Categories
Durango Herald Family Planning Public Health Women's Issues

Envision the Ideal Baby Food

Imagine a food that is ideal nutritionally, is inexpensive and prevents many diseases. Wouldn’t you expect such a product to be used universally? Guess again!

Breast milk is all of the above, and more. Sadly, only one child in seven born in the USA is given just breast milk at six months of age, which is what the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends. It is especially sad that one third of all moms never give their babies access to the best possible food.

I had the chance to visit an obstetrical clinic in Egypt. I asked one of the new mothers if she was nursing her baby. “Oh, yes, we all breastfeed for seven months!” she exclaimed. “That is what the Qur’an says we must do. Many women continue to nurse longer.”

Why don’t mothers in the USA nurse their children, since it is best for themselves and their babies? Many forces act against breastfeeding. Manufacturers market artificial formula intensely to pregnant women and new mothers. When you go down the aisles of a supermarket you see all sorts of formulas and bottles, but little or nothing for breastfeeding. Of course, one of the advantages of breastfeeding is that the new mother doesn’t need to buy anything.

Let’s face it; our society is unfriendly for breastfeeding moms. Many new mothers need to return to work six weeks or less after giving birth. Few workplaces have provision for women to pump their breasts, let alone for the baby to be nearby so he can nurse. Until society becomes nursing-friendly, many babies can only get six weeks of this ideal food. Fortunately, the first month of nursing is the most important.

Another reason that women are turning away from breastfeeding is that we view breasts as sex objects. Recently a former Durango woman was thrown off an airplane in Vermont for breastfeeding. Even though she was nursing discretely, the flight attendant insisted that she cover her nursing baby with a blanket.

Breast milk has advantages for both baby and mother. The breastfed baby is less likely to get sick from diarrhea or respiratory diseases because he receives immunity from his mother. He is less susceptible to allergic problems such as asthma and eczema. Recent research suggests that he will even be slightly more intelligent than if he had bottle-fed. Nursing lessens his chances of getting serious diseases such as diabetes, lymphoma, certain bowel diseases and one type of arthritis. He is less likely to die of sudden infant death syndrome. Finally, his chances of obesity are much less if he nurses.

A healthy baby is wonderful here, but critical in poorer countries where five million children die of infectious diseases annually. Couples will not choose to have smaller families until they can be relatively sure that their children will live until adulthood. Paradoxically, survival of children is important for slowing population growth.

Advantages to the mom are also significant. Breastfeeding diminishes her risk of anemia since nursing decreases postpartum blood loss. Women who have breastfed their babies are less likely to develop breast, ovarian and uterine cancers. Losing “baby fat” is easier for a nursing woman, making obesity less likely.

The psychological advantages of breastfeeding are very significant. Breastfeeding promotes intimacy between mother and infant. This is partly because the baby’s suckling releases oxytocin, the “hormone of love.” Oxytocin helps bond the mother to her baby.

Other hormonal effects of nursing are also important. Another hormone, prolactin, stimulates the breasts to make milk. It also allows the new mother’s ovaries to rest, making her much less fertile while nursing. This natural family planning has helped to regulate fertility for millennia. Worldwide, breastfeeding is the most widely used temporary contraceptive method.

This relative infertility has been studied extensively and found to rival the effectiveness of modern contraceptive methods. Named LAM (for Lactational Amenorrhea Method), it is 98 % effective if the mom meets three requirements. The baby must be breastfed almost exclusively, be less than six months old, and the mother must not have resumed menstruation.

Breastfeeding is good for the environment, too. There are no cans or bottles to dispose of, and fossil fuels are not needed to ship artificial formula long distances. No methane-emitting cows need be milked as to make artificial formulas.

For years I have said that inferior products have supplanted two superior ones—drinking water and breast milk. Now industry is marketing water extensively. I hope that breast milk will regain its rightful place in human nutrition.

© Richard Grossman MD, 2007

[The article above may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org.]

Categories
Durango Herald Family Planning Population

Open Letter to the People who Picket Planned Parenthood

I respect people who have strong convictions and are willing to express them. I have demonstrated for peace recently on Main Avenue, and elsewhere, during the Viet Nam war. I also walked in the largest demonstration ever in Washington D.C., the “March to Save Women’s Lives”. The Religious Society of Friends (Quakers), of which I am a member, does not have a stand on abortion. I was brought up in this religion and attended 14 years of religious school. Standing up for our beliefs is part of our heritage.

However, I cannot agree with the tactics used by the people who demonstrate outside Planned Parenthood. If you wish to communicate with me, please don’t yell; there are better ways to get your point across. My e-mail address is at the end of this article. If you have something to say, please address me (and the Planned Parenthood patients) with respect. This is what my mother taught me, and I am sure that your mothers taught you the same.

Reverend Joachim Blonski, the Roman Catholic pastor at Saint Joseph Church in Aztec, NM, was courteous in the way he corresponded with me. He wrote a polite letter accompanying a book on post-abortion emotional problems. (I don’t believe that they occur frequently, but that is another subject.)

Another example of positive communication took place in Boston. The Public Conversations Project started with a small group of women, some strongly against abortion and others strong supporters of abortion rights. Over years they discussed their beliefs, got to know and appreciate each other, and found some common ground—as well as differences. Wouldn’t it be good to have a similar discussion group here?

Opposition to abortion is basically religious. Although some people may be against abortion on purely ethical grounds, most of the antiabortion arguments I have heard are based on religion. Some religions (such as Roman Catholicism) are officially against abortion, while many take no stand on the subject.

I have two observations on the effectiveness of religion on controlling this aspect of women’s lives. Catholic women have about the same number of abortions as other women in the United States, according to a 2002 study (www.guttmacher.org/pubs/journals/3422602.pdf). Furthermore, I have observed that many formerly Catholic women have given up this religion because of its stand on reproductive issues.

The first amendment to the Constitution of the United States guarantees the right to picket outside Planned Parenthood. This same section of the Bill of Rights starts:

“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof….”

I interpret this to mean that each person can live by her own religious beliefs, and that no one has the right to impose her beliefs on me or another person. Until you convert me to your religion, please do not try to force your beliefs on me.

Until the Renaissance, power and knowledge were in the hands (or heads) of a few men. With Gutenberg’s invention of moveable type, more people had access to written material, helping literacy and education to spread. This permitted a more sophisticated populace, and aided the development of democracies. Today, with almost universal literacy and wide access to libraries, Internet and other sources of knowledge, we rely less on single authoritative sources. It seems to me that the sort of yelling that I’ve heard at the entrance to Planned Parenthood comes from the old-fashioned era of authoritarian domination. This attempt to dominate is antipathetical to respect for individuals. Many of the women who go through those gates have agonized over difficult decisions and deserve loving care. They don’t deserve to be told that they have made a bad decision. Remember, too, that I am happy to care for women who decide to continue unplanned pregnancies.

From years of listening to women who come to me for abortions, I am convinced that most of them have thought hard about their decisions before calling to make their appointments. Few will be dissuaded by confrontation at the clinic’s gates, although some might be intimidated. On the other hand, I hear compliment after compliment for the Planned Parenthood staff because they lovingly treat women as thinking people.

So, friends, if you want to communicate, please don’t yell at me or at our patients. If you want to help prevent the need for abortion, join me in trying to decrease the number of unplanned pregnancies. Surely, one of our country’s greatest shames is that half of pregnancies conceived here are unintended.

© Richard Grossman MD, 2007

[The article above may be copied or published but must remain intact, with attribution to the author. I also request that the words “First published in the Durango Herald” accompany any publication. For more information, please write the author at: richard@population-matters.org]