iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Breast-Feeding Study On Benefits, Cost: 900 Lives And Billions Of Dollars Could Be Saved Annually

Breast Feeding Study

LINDSEY TANNER   04/ 5/10 02:53 PM ET   AP

CHICAGO — The lives of nearly 900 babies would be saved each year, along with billions of dollars, if 90 percent of U.S. women fed their babies breast milk only for the first six months of life, a cost analysis says.

Those startling results, published online Monday in the journal Pediatrics, are only an estimate. But several experts who reviewed the analysis said the methods and conclusions seem sound.

"The health care system has got to be aware that breast-feeding makes a profound difference," said Dr. Ruth Lawrence, who heads the American Academy of Pediatrics' breast-feeding section.

The findings suggest that there are hundreds of deaths and many more costly illnesses each year from health problems that breast-feeding may help prevent. These include stomach viruses, ear infections, asthma, juvenile diabetes, Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and even childhood leukemia.

The magnitude of health benefits linked to breast-feeding is vastly underappreciated, said lead author Dr. Melissa Bartick, an internist and instructor at Harvard Medical School. Breast-feeding is sometimes considered a lifestyle choice, but Bartick calls it a public health issue.

Among the benefits: Breast milk contains antibodies that help babies fight infections; it also can affect insulin levels in the blood, which may make breast-fed babies less likely to develop diabetes and obesity.

The analysis studied the prevalence of 10 common childhood illnesses, costs of treating those diseases, including hospitalization, and the level of disease protection other studies have linked with breast-feeding.

The $13 billion in estimated losses due to the low breast-feeding rate includes an economists' calculation partly based on lost potential lifetime wages – $10.56 million per death.

The methods were similar to a widely cited 2001 government report that said $3.6 billion could be saved each year if 50 percent of mothers breast-fed their babies for six months. Medical costs have climbed since then and breast-feeding rates have increased only slightly.

About 43 percent of U.S. mothers do at least some breast-feeding for six months, but only 12 percent follow government guidelines recommending that babies receive only breast milk for six months.

Dr. Larry Gray, a University of Chicago pediatrician, called the analysis compelling and said it's reasonable to strive for 90 percent compliance.

But he also said mothers who don't breast-feed for six months shouldn't be blamed or made to feel guilty, because their jobs and other demands often make it impossible to do so.

"We'd all love as pediatricians to be able to carry this information into the boardrooms by saying we all gain by small changes at the workplace" that encourage breast-feeding, Gray said.

Bartick said there are some encouraging signs. The government's new health care overhaul requires large employers to provide private places for working mothers to pump breast milk. And under a provision enacted April 1 by the Joint Commission, a hospital accrediting agency, hospitals may be evaluated on their efforts to ensure that newborns are fed only breast milk before they're sent home.

The pediatrics academy says babies should be given a chance to start breast-feeding immediately after birth. Bartick said that often doesn't happen, and at many hospitals newborns are offered formula even when their mothers intend to breast-feed.

"Hospital practices need to change to be more in line with evidence-based care," Bartick said. "We really shouldn't be blaming mothers for this."

___

On the Net:

American Academy of Pediatrics: http://www.aap.org

Government: http://www.womenshealth.gov/breastfeeding/

FOLLOW HUFFPOST HEALTHY LIVING

CHICAGO — The lives of nearly 900 babies would be saved each year, along with billions of dollars, if 90 percent of U.S. women fed their babies breast milk only for the first six months of life,...
CHICAGO — The lives of nearly 900 babies would be saved each year, along with billions of dollars, if 90 percent of U.S. women fed their babies breast milk only for the first six months of life,...
Filed by T.J. Ortenzi  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 131
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Bloggers
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
11:02 AM on 04/08/2010
Year 2015: Big Pharma insists all women cut off their breasts. Golf trip seeking doctors comply.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
04:35 PM on 04/08/2010
next they will require all children to have stint installed so they can start riddlin at birth. New too young to medicate.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
MorganT
09:12 PM on 04/07/2010
There's benefits for mom too!!! Mothers get more help to lose the baby-weight when they breast feed. Plus I think it helps a lot with bonding too!!!
03:40 PM on 04/07/2010
I just received my results back from personal genome decoding. One of the genes decoded has markers relevant to breastfeeding. The results are: I am receptive to breast feeding and higher IQ. That is, had I been breast fed, my IQ would have been several points higher. There are others for whom being breast fed makes no difference, IQ wise.

This has nothing to do with all the other absolutely wonderful and healthy reasons to breast feed. I simply thought this genetic research was fascinating.

(I could have used those points. Damn)
03:54 PM on 04/08/2010
I read about 23andme site on TED...sounds interesting, I am checking this out.
06:23 AM on 04/07/2010
Exclusive breastfeeding for six months is so important in preventivehealth terms that it should be supported in the tax system.

A man
09:00 AM on 04/07/2010
Amen lol
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Bethab
10:07 AM on 04/08/2010
Is this a joke? Parents already receive so many tax-related benefits for having kids. Are you honestly suggesting that the government should give a tax benefit for breastfeeding? Can I get one for urinating in the correct place every day?
12:11 AM on 04/07/2010
I just learned in my Anthropology class that men have all the equipment to breast-feed, all the would need is sufficient nipple stimulation to produce milk (although not as much as nursing mothers). Maybe it's time men shared some of the nursing responsibilities and special "bonding" with infants...
09:11 AM on 04/07/2010
My son wants to breast fed lol ... Their child is about a month old. He was born a month early and he had problems latching and the mother did not produce milk and still has problems relaxing so the milk duct will open up. This is where formula has replaced the wet nurse and is a life saver. Corporations for 'more' profit have convinced the general public it is normal to use formula for a healthy mother and child. This is not normal and I will not have some authority who's aim is only profit, not my families well being, telling me what the norm is. I will not be branded like (identified with a brand name) like a cow in a herd of cattle.
01:22 PM on 04/07/2010
Exactly, Lisa! This is what I'm talking about when I say formula is a medical item for medical use! Of course if you can't make milk and your area doesn't have a milk bank (or, like me, if you can make some milk but not enough and your infant is steadily losing weight), you use formula to save a life. If you don't have a medical need for it and you use it inappropriately, then, yeah... as a nurse (okay, nursing student) I'm judging you negatively as a parent.

Insulin. It's just like freaking insulin. If you medically need it, you use it, but you don't have an elective pancreatectomy for convenience or vanity.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
emhellmer
12:51 PM on 04/07/2010
Gloria Steinem wrote a column once about what the world would be like if men menstruated. It was hilarious. I urge you to google it immediately.
12:18 PM on 04/06/2010
Formula for human babies is another example of profit over people. If you grew up on a farm like me bottle fed livestock never grew as well as those who had access to mothers milk. Many died. One of the reasons I decided to breast was because of my experience raising orphan or rejected cattle, sheep, dogs, and cats. Another huge reason I decided to breast fed my kids. We saved a large amount of money. Money was always tight and this is one of the reasons we grew our own food. Now we are coming to the conclusion that whole foods including mothers breast milk are the best things for us. Go figure! We did it because its economical. Another reason for breast feeding...I loathe being dependent on another entity for what I need, especially if that entity is making a profit at the expense of my well being and health...this just p.isses me off to the point of wanting to curse. Women shouldn't have to work during the first year of raising a child. In fact a family should be able to afford to have one parent stay home to care for the children. The reason we can't do this is because of corporate laws and value system have eroded our social, economic, environmental systems for profits.
11:14 AM on 04/06/2010
Ultimately, we will be forced by necessity to make a return to the basics.
As a developed Nation, America has yet to make the needed adjustments for it's changing realities.
Many seemingly good ideas often come with a hidden price...such as a two Parent income home with children.
I'm far from being a sexist, but women have been endowed with breasts for nurturing their infants...not for gainful employment at your local Hooters.
I must question how advanced we have actually become, in the face of repeated mistakes with predictable outcomes.
Some of these un-nurtured children of Today will be tomorrow's candidates for psychopathic serial killers...and other perverted criminal behavior. Why? Because mommy was a slave to her job and couldn't afford maternity leave to nurture her children.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Pennsylvanianne
There is no sin but ignorance.
09:45 AM on 04/06/2010
Isn't this rehashing research that was established more than 30 years ago? Why the need to emphasize it all over again? Maybe a new generation of mothers needs to hear that OF COURSE breastfeeding has many physical, emotional and even monetary benefits. OF COURSE breast milk is far superior to formula. But breastfeeding can be difficult to establish, so women who opt for formula should not feel as though they are bad mothers. Now some mothers who work are committed to pumping breast milk as a compromise solution to breastfeeding, an admirable solution. What needs to change are the attitudes of people who see breastfeeding very modestly in public places as offensive. It's ridiculous.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:44 AM on 04/06/2010
The human species has existed for between 35,000 and 200,000 years, depending on who one talks to. For all of that time, until the last 100 years or so, we got by just fine with our mothers' milk as a primary food source during the first several years of infancy.

The real story here is not why we should return to breast feeding our babies, but why we ever stopped. The current obsession with a woman's breasts in Western culture may have something to do with it, as well as the industry that has built up to sell us artificial breast milk. Or, perhaps we think that a woman breast feeding diminishes a woman's power, instead of increasing it. Whatever the reason, the scientific conclusion seems to be that abandoning the act of breast feeding has been largely bad for the health of infants.
photo
HUFFPOST BLOGGER
Philip N. Cohen
08:30 AM on 04/06/2010
Unfortunately, the benefits of breastfeeding are unequally distributed by race/ethnicity and education level: http://familyinequality.wordpress.com/2010/03/28/breastfeeding-gaps-persist/
07:55 AM on 04/06/2010
I'm going to take it a step further and say that breastfeeding every child born in the US for 6 months starting today would reduce the autism rate in this country, bringing it closer in line with comparable European cultures. As I watched a close relative pump breastmilk which was then fed to her child in a bottle, I realized something. It is the contact, the connection, and yes, even the frustration that is an essential part of developing the emotional connection (which is not always roses and hearts of course!) between parent and child. That bottle fed baby, despite the breastmilk, did not thrive because her mother had serious postpartum depression and fed the baby from a bottle while staring into space, disconnected from the baby's gaze. Breastfeeding is the most direct way to ensure terrific nutrition as well as the physical closeness and frequent eye contact that is necessary for the healthy development of body AND mind in a new baby. But I would add to the list of 'healthy' improvements the need to dispense with baby carriers and strollers as much as possible because new babies need the loving gaze of caregivers as much as they need breastmilk, in fact they need it more.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
thinkingwomanmillstone
great, green, globs of greasy grimey GOPerspeak.
09:18 AM on 04/06/2010
Show me the statistics. My son was breastfed exclusively for six months and weaned at one year. He is autistic.. I am in favor of breastfeeding, but don't think unsubstantiated gains are helpful.
02:22 AM on 04/06/2010
I don't understand why this is new or shocking. My eldest is in jr. high and this information was well documented at the time I was pregnant with her. This is about as surprising as would be a study showing that a diet high in soda and candy is unhealthy for kids. And at the end of the day it will be no more influential than a study showing soda and candy is harmful because so many parents don't want anyone telling them their choices are bad for their kids and themselves.
11:31 PM on 04/05/2010
Yes! We have once again, created statistics to state the obvious. Didn't anyone every think about the financial savings before?

Anyway, yeah!!!! Now, we can really get down to the support/policies to increase exclusive breastfeeding practices. Why did we need a new study? Because so many people still do not understand how vital breastfeeding and breastmilk is to both a mother and child. Breastfeeding also reduces a mother's risk for diabetes, breast cancer, and heart disease!

We need to educate COMMUNITES as to how everyone can support new breastfeeding mothers? The reason so many mothers aren't successful in continuing their exclusive breastfeeding is because there are way too many myths and far too little support surrounding this issue. My website http://GrannyPantsSpeaks.wordpress.com actually has a list of the "10 Things Every Adult Can Do To Support a Breastfeeding Mother", as taken from my book, The New Physics of Childhood.

It WILL take a community to make the difference. It will also take support at the top to create more incentives & support for breastfeeding mothers in the workplace, extend maternity leave and create childcare facilities in the workplace for children under 2. It shouldn't take Wonder Woman to work and breastfeed. Now that we have established the financial savings (and they haven't even counted the health care savings), we can find the way to make this happen!
11:33 PM on 04/05/2010
Well said..grannypants lol
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SilentSolidarity
So what do you need? Besides a miracle.
09:42 PM on 04/05/2010
I always knew that babies who didn't have the privilege of breastfeeding will suffer in some form or another, even simply because of the lack of these very intimate moments between a baby and her mother that might have an influence on the psyche of this human being in the future.
10:27 PM on 04/05/2010
This is the kind of generatlization and scorn that is entirely uncalled for and completely unhelpful. I could not breastfeed my twins. Believe me - I TRIED. But they were premature, could not latch and I was under so much stress (without family nearby and unable to pay for help) that I simply could not produce sufficient supplies for twins. Plus I couldn't sleep more than 2 hours a day, with pumping, feeding practice, feeding, etc. etc. etc. Breastfeeding time was certainly not intimate but full of stress and angst. It was my fabulous pediatrician who finally said, "stop, it's better they get formula from happy mom than breast milk from crazy lady." And they did. And we had plenty of intimate moments as I fed them with formula. We could cuddle - FINALLY. And my twins have not suffered one bit. They are remarkably healthy (no asthma, no allergies, no ear infections etc), slim and athletic, smart, well behaved, loving, sweet and well adjusted. Meanwhile, my sister-in-law breastfed her daughter until she looked like a sumo-wrestler and the child is stll battling her weight. It is all about choices - MANY choices, not just about whether you breastfeed that result in healthy, well developed children. So, plesae stop judging.
11:25 PM on 04/05/2010
I'm sorry you did not have the outcome you wanted with breastfeeding. But no matter the reason for lack of breastmilk- breastmilk is the biological norm. It is what every baby's body expects...the base line, the standard. Breastmilk is not a magic elixir that guarantees perfect health. Not breastfeeding increases risks. That doesn't mean every child that gets formula will get sick, no more than it means breastfeeding child never gets sick. Tummy sleeping increases the risk for SIDS - but not every baby who sleeps on their tummy dies of SIDS & back sleeping doesn't promise an absence of SIDS.
09:03 AM on 04/06/2010
No one ever said that every single mother can breast feed. But the absolute undeniable fact is that breast milk is better for babies than formula. That doesn't mean formula is toxic, just inferior to some degree. And the intimacy comes after a while. At first it's all about how much time on each side, latch, position, etc. After a month or so it gets to be second nature and then the intimacy starts. If you never make it to that point, of course breast feeding isn't going to be intimate for you.
The problem isn't mothers who can't breast feed; it's the ones who just don't. The ones who say their breasts are sex organs that belong to their husbands, not to babies. The ones who say it would be incestuous. The ones who can't wait to go out and start getting their drink on right away, or who think it will make them sag, or who so loathe the thought of midnight feedings that they show Dad how to make a bottle and then let themselves dry up. This isn't about adoptive mothers, or breast cancer survivors, or mothers with babies who have cleft palates or feeding tubes or just can't latch. This is about making the wrong choice, not being in a poor situation to start with.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
08:53 AM on 04/06/2010
Researchers have often wondered why there was an upsurge in the number of polio cases in American children starting around 1900, to the point where it became an epidemic, when the virus that causes it has been in the soil seemingly for ever. It may be only coincidental, but the rise of many childhood diseases in America has coincided with the abandonment of the practice of breast feeding babies for the first few years.
09:28 PM on 04/05/2010
So can someone explain this to me: females (even young ones) can go out in public wearing super low cut shirts (I like to) and show off tons of cleavage, and females can go out in tiny shorts and skirts where their butts are almost hanging out, BUT if a mother is nursing and you can see part of her breast, this is somehow shameful, disgusting and needs to be done in private? It is a baby feeding on a nipple and a part of life. It isn't like a grown adult is sucking someones nipple in public. When a mother nurses she doesn't take her entire shirt off or even have both breasts out. The nipple is in the baby's mouth and the most you can ever really see is just as much as much breast as you would see if a female were wearing a low cut shirt and showing cleavage. So, I don't get it? I've never seen a woman nursing who wasn't still trying to be modest and covering up any showing breast that wasn't necessary to feeding the baby without covering the baby's head, so I mean, mums are being modest about it they aren't trying to flash people or waving their boobs around, so what is the problem?
09:42 PM on 04/05/2010
Men get jealous and turned on and then they freak out. They ban breast feeding in public for control issues. Women are only allowed to expose themselves as sexual objects ;-)
08:01 AM on 04/06/2010
I'll go one further... men can walk down a street in public and show their bare chests and nobody says a thing, but women are required to feed their infants "modestly"... are we a twisted society or what?
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
09:02 AM on 04/06/2010
Is that a trick question?