Today on the radio have been talking about breastfeeding (obviously, breastfeeding father would sound a little weird right?), WHO and UNICEF say that if more children breastfed in the first world would save many infant deaths and illnesses. After that, they have been talking that we tend to bottle feed from day to children and that many diseases, and even obesity child would be avoided if breastfeeding newborns. They also said that those mothers who choose not to breastfeed their children are more likely to develop breast cancer, uterus (not quite understand the relationship), osteoporosis and not know how many diseases.
case, I just kept thinking, could it be that now they want becomes fashionable to breastfeed babies? Because the late sixties, early seventies, the "we parimos, we decided" made it in as bottle-feeding the child, then the late seventies, early eighties (luckily I had) , which was in vogue was natural, to nurse the children and hate unnatural as the bottle. Now I'm not sure as there is the issue, just know that many do not believe it: a bottle from the first day. The reasons many and varied.
And it's a pity that it is a matter of fashion, I mean, as you approach the moment of birth we begin to produce milk, and is the first milk, colostrum, particularly sweet and particularly rich in many things that any parent will tell web , which will make the child accept the breast, sucking accept, and therefore accept all immunoglobulin G that the mother can provide the unique and exclusive baby's milk that comes from her breasts.
It amazes me how arrogant they can be humans, give birth, our hearts overflow with milk, life, immunity, vitamins, proteins, food, and we say "no, no, I will give my child a bottle that is much better inyécteme something, doctor, that I cut the milk. " Do you really think we are smarter than nature? Excuses are many and varied, when the only truly valid is a problem with the child to grip or intolerance, what do I know?, But it seems extremely selfish to decide for the child, medically based no reason, whether to give the chest or not. Even on the radio discussed in the "first world" many people believed that breastfeeding was something of underdeveloped areas where there are no means or money to other options.
do not know how many of you reading this have had a puppy in his hands, I know it is not the same, but, again, try to animals better than ourselves. The fact is that it is not advisable to wean the puppies or kittens, or itos you like, too soon. If for some reason or another, a puppy has the misfortune of being separated from its mother too soon and being bottle-fed, their survival is based on how long you've been nursing her mother, will be smaller than his brothers, less stronger, more prone to many diseases of the immune status and will have much less chance of survival. Survive, yes, because humans are stubborn, but will bring a lifetime of never having been breastfed enough time (and I speak from experience), compared with pups from the same litter that have actually complied with the timetable breastfed.
So, if many know how important it is that the puppy is with your mother, do not understand how many might question the human breast, if nature does have milk why deprive the child of her? Moreover, it is extremely comfortable, going for a walk to the park, the beach, wherever, and start to mourn, hungry, has several options, the first is to sit on a bench and give the breast, the second is, because you're a woman sighted, take one of the bottles of the brand of the moment that you have prepared before you leave home and give it sitting on a bench, the third is, as you are a mess and did not think I was going to go hungry on the walk, run back home with the child screaming to prepare the bibe. The difference between the first and the second, apart from money, is "the mother-child bond," I'm sorry but if I can, I will breastfeed my son, is all I can share with him that his father can, is a unique moment. Just seeing a mother breast-feeding a child makes me want to feel that too, the face of the mother, child ... maybe I'm being more romantic than scientific but it seems unfair to deprive the child of privilege. We are mammals, what the heck, mamemos. What gives us only four months out? Work but do not know how, or give those four months and then bibe base, or we took the milk to give it to them in the store, or father, or whoever. Why are we so selfish to deprive the child of natural things from birth?
Moreover, in the program spoke of mothers who thought their milk was not good enough compared to how business we reached this point? Think that commercial infant formulas are better than we produce naturally. Who is right? Nature, with billions of years of experience, or human, to pretend to be gods?
I can say from personal experience, two brothers from the same parents, a breastfed until he had to go to kindergarten, college, a few languages, optimal weight in his life has had a major illness .... The other brother, so it was not breastfed more than a month, obese, uneducated, visiting doctors every few ... will happen, but maybe not. Same with the care, why depriving the child of wealth of germs that can offer children who are in the store?
Of course, the WHO recommends breastfeeding a child up to two years ... to see, in Spain we have only four months of maternity leave, in Germany it seems that there are six ... in Cuba, up to two years do not accept the any child in kindergarten ... Open discussion
As I try to do lately, several links, some for and some against, judge for yourself:
http://www.amamantarsalvavidas.org.ar/
http://www.scribd .com/doc/906676/Lactancia-Materna
http://www.mibebe.com.mx/02preparate/02tubvenbib.htm
http://lactancia.suite101.net/article.cfm/la-lactancia-es-lo-ideal-el-biberon-es-la-mejor-alternativa
0 comments:
Post a Comment