Dubai Forums Dubai Expat Forums Health and Medicine in Dubai

For those who doubt to feed with breast milk or with milk formula

Surely, it's for the mother and father to decide what is best? It's her body and their baby.

Blueie , it is obviously that parents decide what to do with their child and not pharma companies and milk formula manufacturers )))

Few days ago a woman decided to feed her new born baby with water and he died (dubai-romance/woman-gives-birth-sharjah-pavement-t59269.html). She did her best for the baby and what is the result? There are cases when we should learn as much information as we can and only then to make a decision especially if it concerns our children.

There are millions of women who bottle-feed their babies. In fact, I don't know anyone who breastfeeds. The figure is so low in the major city that I live in that the health service PAYS them to breastfeed. It is not culturally acceptable here. These mothers take the money and breastfeed for a few days, and then go back to bottle-feeding.



The only time I have ever seen a mother breastfeeding was in a pub. The pub was empty when I walked in, apart from her. She was breastfeeding and drinking beer at the same time. She was never going to give up drinking, of course not, so I suggested she bottle-feed.

When I say bottle-feeding, I mean Cow & Gate or SMA - these are milk stuffs, not water, and generations of babies have grown up on this bottle-feeding. Bottle-feeding is simply more convenient for the mother. If a visitor calls at her house and the mother is breastfeeding, what does she do? Most mothers would go into another room to breastfeed, away from the visitor, unless she's an exhibitionist and wants to flash her breasts in front of the neighbour. Most people are private. Besides, the visitor, father, family members, etc, can help feed the baby if that baby is bottle-fed.



In terms of nutrition, the difference between breast and bottle-feeding is negligible. People weigh up the benefits and lack of benefits between breastfeeding and bottle-feeding. With breastfeeding you tend to be housebound because the vast majority of mothers would never breastfeed in public. The only way around it is to pump breast-milk into a bottle and some people do that - for a while - and then resort to Cow & Gate/SMA bottle-feeding. As I say, that's their choice.



In some countries you are advised against breastfeeding. For example, in Manila, the water is so contaminated that breastfeeding is unhealthy, so mothers/fathers boil the water for bottle-feeding. What do those people in favour of breastfeeding only have to say about that? Even this is inconvenient for many people, and so the birth-rate has fallen dramatically.

What is not acceptable is that mothers who breastfeed 'look down' on mothers who don't breastfeed. It is for the parents to decide what is best for them and their baby, and NOT for other mothers or so-called health workers to decide.

Blueie wrote:

There are millions of women who bottle-feed their babies. In fact, I don't know anyone who breastfeeds. The figure is so low in the major city that I live in that the health service PAYS them to breastfeed. It is not culturally acceptable here.

I breastfeed my baby for a year and am going to continue for half a year more. And I know many women who do the same thing )) Natural thing can't be not acceptable in any country.

Blueie wrote:

The only time I have ever seen a mother breastfeeding was in a pub. The pub was empty when I walked in, apart from her. She was breastfeeding and drinking beer at the same time. She was never going to give up drinking, of course not, so I suggested she bottle-feed.

In majority cases breastfeeding women are more conscious what they eat and what they drink.

Blueie wrote:

When I say bottle-feeding, I mean Cow & Gate or SMA - these are milk stuffs, not water, and generations of babies have grown up on this bottle-feeding.

Cow & Gate or SMA isn't water but it can't be compared with human milk. "Breastmilk contains literally thousands of different components that support the immune system in some way. Some of these components are very specific, defending against a particular pathogen (bacteria, virus, parasite), while others have a broader function, protecting the baby in many different ways. Often these various components act together, providing even more protection than each would alone.From the outside, babies seem to grow well on formula -- they certainly get bigger and longer. But on the inside their vital organs may struggle to grow adequately without support from mother's milk, which has evolved to meet their needs. Perhaps one brand of formula can argue that it is marginally better than another brand, but can it possibly claim to be "inspired by breastmilk" or to "strengthen the immune system"? Those are claims that the real science simply does not support." Hanson, L. A. MD, PhD. Immunobiology of Human Milk: How Breastfeeding Protects Babies. Pharmasoft Publishing, 2004.

Blueie wrote:

Bottle-feeding is simply more convenient for the mother. If a visitor calls at her house and the mother is breastfeeding, what does she do? Most mothers would go into another room to breastfeed, away from the visitor, unless she's an exhibitionist and wants to flash her breasts in front of the neighbour. Most people are private. Besides, the visitor, father, family members, etc, can help feed the baby if that baby is bottle-fed.

Do you think bottle feeding is really convenient? When your baby wakes up for several time to eat at night you have to get up and make milk formula (it should be always fresh). And bottle feeding isn't enough for the baby to sleep further. You have to rock to sleep him at night instead of giving him a breast and keep on sleeping.

Breastfeeding mother can go anywhere not warring about milk stuff, boiled water, sterilizing measures etc. She has essential food in necessary quantity and in perfect condition with herself ALWAYS and FREE.

There was created very simple stuff for private breastfeeding even in the public places. Look at the picture below. With its help woman can host her relatives and friends breastfeeding at the same time

Blueie wrote:

In terms of nutrition, the difference between breast and bottle-feeding is negligible.

Read more about consistence of human milk http://www.llli.org/nb/nbmarapr06p82.html and then compare it with the package of any milk formula. The difference is significant! "The most common reason mothers probably choose to breastfeed is the knowledge that human milk is the superior infant food. It contains live cells, like those in blood. Some components of human milk also enhance the effects of others, so the ingredients of human milk work together. In contrast, only a small percentage of some ingredients of formula are absorbed; mixing ingredients in formula does not guarantee they will act together the way they do in human milk."

Blueie wrote:

With breastfeeding you tend to be housebound because the vast majority of mothers would never breastfeed in public.

The situation is vice verse. You can travel anywhere with your child because you are'not bound to all this milk stuff and sterilized environment as I said before. I have even a part time job being a breast feeding mother without pumping the milk I feed her, then I leave house for my business for several hours. Back home I feed her again and everybody is happy )))

Blueie wrote:

In some countries you are advised against breastfeeding. For example, in Manila, the water is so contaminated that breastfeeding is unhealthy, so mothers/fathers boil the water for bottle-feeding.

I don't understand this logic. So, boiling the contaminated water and then making baby food with it is good while breastfeeding is unhealthy! It's a paradox!!! Especially in non-ecological environment breastfeeding is recommended as the most safety and healthy way of feeding.
By the way even bad nutrition of mother doesn't influence on the consistence of her milk. That is why women from development country like Philippinas can breastfeed their babies the same as women from developed countries as UAE despite of their bad nutrition.
"In recent years, research has confirmed that even if some nutrients are missing in a woman’s daily diet, she will still produce milk that will help her child grow. There is very little difference in the milk of healthy mothers and mothers who are severely malnourished. For example, if a mother’s diet is lacking in calories, her body makes up the deficit, drawing on the reserves laid down during pregnancy or before. Unless there is a physical reason for low milk production, a woman who breastfeeds on cue will be able to produce enough milk for her baby, regardless of what she eats."

I take your point(s). I have no objection to breastfeeding - as long as breastfeeding mothers don't expose their (unwanted) breasts to other women or men.



I am just saying that here it is very rare: http://www.sunday-guardian.com/news/uk-to-pay-new-mothers-p-200-to-breastfeed

This is rare here because women faced with difficulties in their first month of breast feeding are given wrong advises and loose their milk. Or simply they hear such opinion like yours: "Don't worry, take a bottle." Lack of information produces ignorance

Can't you accept that many women just don't want to breastfeed? Many women don't want a 'natural' birth, either, so they choose a C-Section. Surely, that's their choice? In the UK, you can choose a C-sec for non-medical reasons. Same with breastfeeding - isn't it the mother's choice? You can't FORCE people, can you?

Well, there are such women. But what influences on their choice?
For instance, a toddler studies in a group where 90 % of students smoke. What is a probability that he will smoke as well? The answer is 90 %. Because smoking is a usual and normal thing for his society. He even doesn't think if it is good or bad. He makes his choice mechanically .The same is with women with C-section and breastfeeding. They make such decision because all their friends and relatives bottle feed and they do the same. I can't call such decision a real choice, because choice should be conscious: when you learn all the drawbacks and benefits, consider them and only then make a decision. That's why I call it ignorance. They don't know the information concerning this question and they even don't want to learn it. They do the same as majority does without any thinking. That 's all.

Inform people about all the points of this matter can change the minds. At the end when majority will breastfeed and give birth naturally the rest unconscious part will tend for the same because they will have another standard of life.

I don't know why the mother can't have a C-section: it's her body, her baby, her choice. There are no internal examinations (most women despise them) and you can choose a date to have a C-section. I don't know why you think it's not the mother's right to prefer a C-section?

As to breastfeeding, sometimes it is the opposite to what you say. Sometimes the midwife is a bully especially with young mothers, and tries to intimidate them into breastfeeding when the mother has no intention of it. The midwife, whether male or female, has to accept that it is the mother's informed decision not to breastfeed. I don't know why you think it's not the mother's right to prefer bottle-feeding?

I just say that many mothers choose artificial way of feeding and baby-birth because of the fashionable trends of the time. If they knew all the consequences of their choice on the physical and mental health of their children they wouldn't choose the path of least effort.

"it's not the mother's right to prefer bottle-feeding?" "it's not the mother's right to prefer a C-section?"- where is the children's right in your declaration? According to this logic we can say : " Why the mothers can't drink alcohol and smoke being pregnant: it's her body, her baby, her choice"
C-section along with bottle feeding has many drawbacks that have negative effect on newborns:

1.Increased risk of respiratory compromise, low blood sugar and poor temperature regulation.

2.Slower neurological adaptation after birth.Differences in levels of hormones regulating calcium metabolism, renin-angiotensin, progesterone, creatine kinase, dopamine, nitric oxide synthesis, thyroid hormones and liver enzymes.

3.Depressed immune function, including poor function of neutrophils, natural killer cells and lymphocytes (all cells that fight infection).

4.Increased risk of oxidative stress.

5. There is also some evidence to show that babies born by Caesarean are more likely to develop respiratory diseases.
Melanie Every from the Royal College of Midwives explains, 'When the baby is born naturally, the chest compresses as it comes through the birth canal which 'kick-starts' the breathing.'You don't get this stimulus with a Caesarean so this could lead to the respiratory problems later on in life.'

6.Mums-to-be can take blood thinning drugs and antibiotics before a Caesarean to protect themselves, but these drugs have been found in the placenta and also in breast milk.

7.But perhaps one of the most significant and lasting risks for babies delivered via cesarean is the alteration of the of gut flora. Studies have consistently shown that cesarean babies have altered fecal microbiota compared with vaginally born babies, which can persist for at least six months and quite possibly for life.

Of course C-section is good when natural birth leads to some risks for mother and the baby otherwise it's a silly choice of a selfish mother that thinks about her own interests and doesn't think about the health of her baby.

Do you mean that mothers-to-be who choose to have a C-Sec and to bottle-feed should not have children?

In terms of midwives, if I were a woman, I would not want a woman to 'see' me during childbirth (in the UK, mothers-to-be never
have internal examinations until they go into labour, so if they choose to have a C-sec they will probably never be internally
examined. I know at the time of birth that the mother-to-be probably does not care, though the vast majority choose to have pain
relief, but she has 9-months to worry about the time she goes into labour when another female will examine her.

Having said that, there are more and more male midwives now and more and more mothers-to-be are choosing them:

http://www.midwiferyonline.co.uk/conten ... hy-Why-not

Are there male midwives in Dubai?

If only altruists gave birth to their children mankind would die out

I don't see any problem in internal examination during childbirth. In the majority cases it is painless (I judge from my own experience as well). I also don't see nothing criminal in male midwives. I have personal experience with male gynaecologists even during childbirth (I gave birth not in Dubai) and can say that that very time I thought only about the whole process of my delivery and the health of my baby. I didn't care about ward's furniture and male doctor who examined me. He should be a specialist and have positive human character that's all that I need.

My essential message is that mothers-to-be should think less about themselves and more about their babies.

As I know male midwives aren't popular in Dubai.

Well, you sound a positive person with the right criteria.

'As I know male midwives aren't popular in Dubai' - not yet: as you suggest, the most important thing is professionalism, and not the gender of the doctor/midwife. You know in Spain, there is no such thing as a midwife (comodroma). The word, and the profession, died out years ago. They just have male and female obstetricians.



We also have surrogates here (not sure if they exist in Dubai, but I am sure they do!).