Breast milk is 'no better for a baby than bottled milk' - and it INCREASES the risk of asthma, expert claims

Dr Cynthia Colen says the benefits of breastfeeding are exaggerated

She says comparisons of breastfed and bottle-fed siblings show the bottle-fed ones perform no worse than the breastfed ones in the long run

Says studies that show benefits to breastfeeding don't compare children from same family, so factors other than breastfeeding could be responsible

The benefits of breastfeeding have been exaggerated, a new study has suggested.

A comparison of siblings fed differently during infancy suggests breast milk is no better than bottled milk at improving long-term health.

Dr Cynthia Colen, from Ohio State University, said her findings are not meant to challenge established ideas, but could prevent women who cannot breastfeed from feeling stigmatised.

+3

The benefits of breastfeeding have been exaggerated, a U.S. expert has claimed

Those promoting the 'breast is best' message, including the Department of Health, say a mother's milk wards off a host of ills.

NHS leaflets given to pregnant women and new mothers claim breastfeeding protects against obesity, allergies, asthma and diabetes.

But Dr Colen’s research suggests breastfed children perform no better than their siblings who are bottle-fed.

 

More...

• Dyslexia is a 'meaningless label used by middle-class parents who fear their children are being branded stupid', professor claims
• Just one cigarette a day trebles heart risk: Britain's 1.1million 'social' smokers warned of dangers to their health

It showed they are no more likely to be obese and that they do not perform better academically.

Dr Colen also claims that children who are breastfed are more likely to develop asthma than those who are bottle-fed. 

She said: ‘Many previous studies suffer from selection bias. They either do not or cannot statistically control for factors such as race, age, family income, mother's employment - things we know that can affect both breast-feeding and health outcomes.

+3

Dr Cynthia Colen says siblings who are bottle-fed perform just as well in the long-term as those who are breastfed

‘Mums with more resources - with higher levels of education and higher levels of income - and more flexibility in their daily schedules are more likely to breastfeed their children and do so for longer periods of time.’

The NHS recommends that mothers breastfeed for about six months.

Dr Colen said: ‘I'm not saying breastfeeding is not beneficial, especially for boosting nutrition and immunity in newborns.

‘But if we really want to improve maternal and child health, let's also focus on things that can really do that in the long term - like subsidised day care, better maternity leave policies and more employment opportunities for low-income mothers that pay a living wage, for example.’

She used data from the 1979 cohort of the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, a nationally representative sample of young men and women.

She analysed a total of 8,237 children made up of 7,319 siblings and 1,773 ‘discordant’ sibling pairs, where one was breastfed with the other given a bottle.

The study measured BMI (body mass index), obesity, asthma, hyperactivity, parental attachment and behaviour as well as scores predicting academic achievement in vocabulary, reading, maths, intelligence and scholastic competence.

Across all of the families, breastfeeding resulted in better outcomes in BMI, hyperactivity, maths, reading recognition, vocabulary word identification, digit recollection, scholastic competence and obesity.

But when restricted to siblings differently fed within the same families, scores reflecting breastfeeding's positive effects on 10 of the indicators were closer to zero and not statistically significant - meaning any differences could have occurred by chance.

The researchers believe this means the siblings who were all breastfed probably performed better because of other factors, such as socioeconomic status.

The most surprising finding was that children who were breastfed were at greater risk of asthma.

However, this could be because the data relied on whether people said they had asthma, rather than whether they had been formally diagnosed with the condition.

+3

Dr Colen also says children who are breastfed are more likely to develop asthma than those who are bottle-fed

Dr Colen said: ‘Instead of comparing across families we are comparing within families completely taking into account all of those characteristics - both measured and unmeasured - that differ by family such as parental education, household income and race/ethnicity.

‘If breastfeeding doesn't have the impact we think it will have on long-term childhood outcomes then even though it's very important in the short-term we really need to focus on other things.

‘We need to look at school quality, adequate housing and the type of employment parents have when their kids are growing up.

‘We need to take a much more careful look at what happens past that first year of life and understand breastfeeding might be very difficult, even untenable, for certain groups of women.

‘Rather than placing the blame at their feet let's be more realistic about what breastfeeding does and doesn't do.'

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2568426/Breast-milk-no-better-baby-bottled-milk-INCREASES-risk-asthma-expert-claims.html#ixzz2uSeG3jSs 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook 

Me and my operation: New breast reconstruction that's more natural looking than ever

+3

Cal Tason has had a reconstruction operation after surgery for breast cancer

Every year thousands of women with breast cancer have mastectomies followed by reconstruction. Cal Tason, 48, a yoga teacher and administrator from near Guildford, Surrey, underwent a new form of breast reconstruction, as she tells CAROL DAVIS.

THE PATIENT

Checking my breasts one morning in March 2010, I felt a hard pea-sized lump in the left one. A twinge of fear ran through me. I tried not to panic - I eat healthily, avoid sugar, don't smoke or drink, and keep very fit - but saw my GP the next day, who referred me to a breast screening clinic.
A week later, I had mammograms and a core biopsy, which involves extracting a tissue sample to analyse. That same day, the doctor told me it was breast cancer, and the biopsy results later confirmed it. She said there could be more cancerous tissue behind the lump, and I'd need to see a specialist.

My husband, James, and I were  devastated. There's no history of breast cancer in my family.
I saw the surgeon a week later, and he said I would need six months of chemotherapy first to shrink the tumour, which was a 4cm spidery mass. Then I had a lumpectomy (an operation to remove the lump) in October.

However, despite a further operation to remove more tissue, tests showed there were still precancerous cells in the edges of the tissue. So in January 2011 I had a mastectomy to remove the whole breast, and some lymph nodes, where the cancer had spread.

I had an immediate reconstruction with a silicone breast implant. My main concern was that they took the cancer away, but I felt a reconstruction would make me feel normal again.

However, the area around the implant became infected, which the surgeon had warned me might happen, and it had to be removed five weeks later.

 

More...

• Secrets of an A-list body: How to get Cindy Crawford's calves
• 'I know my Daddy's so ill he might die': A heartbreaking account of how the organ donor shortage has left this father of two with just a one in 10,000 chance of survival
• 'I'm trying to give up smoking again as I eventually want a family': Sophie Anderton under the microscope

So I was left one-sided, with lots of scar tissue. I wore a prosthesis inside a special bra, but I worried about it slipping out and felt very self-conscious, especially in the tight tops I wore for yoga. 

Wearing low-cut dresses or a bikini was impossible - I had lots of scarring, and the prosthesis was a constant reminder I'd had breast-cancer surgery. I felt very low about my body, so in autumn 2012 I saw surgeon Paul Harris.

Mr Harris said women usually have a reconstruction using skin and fat taken from their abdomen. But because I'm slim with very little belly fat, there wasn't enough to form a new breast.

+3

The new operation involves taking a skin and tissue up to 10cm deep from the top of each upper thigh

Then he explained that he was pioneering a new operation to take a flap of skin and tissue up to 10cm deep from the top of each upper thigh - he'd need two of these for enough skin to form a whole new breast.

Taking these flaps from the inside of each thigh would mean the scars would be hidden, and I could even wear a bikini.

I had the eight-hour operation at the London Clinic in January 2013, and was on a morphine drip that first day and paracetamol after that. But I left hospital five days later walking normally and was back at work eight weeks later. And my new breast looked and felt just like the other.

The thigh scars have faded, and they're hidden anyway. Wearing a bikini on holiday was wonderful, and so is wearing yoga tops, now I've finally put the past few years behind me.

Cal is cycling 185 miles for Breakthrough Breast Cancer charity in May. To sponsor her, visit http://www.virginmoneygiving.com/team/fundraisingCTNR

THE SURGEON

Paul Harris is consultant plastic surgeon at the Royal Marsden Hospital in London and the London Clinic.

'This procedure does leave a scar of up to 50cm from hip to hip, and very slim women may not have enough abdominal fat to create a breast'

Around 48,000 women in Britain are diagnosed with breast cancer each year, and up to 20,000 have a mastectomy. Survival has improved enormously over the past ten to 15 years, with earlier diagnosis and better treatment, so many now have a normal life expectancy after breast cancer.

More than half of those patients needing to have their breasts removed have a reconstruction. Until ten years ago this meant using an implant, which may need to be replaced within five to ten years as the other breast changes or scar tissue tightens around it.

Now surgeons often use a flap of skin and tissue from the abdomen, because most women have excess tissue here and fat similar to that in the breast.

This procedure does leave a scar of up to 50cm from hip to hip, and very slim women may not have enough abdominal fat to create a breast. If they've already had abdominal surgery scars may also mean there isn't enough tissue available to use.

So a procedure developed mainly by surgeons in Austria in the early 2000s has become another option. This uses skin, tissue and part of a long, thin muscle taken from the upper thigh, called the TUG (transverse upper gracilis flap.

Using flaps from the thigh means scarring is hidden when the patient stands up.

However, the TUG flap may be too small to create a whole breast, so surgeons have tried using two, one from each thigh.

This has meant connecting one flap to a blood vessel in the chest and the second flap to a blood vessel in the armpit and then stitching them together, which creates problems when trying to shape the new breast.

It can result in a broad, flat breast and also means we have to operate on the armpit, which is often already scarred from the first operation. This can increase the chances of permanent arm swelling afterwards.

+3

The operation takes six to eight hours under general anaesthetic

But at the Royal Marsden, we are connecting the two flaps before creating the breast. We connect one flap to a blood supply in the chest, and then connect the second flap to the first flap. This means we have a large piece of tissue that we can manoeuvre and trim to create the most natural-looking breast, and can also avoid operating on the armpit.

This is very exciting and could be an excellent solution for women who cannot have a reconstruction using an abdominal flap.

Like all surgery, it carries risks including infection, blood clots and bleeding - around 15 to 20 per cent of women can also have short-term problems such as infection or delayed healing in the thigh donor sites.

The operation takes six to eight hours under general anaesthetic. First I prepare two crescent-shaped flaps in the upper thighs, making an incision approximately 15cm long using a scalpel, high up in the groin crease, and then carefully dissecting away tissue while keeping it attached to a blood vessel.

Each flap is around 15cm long, and 7cm wide and 4cm to 10cm in depth. Then I open the previous mastectomy scar on the chest and separate the skin from the muscle using a scalpel. I find the main artery supplying the chest, and attach it to the artery in one of the TUG flaps using microscopic stitches.

Once I am sure there is a proper blood supply established to the first flap, I put the other TUG flap next to it - the two crescents sit together in a yin-yang shape - and connect the blood vessels using microsurgery, another branch of the blood  vessel from the chest feeds the second flap, so the chest blood supply already feeding the first flap also feeds the second. Then I suture the flaps together.

After I have checked the blood supply to both TUG flaps is working well using ultrasound, I adjust the joined flaps to match the healthy breast, and suture everything into place. I also close the thigh wounds with stitches.

Patients stay in hospital for around five days. The upper thighs will be thinner than before, and scarring is hidden - it should heal in two to three weeks. Very active women like Cal can lead a completely normal life.

Any drawbacks?

'The risks of breast reconstruction surgery are relatively small, though all surgery carries risks, including bleeding, deep vein thrombosis and infection,' says Professor Venkat Ramakrishnan, consultant plastic surgeon at the Broomfield Hospital in Essex.

'Using a flap of skin and tissue carries a small risk that a blood clot will form after surgery and could block off the blood supply to the flap. There will also be scarring at the donor site, but the scars are hidden in the natural creases of the body.

'Using a TUG flap or two from the upper thigh is well established, and Paul Harris and his team are refining an existing technique, so we know that the risks are small and this can give a good aesthetic result.'

The operation is available in specialist centres and costs up to £20,000 privately, or around £10,000 to the NHS.

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2567027/Me-operation-New-breast-reconstruction-thats-natural-looking-ever.html#ixzz2uScrXBtH 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

Breastfeeding Basics

1. Early breast milk is liquid gold - Known as liquid gold, colostrum is the thick yellow first breast milk that you make during pregnancy and just after birth. This milk is very rich in nutrients and antibodies to protect your baby.

 

2. Your breast milk changes as your baby grows - Colostrum changes into what is called mature milk. By the third to fifth day after birth, this mature breast milk has just the right amount of fat, sugar, water, and protein to help your baby continue to grow.

 

3. Breast milk is easier to digest - For most babies - especially premature babies - breast milk is easier to digest than formula. The proteins in formula are made from cow's milk and it takes time for babies'stomachs to adjust to digesting them.

 

4. Breast milk fights disease - The cells, hormones, and antibodies in breast milk protect babies from illness. This protection is unique; formula cannot match the chemical makeup of human breast milk.

 

 

1. Life can be easier when you breastfeed - Breastfeeding may take a little more effort than formula feeding at first. When you breastfeed, there are no bottles and nipples to sterilize. You do not have to buy, measure, and mix formula. And there are no bottles to warm in the middle of the night!

 

2. Breastfeeding can save money - Formula and feeding supplies can cost well over $1,500 each year.

 

3. Breastfeeding can feel great - Physical contact is important to newborns. It can help them feel more secure, warm, and comforted.

 

4. Breastfeeding can be good for the mother's health, too - Breastfeeding is linked to a lower risk of these health problems in women, like: Type 2 diabetes, breast and ovarian cancer and postpartum depression.

 

5. Mothers miss less work - Breastfeeding mothers miss fewer days from work because their infants are sick less often.

 

To watch a video about the benefits of breastfeeding click here.

 

For more information on breastfeeding click here.

 

 

Breastfed babies generally eat more frequently than formula-fed babies. Newborns usually nurse on their mothers' breasts every 2 to 3 hours; as they become older, feeding times will decrease as your baby's stomach becomes larger.

 

Formula-fed newborns will eat about every 3 to 4 hours during the first few weeks of life. By the end of the first month, formula fed babies will take at least 4 ounces of formula per feeding. At 6 months of age, baby will take 6 to 8 ounces per feeding.

 

It's important to watch and learn when your baby is hungry. These signals are called hunger cues. When she wants to eat baby may

 

• Become more awake
• Put her hands or fingers on or in their mouth
• Make sucking motions, stick out their tongue
• Smack their lips
• Kick or squirm
• Begin rooting (moving jaw and mouth or head in search of your breast)

 

If baby begins crying, this is usually a late signal that they want to eat. Your baby should also appear satisfied for a couple of hours after each feeding if they are getting enough food.

 

 

From months 1 through 4 of life, your baby should gain about 1 1/2 to 2 pounds each month, and grow about 1 to 1 1/2 inches.

 

Between 4 and 7 months of age, baby will gain 1 to 1 1/2 pounds per month and grow about 2 to 3 inches.

 

By 8 months, the average boy will weigh between 14 1/2 and 17 1/2 pounds, while girls will probably weigh about a 14 and 17 pounds.

 

At 1 year of age, the typical child weighs about 3 times their birth weight. Breastfed babies tend to be chubbier than formula-fed babies during the first 4 to 6 months of life. Then breastfed babies usually become leaner than formula-fed babies by 9 months to 1 year of age.

 

If your baby always seems hungry or doesn't have the appetite that you think they should, talk to your baby's doctor.

Mediterranean diet cuts risk of feeling blue, study finds

+1

Mediterranean diet is rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and olive oil

The Mediterranean diet is known to help with heart health, but new evidence shows it can reduce depression, too. 

Spanish researchers followed 4,000 people aged 55 to 80 - some on a Mediterranean diet, rich in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, nuts and olive oil, and some on a low-fat diet - for four years. During that time, more than 200 of the group developed depression. 

The Mediterranean diet cut the risk, most significantly - by 41 per cent - among diabetic men, according to results published in the journal BMC Medicine. 

The diet is thought to lower levels of inflammation. Inflammation reduces the secretion of a brain compound called neurotrophic factor, levels of which are lower in patients with depression.

Perils of not wearing your hearing aids

Just a fifth of people with hearing loss wear a hearing aid, a study has found. 

Researchers from Manchester, Southampton and other universities studied the habits of 160,000 people in the UK aged 40 to 69, and found that 10.7 per cent of adults had significant hearing impairment - but only 2.1 per cent used a hearing aid. 

Many people refuse to wear a hearing aid because they think they are unsightly and associated with ageing. 

But studies have shown that untreated hearing problems can lead to poorer quality of life, depression, anxiety and social exclusion, all of which can also impact on your physical health.

 

More...

• 'I'm trying to give up smoking again as I eventually want a family': Sophie Anderton under the microscope
• 'I'm trying to give up smoking again as I eventually want a family': Sophie Anderton under the microscope

Can probiotic pills easy creaky joints?

A dose of bacteria may reduce the pain, swelling and stiffness of rheumatoid arthritis. 
Women with the condition who used probiotics daily for eight weeks found their symptoms improved seven times more than those given a placebo pill. 

Rheumatoid arthritis is caused by the immune system attacking joints. Recent research has suggested that the balance of bacteria found in the gut may play a role in the development of the disease. 

The women in the study group were given a daily capsule of the probiotic lactobacillus casei. 

Researchers at Tabriz University of Medical Sciences, Iran, found the symptom score went down by 43.96 per cent in the women in the probiotic group, compared with 5.99 per cent in a placebo group

Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2567078/Diet-cuts-risk-feeling-blue.html#ixzz2uNX49vXx 
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook