Paganism, Celtic culture, and other non-"western" histories, you will find plenty of examples of where the "female processes" are celebrated as a source of power and strength because they represent fertility and the continuation of the species .

On the flip-side of the argument, there are also folks who think that breast-feeding one's OWN child is "unnatural, even distasteful".

So, poo-poo on your argument from both sides of the fence, yo.It's not MY argument. I wouldn't have started this whole line of thought (on another thread, moved twice to end up here) if I weren't a big fan of breastfeeding and - incidentally - "female processes" in general. I actually felt a LOT more comfortable (meaning: less squeamish, less embarrassed, not "physically comfortable", so PLEASE don't anybody jump on me with: "Of course you felt more comfortable!") with menstruation than one of my girlfriends, who used to wrap each used sanitary towel in about a metre of toilet paper before burying it at the bottom of the rubbish bin.

I agree with everything else you say: it's the fucked-up patriarchal, consumerist, male-is-better-than-female society that is the norm in the First World that has distanced us from a healthy respect for The Female.

[MrFarFromRight]

MrFFR, congrats on a post with no smilies, no brackets, no bolding, no underlining, no italics, no large fonts, and no colors! Refreshing!My Sweet Lord! How did that one slip by me? (:confused::confused::confused::eek::eek::eek::D:D :D)

[nycindie]

Look at this blissful face!

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Pig_lactation.jpg/800px-Pig_lactation.jpg