Re: breastfeeding and palate development

[Guest guest]

As a chiropractor, dealing with structure and nutrition is what I do

all day and I think I can create a little clarity here.

It is my experience that the nutrition of the child and mother from

even pre conception and certainly post delivery is what determines

size and full structural growth (actual bone development) of the

child's head, face, dental arch, etc... this aspect of the child's

development is only impacted by breastfeeding in that a well fed mom

make the most extraordinary nutrition any baby could have. The

actual mechanics of suckling at the breast don't play a role here.

HOWEVER the actual mechanics of suckling at breast are essential for

this development to happen properly and to its maximum and here's

why. The mechanical suckling of the breast as most other natural

occurances cannot be simulated by a bottle or pacifier or anything

else for that matter. The events surrounding breast suckling involve

the actual movement and positioning of the childs facial and skull

structures. The suckling actually allows for full range of movement

to occur in these structures. An example of this is there are times

where you will see a newborn delivered with a remarkably mishapen

head and almost immediately right before your eyes when the child

begins to nurse the head will reshape with a certain pumping like

action, it is a morphing that is quite remarkable.

So as you may have assumed both are essential for full development

only they effect two different aspects of the development process.

An analogy that might work for this is if you have a broken bone that

is not properly positioned it needs to be reset. If it is not reset

even with perfect nutrition it will be deformed. If you reset it but

don't provide the necessary nutrition for optimal healing it will be

weak and under developed. The same senario with the breastfeeding of

the infant mechanically it allows the structures to move freely and

receive the maximum nutrition and have the room to fully develop.

As for the length of time for nursing and the effect there, the

longer the better however Sally makes a good point that excellent

development has been attained in less than a maximal amount of time.

Sincerely,

Dr. Marasco,BS,DC

Cincinnati, Oh

--- In @y..., " Alison " <ackermurphy@y...>

wrote:

> Barb,

>

> Thanks for the posting that information on the formation of the

palate and the head shape. Do you have any references or links on

this that I could write down or bookmark? I'd really like to have

this information documented for dissemenation to others.

>

> I also wonder if anyone knows somone who does cranio-sacral

therapy? My understanding is that this type of chiropractic focuses

on aligning the bones in the head. I wonder if a practioner could

tell the difference between someone who was breastfed " long-term " ie

not weaned or encouraged to wean before 2 years of age, and someone

who wasn't breastfed at all.

>

> Sally,

>

> Here's a quote from " The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding " Sixth

revised edition p.358 (you can look up the names of the studies on

p. 450 if you want to look up and analyse the actual information,)

>

> " Researchers from Hopkins School of Public Health reported on

a study of nearly 10,000 children in which they found that the longer

the duration of breastfeeding, the lower the incidence of

malocclusion. Children who were breastfed for a year or more required

40% less orthodontia than those who were bottle-fed. "

>

> IMO 40% is significant!

> Also, while there may be some benefit from sucking on bottles and

thumbs as opposed to nothing at all, breast is best. The way in which

a baby sucks at the breast and the muscles that are used are

completely different from the way a baby sucks a bottle (even with a

so called orthodontic nipple) or a thumb. Facial development IS

affected and some studies have found that speech is too.

>

> Love in Christ,

> Alison

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

I think it's important to realize that a number of factors must contribute

to the issue of palate and head shape. Otherwise, how would we account for

people that were not breast-fed and have good bone structure.

My parents have extremely wide faces and straight teeth - neither was

breast-fed. I have straight teeth, two wisdom teeth impacted, not

breast-fed.

----- Original Message -----

From: " Alison " <ackermurphy@...>

< >

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:15 AM

Subject: breastfeeding and palate development

Barb,

Thanks for the posting that information on the formation of the palate and

the head shape. Do you have any references or links on this that I could

write down or bookmark? I'd really like to have this information documented

for dissemenation to others.

I also wonder if anyone knows somone who does cranio-sacral therapy? My

understanding is that this type of chiropractic focuses on aligning the

bones in the head. I wonder if a practioner could tell the difference

between someone who was breastfed " long-term " ie not weaned or encouraged to

wean before 2 years of age, and someone who wasn't breastfed at all.

Sally,

Here's a quote from " The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding " Sixth revised edition

p.358 (you can look up the names of the studies on p. 450 if you want to

look up and analyse the actual information,)

" Researchers from Hopkins School of Public Health reported on a study

of nearly 10,000 children in which they found that the longer the duration

of breastfeeding, the lower the incidence of malocclusion. Children who were

breastfed for a year or more required 40% less orthodontia than those who

were bottle-fed. "

IMO 40% is significant!

Also, while there may be some benefit from sucking on bottles and thumbs as

opposed to nothing at all, breast is best. The way in which a baby sucks at

the breast and the muscles that are used are completely different from the

way a baby sucks a bottle (even with a so called orthodontic nipple) or a

thumb. Facial development IS affected and some studies have found that

speech is too.

Love in Christ,

Alison

[Guest guest]

Dear Deanna,

I would agree that there are definetly many factors that figure

in here. However for the sake of this conversation I believe we are

speaking of what is optimal for creating optimal bone structure and

health. Remember the idea is not to create straight teeth the idea

is to be as healthy and develop as well as possible the dental arches

and teeth are just the by product of being well and well developed.

Along those lines it is not possible to have optimal development

in any specific part of the body without proper nutrition and care.

When speaking of the facial and cranial structures can people have

reasonably good structures if they did not breastfeed and other

environmental concerns were minimal? Sure. However, it is no more

possible to develop an optimal dental arch without breast feeding and

excellent nutrition at least for a little while than it is possible

to learn to speak optimal english without learning the letter B.

Many paragraphs could be spoken excellently without the letter B

however when something so early in development is left out it is lost

forever and optimal is no longer an option. I agree it is sad,

however there are things necessary for optimal development and

breastfeeding is one. I would suggest that you are 100% correct in

stating that in this day and age for you to have straight teeth and

wide face without breastfeeding is unusual and terrific I might add,

however the fact that you have two impacted wisdom teeth clearly

demonstrates that there is a less than optimal situation there. And

this is where getting as many neonatal needs as possible met comes in.

Sincerely,

Dr. Marasco,BS,DC

Cincinnati, OH

> I think it's important to realize that a number of factors must

contribute

> to the issue of palate and head shape. Otherwise, how would we

account for

> people that were not breast-fed and have good bone structure.

>

> My parents have extremely wide faces and straight teeth - neither

was

> breast-fed. I have straight teeth, two wisdom teeth impacted, not

> breast-fed.

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: " Alison " <ackermurphy@y...>

> < @y...>

> Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 11:15 AM

> Subject: breastfeeding and palate development

>

>

> Barb,

>

> Thanks for the posting that information on the formation of the

palate and

> the head shape. Do you have any references or links on this that I

could

> write down or bookmark? I'd really like to have this information

documented

> for dissemenation to others.

>

> I also wonder if anyone knows somone who does cranio-sacral

therapy? My

> understanding is that this type of chiropractic focuses on aligning

the

> bones in the head. I wonder if a practioner could tell the

difference

> between someone who was breastfed " long-term " ie not weaned or

encouraged to

> wean before 2 years of age, and someone who wasn't breastfed at all.

>

> Sally,

>

> Here's a quote from " The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding " Sixth

revised edition

> p.358 (you can look up the names of the studies on p. 450 if you

want to

> look up and analyse the actual information,)

>

> " Researchers from Hopkins School of Public Health reported on

a study

> of nearly 10,000 children in which they found that the longer the

duration

> of breastfeeding, the lower the incidence of malocclusion. Children

who were

> breastfed for a year or more required 40% less orthodontia than

those who

> were bottle-fed. "

>

> IMO 40% is significant!

> Also, while there may be some benefit from sucking on bottles and

thumbs as

> opposed to nothing at all, breast is best. The way in which a baby

sucks at

> the breast and the muscles that are used are completely different

from the

> way a baby sucks a bottle (even with a so called orthodontic

nipple) or a

> thumb. Facial development IS affected and some studies have found

that

> speech is too.

>

> Love in Christ,

> Alison

>

>

>

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Alison,

I don't really have any good references regarding sucking and its influence on

head shape - but here are some links that touch on it. The last link is not

really about infants but more about an emerging field of chiropractic and

dentistry which works to improve cranial structure/function via dental

appliances and changing the palate.

http://www.osteodoc.com/birthtrauma.html

http://www.ccst.co.uk/articles3.htm

www.chirodontics.com

My understanding (based on working with good osteopaths and chiropractors who

are specialized in cranial mechanisms and on my own training in cranial sacral

therapy) is that the skull expands and narrows in a rhythmical fashion. These

motions are referred to as flexion (widening of the entire skull) and extension

(narrowing). This natural movement may not be working properly due to cranial

strains...for instance, there could be a restriction that stops the head from

going into flexion. If this went on long enough, the person would have a more

narrow head and palate and the teeth wouldn't have room to come in (not that

straight teeth are what we are concerned about, but it could be one of the

symptoms of a strain which restricts flexion). A cranial practitioner could

release this strain (often by using light finger pressure on the palate) to

allow the head to move into flexion and thus widening the palate and skull to

where it would normally go if the strain hadn't been present. Releasing the

strain isn't going to make the bones grow more, necessarily, it is just going to

change the relationship of the bones to each other which is going to change the

appearance and function of the skull. Sucking, particularly on the breast but

also in other ways, helps trigger cranial motion. If cranial motion is stopped

in someway, it is possible that sucking/breastfeeding would be enough to get

things going again. This is probably the case with normal, healthy, well fed

infants. Other infants might need intervention to get things moving right. Some

infants may not even be able to suck/breast feed because of cranial problems and

would need intervention to help them feed.

If I were in need of cranial work for a child/infant, I would first look for a

good osteopath or chiropractor (preferably one certified as a craniopath) before

I would look for a cranial sacral therapist. Some cranial sacral therapists are

very good but generally they don't have the expertise or training that a really

good osteopath or chiropractor could have (unfortunately, most osetopaths and

chiropractors aren't trained in cranial work though). If you want to find a

cranial sacral therapist, you can contact the Upledger Institute and they can

refer to you someone... www.upledger.com

I've been working with children with developmental problems for over 16 years

and IMO, next to nutrition, the most important thing to their health and

development is cranial and upper cervical factors (and of course loving,

nurturing parents).

Barb

----- Original Message -----

From: Alison

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:15 AM

Subject: breastfeeding and palate development

Barb,

Thanks for the posting that information on the formation of the palate and the

head shape. Do you have any references or links on this that I could write down

or bookmark? I'd really like to have this information documented for

dissemenation to others.

I also wonder if anyone knows somone who does cranio-sacral therapy? My

understanding is that this type of chiropractic focuses on aligning the bones in

the head. I wonder if a practioner could tell the difference between someone who

was breastfed " long-term " ie not weaned or encouraged to wean before 2 years of

age, and someone who wasn't breastfed at all.

Sally,

Here's a quote from " The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding " Sixth revised edition

p.358 (you can look up the names of the studies on p. 450 if you want to look up

and analyse the actual information,)

" Researchers from Hopkins School of Public Health reported on a study of

nearly 10,000 children in which they found that the longer the duration of

breastfeeding, the lower the incidence of malocclusion. Children who were

breastfed for a year or more required 40% less orthodontia than those who were

bottle-fed. "

IMO 40% is significant!

Also, while there may be some benefit from sucking on bottles and thumbs as

opposed to nothing at all, breast is best. The way in which a baby sucks at the

breast and the muscles that are used are completely different from the way a

baby sucks a bottle (even with a so called orthodontic nipple) or a thumb.

Facial development IS affected and some studies have found that speech is too.

Love in Christ,

Alison

[Guest guest]

for some references from animal studies in which mastication, weaning and

nutrition were manipulated, do a PubMed http://www4.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/

search for:

cranial development weaning

i just did this. although there are few, these studies are very

interesting. granted, i'm not familiar with the bone terminology, but the

results are easy to understand:

interfering with mother nature changes our physical appearance.

(and the media thinks the answer is the Human Genome Project!)

----- Original Message -----

From: " Barb Carr " <bdcarr@...>

< >

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 3:27 PM

Subject: Re: breastfeeding and palate development

Alison,

I don't really have any good references regarding sucking and its influence

on head shape - but here are some links that touch on it. The last link is

not really about infants but more about an emerging field of chiropractic

and dentistry which works to improve cranial structure/function via dental

appliances and changing the palate.

http://www.osteodoc.com/birthtrauma.html

http://www.ccst.co.uk/articles3.htm

www.chirodontics.com

My understanding (based on working with good osteopaths and chiropractors

who are specialized in cranial mechanisms and on my own training in cranial

sacral therapy) is that the skull expands and narrows in a rhythmical

fashion. These motions are referred to as flexion (widening of the entire

skull) and extension (narrowing). This natural movement may not be working

properly due to cranial strains...for instance, there could be a restriction

that stops the head from going into flexion. If this went on long enough,

the person would have a more narrow head and palate and the teeth wouldn't

have room to come in (not that straight teeth are what we are concerned

about, but it could be one of the symptoms of a strain which restricts

flexion). A cranial practitioner could release this strain (often by using

light finger pressure on the palate) to allow the head to move into flexion

and thus widening the palate and skull to where it would normally go if the

strain hadn't been present. Releasing the strain isn't going to make the

bones grow more, necessarily, it is just going to change the relationship of

the bones to each other which is going to change the appearance and function

of the skull. Sucking, particularly on the breast but also in other ways,

helps trigger cranial motion. If cranial motion is stopped in someway, it is

possible that sucking/breastfeeding would be enough to get things going

again. This is probably the case with normal, healthy, well fed infants.

Other infants might need intervention to get things moving right. Some

infants may not even be able to suck/breast feed because of cranial problems

and would need intervention to help them feed.

If I were in need of cranial work for a child/infant, I would first look for

a good osteopath or chiropractor (preferably one certified as a craniopath)

before I would look for a cranial sacral therapist. Some cranial sacral

therapists are very good but generally they don't have the expertise or

training that a really good osteopath or chiropractor could have

(unfortunately, most osetopaths and chiropractors aren't trained in cranial

work though). If you want to find a cranial sacral therapist, you can

contact the Upledger Institute and they can refer to you someone...

www.upledger.com

I've been working with children with developmental problems for over 16

years and IMO, next to nutrition, the most important thing to their health

and development is cranial and upper cervical factors (and of course loving,

nurturing parents).

Barb

----- Original Message -----

From: Alison

Sent: Monday, January 28, 2002 10:15 AM

Subject: breastfeeding and palate development

Barb,

Thanks for the posting that information on the formation of the palate and

the head shape. Do you have any references or links on this that I could

write down or bookmark? I'd really like to have this information documented

for dissemenation to others.

I also wonder if anyone knows somone who does cranio-sacral therapy? My

understanding is that this type of chiropractic focuses on aligning the

bones in the head. I wonder if a practioner could tell the difference

between someone who was breastfed " long-term " ie not weaned or encouraged to

wean before 2 years of age, and someone who wasn't breastfed at all.

Sally,

Here's a quote from " The Womanly Art of Breastfeeding " Sixth revised

edition p.358 (you can look up the names of the studies on p. 450 if you

want to look up and analyse the actual information,)

" Researchers from Hopkins School of Public Health reported on a study

of nearly 10,000 children in which they found that the longer the duration

of breastfeeding, the lower the incidence of malocclusion. Children who were

breastfed for a year or more required 40% less orthodontia than those who

were bottle-fed. "

IMO 40% is significant!

Also, while there may be some benefit from sucking on bottles and thumbs

as opposed to nothing at all, breast is best. The way in which a baby sucks

at the breast and the muscles that are used are completely different from

the way a baby sucks a bottle (even with a so called orthodontic nipple) or

a thumb. Facial development IS affected and some studies have found that

speech is too.

Love in Christ,

Alison