Re: spring 2004 wise traditions mag - disappointed with a few comments

[Guest guest]

>As far as I could find out at the time, you cant get supplementation of

>prolactin. I couldn't ever get and explanation as to why. But I was able to

>get oxytocin from a compounding pharmacy. It didn't help at all and was

>very expensive.

>Irene

Prolactin is associated with cancers might be

one reason. People who are gluten intolerant

produce too much prolactin when NOT breastfeeding,

which I think may have been my problem. Also I had

Sjogren's, which is associated with gluten intolerance

and makes ALL your body fluids dry up (my eyes and mouth

were dry too).

-- Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

>At 10:46 AM 6/18/04, you wrote:

> >mine too but what one of the Lynns said was really right: lots of women

> >just want to use it as an excuse to get past the guilt of early weaning or

> >not breast feeding at all.

I think a lot of people really may want to breastfeed, but get very bad info.

They are told to supplement with water, to space feeding out every four hours,

to only let the baby nurse a certain length of time on each breast. Lots of

women also start seriously dieting very soon after birth which can reduce

supply. Others are not informed about growth spurts and nursing strikes and

constant comfort nursing, and they think the baby isn't getting enough milk.

Some people are told that when your breasts stop being engorged, they must not

be making enough milk to keep them full. As older babies nurse less but more

efficiently, they are told that the baby drains the breast so quickly because

there isn't enough milk. I do think there are people who cannot make enough

milk, and I have no idea how many people that is. But I have heard all of the

above from women and doctors too often. I know this kind of misinformation is

sabotaging lots of women.

[Guest guest]

i'm a little lady and i had/have a HUGE amount of milk. i'm still

leading at almost 9 months post partum.

i don't know how much truth there is to this, but i have heard from

mom's who had problems that there seems to be a connection with low

milk supply and breast development at an older than normal age. in

other words, women who didn't develop breasts until late mid/late

adolescence.

erica z

> >Hi Lynn,

> >

> >For adoptive parents, gay parents, infected/sick mothers and

mothers who

> >just can't produce enough milk, the NT formula has been a

godsend. I

> may be

> >wrong but I don't think mothers in these categories can be

called " truly

> >rare " but people who call us can't be considered a random sample.

> Perhaps

> >uncommon would be a better term, but this is semantics. As we

all turn

> the

> >nutritional status of this country around hopefully we'll get to

where

> all

> >mothers will have clean, rich breast milk and plenty of it.

> >

> >As for that perception by some in the mothering community of

WAPF, it

> sounds

> >like this is a good opportunity for building bridges across

differences

> >which should not be difficult since in most respects the camps

are on

> the

> >same page as proponents of natural wisdom around childbirth and

rearing!

> >

> >Thanks for your sharing,

> >

> >Christapher

> >

> >

> > Re: spring 2004 wise traditions mag - disappointed

with a

> few

> >comments

> >

> > > , and can say that in the past two years we have seen countless

> > > mothers turn to the NT formula and be amazed at the results

when for

> > > any one

> > > of a number of good reasons they could not breastfeed.

> >

> >Sure, the WAPF formula is much to be admired and promoted for

those

> >(truly rare) occasions when women cannot breastfeed. And I had to

wean

> >one of mine when I had my heart attack, so I've used formula too.

> >(Pre-WAPF, but she was old enough that her formula days were

brief,

> >luckily.) I'm not arguing about whether WAPF-style formula is

better

> >than commercial formula. I'm arguing about the way WAPF presents

this

> >information.

> >

> >I've answered the other arguments put forth here elsewhere.

> >

> > > I don't think WAPF is out there actively suggesting that

> > > most women should be concerned about whether their milk is

adequate.

> >

> >Maybe so but this is how they are perceived by many influential

people

> >in the mothering community. Sometimes it seems very much that

WAPF gets

> >its mouth in gear prematurely. It could use some advice on

effective

> >communication.

> >

> >Lynn S.

> >

> >------

> >Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

> >http://www.siprelle.com/

> >http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

> >http://www.democracyfororegon.com/

> >

> >

> >

> >

> >

[Guest guest]

ITA with everything - and i hear you on being able to feed an army.

erica z

--- In , Lynn Siprelle <lynn@s...>

wrote:

> > I'm a big gal and I'm sorry to tell you i produced copious

milk ...

>

> Yeah, me too; with my second I could have opened a dairy! I had

enough

> for triplets, it was almost embarrassing.

>

> On the " truly rare " comment: I should have said " very uncommon. " I

just

> get irked by women who say, " Oh, I couldn't breastfeed, " when in

> reality they wanted to use formula. Not saying anyone here has

done

> that, just sayin'.

>

> Lynn S.

>

> ------

> Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

> http://www.siprelle.com/

> http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

> http://www.democracyfororegon.com/

[Guest guest]

it's so weird, isn't it? i mean, how hard is it to whip out a boob?

it's a much bigger PITA to boil bottles (or microwave 'em - ick) and

mix formula!

erica z

> > >mine too but what one of the Lynns said was really right: lots

of

> women

> > >just want to use it as an excuse to get past the guilt of early

> weaning or

> > >not breast feeding at all.

[Guest guest]

it's sad, isn't it?

did you happen to see or here about the recent creation of a pro-

breastfeeding television ad campaign that was squashed by the

formula companies who lobbied the government?

such a disservice.

erica z

> > > >mine too but what one of the Lynns said was really right:

lots

> of women

> > > >just want to use it as an excuse to get past the guilt of

early

> weaning or

> > > >not breast feeding at all.

[Guest guest]

i dunno about this, chris. from anthropological/scientific studies

i've come across, NT/WAPF is incorrect in their stance that any

formula, raw milk or otherwise, could ever be superior to breast

milk.

> > > All this is saying is that the NT prescription is not of much

> > > practical use, which is much, much, much different from saying

> that

> > > it is " ridiculous, " conflicts with research, and is a reason to

> > > ignore other WAPF recommendations.

> >

> > Did I say it was a reason to ignore other recommendations? I

said

> it

> > was hard to get other people to take them seriously, which

results

> in

> > ignored recommendations.

>

> You did seem to imply it conflicted with research that shows that

all

> breastmilk is equivalent (which it doesn't in any case-- I've read

> some and WAPF has cited some to the contrary). You clearly don't

> think WAPF should be ignored for it, or you wouldn't be here;

> however, my point is that WAPF's point is perfectly reasonable in

> principle. If it becomes moot because there's noone who will

follow

> their advice who is in a position that requires doing so, that

simply

> has no impact on the reasonableness of the advice in principle,

but

> only on the practical application of it.

>

> Thus, these people are unjustified in not taking WAPF seriously

based

> on the entirely reasonable point that beyond a certain threshold

of

> poorness of diet, one is better using a quality formula than

> breastfeeding.

>

> Chris

[Guest guest]

>>>You know what, this implies that if they knew how to increase their supply

they would be able to. I am not sure you can assume that.<<<

I didn't mean it to sound like I thought everyone would be able to breast-feed

if they only knew how to increase their supply - but I do think that many more

would be able to if they had good support.

Cheers,

Tas'.

[Guest guest]

>>>Hey,

it's an opinion, but I do think homosexuality could be caused by food.

Or better: It wouldn't surprise me at all if it did.<<<

If food is a possibility, you'd also have to consider all the other wonders of

the modern world that influence our hormones and development - vaccines,

environmental chemicals, etc.

Cheers,

Tas'.

[Guest guest]

the midwives told me i should bottle it and sell it! i guess that's why

they had wet nurses in the old days...maybe it's partly genetic, who

knows. one mother has copious milk, another doesn't have enough for her

baby to thrive. such is nature?

laura

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 10:26:55 -0700 Lynn Siprelle <lynn@...>

writes:

> I'm a big gal and I'm sorry to tell you i produced copious milk

....[laura]

Yeah, me too; with my second I could have opened a dairy! I had enough

for triplets, it was almost embarrassing. [lynn]

[Guest guest]

>> If food is a possibility, you'd also have to consider all the other

wonders of the modern world that influence our hormones and development -

vaccines, environmental chemicals, etc. <<

Do you guys really have to discuss this OVER AND OVER as if homosexuality

were some sort of frigging birth defect? I have tried to be humorous here

but I'm getting pissed off.

I don't care what you think in your heart of hearts, but out of common

courtesy would you just realize that at least two listmembers have now

mentioned we are gay and I at least would appreciate you using like two

teaspoons of tact in how you phrase these comments?

Again, I don't care what you THINK, pro or anti gay. That's your own

business. I'm just asking you to imagine how this discussion feels to a

lesbian or gay man, or the parent or loved one of a lesbian or gay man, who

is reading it.

Christie

[Guest guest]

>>>Again, I don't care what you THINK, pro or anti gay. That's your own

business. I'm just asking you to imagine how this discussion feels to a

lesbian or gay man, or the parent or loved one of a lesbian or gay man, who

is reading it.<<<

Fair enough. Didn't mean to upset anyone.

Cheers,

Tas'.

[Guest guest]

I was quite foggy after my second baby, so much so I went to the ND for a

blood test. Turns out i was deficient in omega 3 EFAs, despite eating what i

thought was a fairly high omega 3 diet. Also deficient in calcium and

phosphorous despite raw milk and greens. She chalked it up to malabsorption

and I've been on HCl since. Brain fog is gone! I'm also losing weight

finally.

Elaine

>> I don't know about 'identical', but I learnt that the baby gets first

> priority on whatever nutrients there are. So if the mother's diet doesn't

> have enough nutrients for both of them, the baby can remain reasonably

> healthy while the mother becomes malnourished.

>

[Guest guest]

> the midwives told me i should bottle it and sell it! i guess that's

> why

> they had wet nurses in the old days...maybe it's partly genetic, who

> knows. one mother has copious milk, another doesn't have enough for

> her

> baby to thrive. such is nature?

I would have happily nursed another child. I had so much Lou would

choke on it until my supply settled down and even then at letdown I

became what we called the Trevi Fountain--my nipple would spurt three

perfect arcs about 6 inches into the air, no lie. I'd have to cap it

with my finger until I could get her latched on.

Once I was in bed with both girls and Josie, my oldest, was about two

feet away. I reached over and stroked her back and it was wet. I said,

honey, did you pee? and she said, no, your nummy got me all wet. I

said, oh that's not possible. She sighed in exasperation and turned

over to go to sleep. And I watched a two-foot long stream of milk

suddenly erupt from my nipple and hit her square in the back...

Lynn S.

------

Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

http://www.siprelle.com/

http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

http://www.democracyfororegon.com/

[Guest guest]

ROFL! My word! So funny!

Actually ladies, there are milk banks if you do a little research

into where they are. They collect the breastmilk to feed to

preemies whose mommies aren't producing enough. Definately

something worth looking into if you're full to overflowing...

--- In , Lynn Siprelle <lynn@s...>

wrote:

> > the midwives told me i should bottle it and sell it! i guess

that's

> > why

> > they had wet nurses in the old days...maybe it's partly genetic,

who

> > knows. one mother has copious milk, another doesn't have enough

for

> > her

> > baby to thrive. such is nature?

>

> I would have happily nursed another child. I had so much Lou would

> choke on it until my supply settled down and even then at letdown

I

> became what we called the Trevi Fountain--my nipple would spurt

three

> perfect arcs about 6 inches into the air, no lie. I'd have to cap

it

> with my finger until I could get her latched on.

>

> Once I was in bed with both girls and Josie, my oldest, was about

two

> feet away. I reached over and stroked her back and it was wet. I

said,

> honey, did you pee? and she said, no, your nummy got me all wet. I

> said, oh that's not possible. She sighed in exasperation and

turned

> over to go to sleep. And I watched a two-foot long stream of milk

> suddenly erupt from my nipple and hit her square in the back...

>

> Lynn S.

>

> ------

> Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

> http://www.siprelle.com/

> http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

> http://www.democracyfororegon.com/

[Guest guest]

Lynn, the milk fountain! that's funny, Lynn.

On Fri, 18 Jun 2004 19:54:22 -0700 Lynn Siprelle <lynn@...>

writes:

I would have happily nursed another child. I had so much Lou would

choke on it until my supply settled down and even then at letdown I

became what we called the Trevi Fountain--my nipple would spurt three

perfect arcs about 6 inches into the air, no lie. I'd have to cap it

with my finger until I could get her latched on.

Once I was in bed with both girls and Josie, my oldest, was about two

feet away. I reached over and stroked her back and it was wet. I said,

honey, did you pee? and she said, no, your nummy got me all wet. I

said, oh that's not possible. She sighed in exasperation and turned

over to go to sleep. And I watched a two-foot long stream of milk

suddenly erupt from my nipple and hit her square in the back...

Lynn S.

[Guest guest]

<<<the midwives told me i should bottle it and sell it! i guess that's why

they had wet nurses in the old days...maybe it's partly genetic, who

knows. one mother has copious milk, another doesn't have enough for her

baby to thrive. such is nature?>>>

They also used to have milk banks in hospitals before we got worried about AIDS

and such.

Tas'.

[Guest guest]

<<< I don't know where those doctors (many of them men) are getting their

info,>>>

From growth charts based on primarily bottle fed babies :-(

Cheers,

Tas'.

[Guest guest]

yes, and those growth charts are only based on white babies. and

since other ethnicities grow at different rates than whites, it sure

does scare the bejesus out of non-white parents who are misinformed

by their peds that their babies aren't thriving.

erica z

> <<< I don't know where those doctors (many of them men) are

getting their info,>>>

>

> From growth charts based on primarily bottle fed babies :-(

>

> Cheers,

> Tas'.

>

>

[Guest guest]

THANK YOU CHRISTIE!!!

Re: Re: spring 2004 wise traditions mag - disappointed with a

few comments

> I don't care what you think in your heart of hearts, but out of common

> courtesy would you just realize that at least two listmembers have now

> mentioned we are gay and I at least would appreciate you using like two

> teaspoons of tact in how you phrase these comments?

>

> Again, I don't care what you THINK, pro or anti gay. That's your own

> business. I'm just asking you to imagine how this discussion feels to a

> lesbian or gay man, or the parent or loved one of a lesbian or gay man,

who

> is reading it.

>

> Christie

[Guest guest]

I don't know why you would be so disturbed by this. Everyone wants to

know why something is the way it is.

If someone discussed that when both parents were blonde, they would

most probable have a blonde baby, I wouldn't be offended.

I would guess my dad had a more wholeful diet (they ate what they

grew, and their animals and they made sauerkraut for winter, sounds

pretty good to me. The sweets the kids got were raisins on Sunday! The

only bad thing that comes to mind is black tea with sugar (and

cream).) when he was young than I had and he has really bad teeth and

mine are very strong. People tend to think the reason is because they

didn't have any toothbrush, but thinking about all those natives who

didn't have a toothbrush, that can't really be the reason, I think.

Plus mine aren't really white, but they are without decay (just 1) and

I feel they are resistant rather than I am a great brusher. I'm one of

the few persons I know that is not afraid to see the dentist. And I AM

afraid of syringes and such, I just figure it's not very probable that

I'll get one next time I go there. Still waiting for my wisdomteeth,

though... ugh.

I don't remember if someone actually said something pro or anti gay,

but as I don't consider it something you " choose " I don't consider it

something you can be " pro " or " anti " about.

I guess you mean like people say everyone can be gay but please not

where I can see it? Well, I don't care, I don't like when people suck

on each other right in front of my eyes in the middle of the day, no

matter what race, skin colour, age or both the same sex, I just hate

it. " Wanna have sex, do it where I can't see it " applies to EVERYONE

CU Anja

> >> If food is a possibility, you'd also have to consider all the other

> wonders of the modern world that influence our hormones and

development -

> vaccines, environmental chemicals, etc. <<

>

> Do you guys really have to discuss this OVER AND OVER as if

homosexuality

> were some sort of frigging birth defect? I have tried to be humorous

here

> but I'm getting pissed off.

>

> I don't care what you think in your heart of hearts, but out of common

> courtesy would you just realize that at least two listmembers have now

> mentioned we are gay and I at least would appreciate you using like two

> teaspoons of tact in how you phrase these comments?

>

> Again, I don't care what you THINK, pro or anti gay. That's your own

> business. I'm just asking you to imagine how this discussion feels to a

> lesbian or gay man, or the parent or loved one of a lesbian or gay

man, who

> is reading it.

> Christie

[Guest guest]

>I don't know why you would be so disturbed by this. Everyone wants to

>know why something is the way it is.

I think when something gets more mainstream, it's easier

to talk about without offending folks. Back in the 70's all

us women libbers got offended when someone implied

we maybe couldn't drive a backhoe as well as a guy. But

now we are all discussing the differences between males

and females and it seems to be ok with everyone ... I totally

admit I'm no good at driving a backhoe and my guy is really

kind of handicapped in the kitchen. But nowadays we also

accept that it's OK for a woman to drive a backhoe or for

a guy to work in the kitchen ... there are broad differences

between the sexes but they don't necessarily apply to individuals.

Personally I think diet etc. has a lot to do with how sexuality

plays out in a person ... the PH of the mother's uterus seems

to help determine whether the X or Y sperm survive, for

starters. I think it's all very interesting. But like Christie says ...

if some conversation bothers some people, the polite thing

to do is not discuss it. In 20 years I'd guess things will be more

open and calm regarding sexuality (or else we'll be re-living

the n era ...). There are a lot of undercurrents that happen

when people discuss these things ... back in the 70's the

discussion of sexes was always tinged by the males being

afraid of female power and vice versa.

-- Heidi Jean

[Guest guest]

< But like Christie says ...

> if some conversation bothers some people, the polite thing

> to do is not discuss it.

> -- Heidi Jean

hi - i'm very new here and surely dont' want to tread on toes or stir

things up unneccessarily... but.... did christie say that? i

thought what she said was that it be " discussed with tact " ?

also, i've been on many lists and the most successful ones seem to be

those that don't restrict topics but rather ask for politeness, to

attack the issue not the poster, and beyond that if you don't like a

thread then don't read it. i just don't agree with the current PC

(politicall correctness) that says we can't talk about something

because it might hurt someone else's feelings. there wouldn't be

much left to talk about if we followed that to the T!

anyways, i went back & read the thread and i didn't find anything

that was personally offensive to me. as a non-practicing bisexual

woman i found it very interesting to see things like margarine linked

to being gay! i'd like to hear more about that as i am raising 4

boys and would not knowingly give them foods that were known to

affect sexuality. (altho we don't eat margarine or non-fermented soy

so that wouldn't be an issue for us. altho, i'm sure they use

margarine in school food, which they do eat, or perhaps at other

houses they visit!). even tho homosexuals may have always been

around (historically) i still don't see any reason that nature would

purposely make them (because in a nutshell it's nature's goal for us

to survive, and to survive we must procreate), so it seems reasonable

to me that *something* happens in utero, like hormone disruptors or

something of that nature and where is the harm in discussing that?

vera

[Guest guest]

> anyways, i went back & read the thread and i didn't find anything

> that was personally offensive to me. as a non-practicing bisexual

> woman i found it very interesting to see things like margarine linked

> to being gay!

Personally I always found hot women lead to " being gay. " But that's me.

Lynn S.

fellow bi

------

Lynn Siprelle * web developer, writer, mama, fiber junky

http://www.siprelle.com/

http://www.thenewhomemaker.com/

http://www.democracyfororegon.com/

[Guest guest]

I think Christie's objection (and mine, although unaired) had to do with

talking about homosexuality as though it were a birth defect or disease that

could be prevented via the mother's diet.

Anja said:

" but I do think homosexuality could be caused by food. "

The implication is " bad food " in this case. Personally, I thought the

statement in the journal that sparked this whole thread ( " We believe that it

is important to provide this information to prospective parents who also

want to be grandparents " ) is insensitive and plain wrong--there are lots of

gay and lesbian parents out there!

I agree with Heidi that nutrition (prenatal and otherwise) and uterine

environment probably DO affect our sexuality profoundly, but it's WAAAAYYYYY

too complicated to say " eating too much XXXX could make your child gay. "

Gays and lesbians DON'T EVEN HAVE EQUAL CIVIL RIGHTS yet, so yes, it's still

a pretty sensitive topic despite " Will and Grace " et al! Even if you believe

that homosexuality is " wrong " or and " aberration " and if we all ate WAP

style and lived in a perfect world there would be no gay folks, keep in mind

that there are gay people on this list and to frame your thoughts and

comments about the subject accordingly. Same goes for discussions that

touch on race and religion.

One of the reasons I LOVE this list is our diversity. I'd bet my gorgeous,

mineral-rich, cavity-free eye-teeth that if we polled the list on religious

and political issues, we'd get an amazing range of answers. And yet we can

have (almost 100% of the time) engaging, respectful, wonderful discussions

about nutrition and all of the issues that connect to it.

My 2c.

> anyways, i went back & read the thread and i didn't find anything

> that was personally offensive to me. as a non-practicing bisexual

> woman i found it very interesting to see things like margarine linked

> to being gay!