It is associated with less GI infections, ear infections, asthma, lower blood pressure, lower cholesterol and risk of type 2 diabetes.
1. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/261881391_Epigeneti...
2. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S193131282...
That's the conclusion of a new study that looked at markers of physical and mental health across the generations."[1]
Of course, there could be many reasons for that.
[1]https://www.webmd.com/a-to-z-guides/news/20210325/gen-x-mill...
As a counterpoint I’ll say that to the extent that the transfer of antibodies prevents or reduces infant illness, that is a win in the dimensions you describe on its own. A sick infant is both wildly impractical and hard to bond with.
For example, in this interventional cohort study with breastfeeding promotion [1], ”the percent of children having pneumonia and gastroenteritis declined 32.2% and 14.6%, respectively, after the intervention.”
[1] https://www.nec.navajo-nsn.gov/Portals/0/NN%20Research/Biolo...
Does breastfeeding negatively impact father-child bond ? I find it highly unlikely. We do know for a fact that it’s better for health.
And the science shows that the health benefits are minimal.
All the nurses, midwives, and doctors I know declare otherwise
Exclusive breastfeeding (not exclusively feeding breastmilk, but exclusively breastfeeding) would to a certain extent, yes.
In early stages of life the mother’s presence will never not be essential.
And finally, I think it's incredibly selfish to argue about equitably splitting feeding times, at the likely expense of your child's health and growth.
Young adults and men seem to be less healthy than ever. Plummeting testosterone, crazy rates of allergies, increased suicide rates, high depression.... But your right, if feeding them processed junk was bad, we'd see signs of it by now.
Young adults and men are less healthy than ever because we play on our computers instead of tilling soil and fighting in wars.
Of course some women can’t breastfeed and they deserve support. But downplaying the benefits of breastfeeding because it may hurt the feelings of some mothers is not the way to go.
It’s disappointing but not surprising that you’re saying that mothers need to go to work in the US. AFAIK in many parts of Europe they take many months off (often 6-12) to spend time with the baby. For some of them, it’s the only time in their life that they’ll get the chance to do that. Work can wait.
Why do mothers need to work in the US in the first 6 months of their baby’s life? Why can’t one of the richest countries in the world pay them to stay at home?
As for parental leave: why not pay men to stay home? Why the presumption that women must be the ones to sacrifice their careers? Because "breastfeeding"? That's a pitiful justification.
I'll say this though - breastfeeding can be a complete mystery for new parents and doctors are often clueless about it. A competent midwife which is familiar with the typical issues is priceless. It's good that there's formula available for those cases where the woman can't breastfeed or the baby is having difficulties and the parent's don't know what to do and can't find competent help.
In the EU, the parents get a number of months which can be split between them. Fathers in Germany for example take a few months off. Because breastfeeding, because moms often want to spend time with their babies and yes, sadly often also because they earn more.
The whole process is as simple as dragging the baby over, taking one breast out and bringing them near to it. The baby will take care of the rest.
Mothers do get sleep, including during the day together with the baby. There are solutions out there for many frequent or rare problems. A good midwife and experienced mothers in the family / circle of friends are priceless.
You have a long history of breaking the site guidelines and we've already had to warn you with this account as well. I don't want to ban you again, but we need you to follow HN's rules. If you'd please review https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html and stick to them, we'd appreciate it.
People don't often seem the grasp the variability of the difficulties that different babies can throw at parents. It really is just harder for some parents than others.
As our very pro-breastfeeding lactation consultant wisely told us with our first child, "Breastfeeding is best, but your child will benefit so much more from a mentally well and rested mother."
Also breastfeeding is much more convenient when traveling.
I think using formula was heavily promoted as a way to establish equality, and many people turned a blind eye on the drawbacks for the sake of progress.
It’s a good thing that we are now prioritizing babies’ health.
Maybe on average, but specific cases can vary wildly. Some foods that the breastfeeding mother consumes can cause issues. Milk, soy, and caffeine are known troublemakers - but good luck finding out which one is the source of stomach issues for your baby!
Regarding milk, avoiding it for a few days and checking for improvements is enough to see if it’s the culprit.
There are so many other, much more important factors in raising a healthy kid. The breastfeeding vs formula is hardly worth the brainpower.
Also, outright calling someone a bad parent because you don't agree with one of their methods is unnecessarily cruel.
Losing that flexibility would be worthwhile only if there was strong evidence that breastfeeding had advantages that can’t be replicated with formula. On that front it should be noted that the vast majority of GenX and older millennials were formula fed, as breastfeeding rates plummeted in the 1970s and 1980s. If there was a massive impact from that it would have been apparent.