Breast vs. Bottle
Erin Johnson
My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
naomi pardue
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
> <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
> | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
> |
> I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest one I've
> heard so far. *You* would like to force women who *cannot* breast-feed to
> have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they need to
> get formula? How completely idiotic!
Why is it any harder to fill a prescription at the drug store than to run
to the grocery every time you run out of formula? My local Krogers has a
pharmacy right in the store!
The main PROBLEM with such an idea is that most doctors would be only too
happy to write such a prescription for any woman who asked, so it would
do little or nothing to increase the incidence of breastfeeding. (And
some women would just resort to feeding home-made formulas, which are
even less desirable than commercial ones.)
Naomi
Anna Fiehler
I thought about this a little and even if doctors did prescribe
so that the breastfeeding situation was still the same there would be
a couple of nice results:
1) Moms who really have no choice if insured would have some of
the cost of formula absorbed by their insurer. A nice break
for them.
2) If insurance companies started getting hit for part of the
cost of the formula, they might start encouraging breastfeeding
a great deal more. ;^)
Anna S. & Declan W. (20 OCT 95) & ? (Due late June 97)
--
==================================================================
Anna S. Fiehler | afie...@mathworks.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
The MathWorks, Inc. | email: in...@mathworks.com
24 Prime Park Way | WWW : http://www.mathworks.com
Natick, MA 01760-1500 | FTP : ftp.mathworks.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you
put into it." - Tom Lehrer
==================================================================
Susanne Bullo
Anna Fiehler <afie...@mathworks.com> wrote in article
<326E43...@mathworks.com>...
First of all, formula would have to be placed in the same group as all
prescribed medicine. As potentially harmful if taken incorrectly. This
would be a lot like making aspirin only available through prescription.
And some women don't have a lot time to be going to the drug store all the
time to have their "prescription" of formula filled. Secondly, my
insurance company isn't all that understanding. It often times takes an
extremely long time before they'll approve payment on something, if at all.
Your second point brings me back to - what if a woman *cannot*
breast-feed? And their insurance company isn't as understanding???
--
Sweet Homes
http://www.prostar.com/web/sweetsue
Susanne Bullo, Owner/Operator
naomi pardue
Anna said:
> | 1) Moms who really have no choice if insured would have some of
> | the cost of formula absorbed by their insurer. A nice break
> | for them.
I would suspect that a lot of insurance companies wouldn't cover it. Some
that do cover prescription drugs have exclusions. (For example, mine
won't cover birth control supplies, or anything related to infertility.)
In the case of formula, I would imagine that some would cover it if
medically necessary, but not otherwise.
Suzanne said:
> And some women don't have a lot time to be going to the drug store all the
> time to have their "prescription" of formula filled.
Again, how is it more time consuming to go to the drugstore than the
grocery store?
Secondly, my
> insurance company isn't all that understanding. It often times takes an
> extremely long time before they'll approve payment on something, if at all.
> Your second point brings me back to - what if a woman *cannot*
> breast-feed? And their insurance company isn't as understanding???
Then they would be no worse off than they are now. They would pay for the
formula out of pocket. If the insurnace company approves it, they get
reimbursed. If not, they don't.
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
Nancy Milinkovich <the...@bnr.ca> wrote in article
<54le9f$h...@bmerhc5e.bnr.ca>...
|
| In article <01bbc0ed$97761120$82a9...@sweetsue.prostar.com>, "Susanne
Bullo" <swee...@prostar.com> writes:
| |> Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
| |> <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
| |> | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
| |> |
| |>
| |> I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest one
I've
| |> heard so far. *You* would like to force women who *cannot*
breast-feed to
| |> have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they
need to
| |> get formula? How completely idiotic!
| |>
|
| brought to my attention in a thread about 4 months
| ago.....BUT - if you really think about the pros
| and cons - it isn't really all that silly.
|
| For instance - if you cannot produce sufficient insulin
| - ie) you are diabetic - you don't feel bad about
| having to get a prescription for needles and insulin
This kind of goes back to what I stated in another post. Making formula
available only through prescription is a bit like taking aspirin off the
shelves and making it available by prescription only. Sure, there are
other ways to alleviate headaches but imagine if those aren't working for
you and you need to get rid of the headache. Call the doctor for a
prescription, get into your car, drive to the pharmacy, wait to get it
filled...etc... Then do this each time? I don't see that as very feasible.
| filled - and far less of the population of women truly
| phyically "can't" breastfeed - although there are many
| of us (myself included) who quit, gave up, had a very
| hard time continuing, etc......and possibly by putting
| the formula behind the prescription counter - this might
| give us the needed push to help us to keep going when
| we get at the low periods. It also might force
| the doctors to become better educated.....etc. There
| may be some positive ripple-down effects from such
| a system??{I'm not saying there WOULD be - I'm saying
| there MIGHT be}.
But what about those out there who do not think that formula feeding is so
horrendously bad for their children? The way I see it, it wouldn't just
stop there. What's to stop someone from deciding that processed baby food
is evil and should be placed on prescription only so we can all make our
own baby food? While I *did* make my own baby food, that was because I had
the time and patience. Other mothers may not.
| And for those who truly do NOT want to breastfeed,
| I can't see any doctor or midwife not providing
| the prescription - although what might be nice,
| is if a woman calls the office or clinic in a panic
| because things are going very badly with breastfeeding
| (thinking about my own situation) - maybe by having
| to go through the caregiver first - you would get
| referred to a Lactation Consultant, etc - for
| some help - which might be a very good thing - I think
| in my own situation it may have helped me continue
| on......I'm not saying this is completely the right
| way to go about it - but it is an idea worth
| exploring fully. I also was wondering - that if
| by putting the formula behind the prescription counter-
| we may be highlighting the very important benefits
| of breastfeeding - therefore maybe we would reach
| those mothers who have never received good information
| about the benefits of breastfeeding and just assume
| formula is better - or just as good???
I think giving women that option is fantastic. I just don't agree with
making formula available by prescription only.
| Anyways - I think it does deserve some thought though!!
| But I know a few months ago - because I was still suffering
| so much guilt over my decision to wean my daughter
| very early - I tossed this idea out - without giving
| it any thought at all....but I think if you look
| at it without the thought that its to "guilt" women,
| but rather it is to "help" women - it may be a little
| less unattractive.
I had to stop breast-feeding my daughter because of the extreme pain it put
me through. I did all the things beforehand to prepare myself but there
was nothing I could do. I felt it was better to enjoy feeding my daughter
(even if it was formula) than to start crying before, cry during and after
feeding due to the extreme amount of pain. I'm not saying formula is the
best solution. I *know* breast-feeding is the best way to go, if you can.
I do know my daughter has shown no ill effects from formula feeding. She's
bright, extremely healthy, I couldn't ask for more. But to place formula
in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
woman feel even more guilty?
Susanne Bullo
L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote in article <326E45...@teleport.com>...
| Susanne Bullo wrote:
| >
| > Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
| > <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
| > | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
| > |
| >
| > I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest one
I've
| > heard so far. *You* would like to force women who *cannot* breast-feed
to
| > have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they need
to
| > get formula? How completely idiotic!
| >
|
| breastfeed: Are you willing to concede that unless formula existed,
| your sweet little baby would probably die?
I cannot say exactly what was done, but there have been women over the ages
incapable of breast-feeding and I'll bet an alternative was found.
Hypothetical? How about a woman who tries steadfastly for 3+ weeks (with
proper preparation beforehand and during) and experiences nothing but pain
and excessive bleeding? How is it better for that child and that woman to
do nothing but cry before, during and after feeding than to feed that child
with formula? *I* was that woman and after consulting with my doctor and
the local woman's group on breast-feeding, I found it was better to formula
feed.
|
| When you decide to feed your baby formula over nature's intended food:
| human milk, you entrust the very life of your child to a pharmaceutical
| company (except Carnation, which is not).
I did and I have an extremely healthy little girl to show for it.
| Formula by prescription is a fabulous idea. At least it would force
| formula
| manufacturers to abide by higher standards (although that's debatable).
And it would be like having to call your doctor for a prescription to
aspirin or cold medicine or vitamins..etc.
L&M
Susanne Bullo wrote:
>
> L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote in article <326E45...@teleport.com>...
> | Susanne Bullo wrote:
> | *You* would like to force women who *cannot* breast-feed
> to
> | > have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they need
> to
> | > get formula? How completely idiotic!
> | >
>
> incapable of breast-feeding and I'll bet an alternative was found.
A baby could survive on evaporated milk (reconstituted), goat's milk,
maybe
other things. But it would unlikely thrive.
> Hypothetical? How about a woman who tries steadfastly for 3+ weeks (with
> proper preparation beforehand and during) and experiences nothing but pain
> and excessive bleeding? How is it better for that child and that woman to
> do nothing but cry before, during and after feeding than to feed that child
> with formula? *I* was that woman and after consulting with my doctor and
> the local woman's group on breast-feeding, I found it was better to formula
> feed.
>
Okay, you're a real person who obviously felt a great deal of grief
after not
being able to breastfeed. I sympathize. And I know that there are
women
like you, and others with active TB, malaria, HIV, certain conditions
requiring
unsafe meds, breasts surgically altered or removed, adoptive mothers,
etc., who
would PREFER to bf, but cannot. For you formula should be available,
and it
should be of the highest manufacturing standard.
I don't know if you realize this, but not so very long ago, a huge
underground
ring of counterfeit formula makers was uncovered. They made bundles of
money
selling pallets of what appeared to be the most common brands of formula
to
grocery stores. As a result, many infants were sickened. Some might
have died,
can't remember.
>
> | Formula by prescription is a fabulous idea. At least it would force
> | formula
> | manufacturers to abide by higher standards (although that's debatable).
>
> And it would be like having to call your doctor for a prescription to
> aspirin or cold medicine or vitamins..etc.
You know, equating what your baby eats lives on for the first six months
with cold medicine or aspirin is kind of ludicrous.
Sometimes taking extra steps to insure your child's health is necessary.
It almost sounds like for you it would be just too much trouble. I wish
your child continued good health.
Lori
Anna Fiehler
> | > > Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
> | > > <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
> | > > | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
> | > > |
> | >
> | > > I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest
> one I've
> breast-feed to
> | > > have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they
> need to
> | > > get formula? How completely idiotic!
> | >
> run
> | > to the grocery every time you run out of formula? My local Krogers has
> a
> | > pharmacy right in the store!
> | >
> | > The main PROBLEM with such an idea is that most doctors would be only
> too
> | > happy to write such a prescription for any woman who asked, so it would
> | > do little or nothing to increase the incidence of breastfeeding. (And
> | > some women would just resort to feeding home-made formulas, which are
> | > even less desirable than commercial ones.)
> | >
> |
> | I thought about this a little and even if doctors did prescribe
> | so that the breastfeeding situation was still the same there would be
> | a couple of nice results:
> |
> | the cost of formula absorbed by their insurer. A nice break
> | for them.
> |
> | cost of the formula, they might start encouraging breastfeeding
> | a great deal more. ;^)
> |
>
> First of all, formula would have to be placed in the same group as all
> prescribed medicine. As potentially harmful if taken incorrectly. This
> would be a lot like making aspirin only available through prescription.
> insurance company isn't all that understanding. It often times takes an
> extremely long time before they'll approve payment on something, if at all.
> Your second point brings me back to - what if a woman *cannot*
> breast-feed? And their insurance company isn't as understanding???
>
There are plenty of over-the-counter medicines that are harmful if
taken incorrectly. So that can't be the only thing that makes
an item subject to perscription. Remember that prenatal vitamins
are prescribed. They're also available over-the-counter, but
getting a prescription lets you reduce your cost.
I guess it depends on the insurance co. When I get a perscription,
I have a card that I present when getting it so that the cost is
greatly reduced. But even if the insurance company delayed paying
for it, you'd still just be paying what you do right now.
I doubt (if this pie in the sky idea ever really happened, which
I can't believe) that an insurance company could deny a perscription
to a woman, let's say, who has had a double masectomy. Maybe
I just have a really nice ins co. :^)
Now what if formula was available just like prenatal vitamins are,
over-the-counter and via prescription? Then moms who really
have no choice could reduce their costs by getting it via
prescription. (Hmm, does this already happen anywhere?)
Anna S. & Declan W. (20 OCT 95, still BF) & ? (Due late June 97)
.
In <326E53...@mathworks.com> Anna Fiehler <afie...@mathworks.com>
writes:
>There are plenty of over-the-counter medicines that are harmful if
>taken incorrectly. So that can't be the only thing that makes
>an item subject to perscription. Remember that prenatal vitamins
>are prescribed. They're also available over-the-counter, but
>getting a prescription lets you reduce your cost.
Just a thought on the vitamin issue... I asked my pharmacist recently
what distinguished OTC vitamins from the prescription ones my husband
was taking. He said it was the amount of iron. Apparently, for some
people, the amount of iron in the prescription vitamins is too much to
be taken daily and can be harmful. Are the amounts of ingredients in
OTC vitamins the same as prescription ones? I'm not sure, but I'd
guess that the OTC have less of some.
Tracie
Nancy Milinkovich
In article <01bbc0ed$97761120$82a9...@sweetsue.prostar.com>, "Susanne Bullo" <swee...@prostar.com> writes:
|> Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
|> <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
|> | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
|> |
|>
|> I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest one I've
|> heard so far. *You* would like to force women who *cannot* breast-feed to
|> have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they need to
|> get formula? How completely idiotic!
|>
Actually I thought the same thing when it was first
brought to my attention in a thread about 4 months
ago.....BUT - if you really think about the pros
and cons - it isn't really all that silly.
For instance - if you cannot produce sufficient insulin
- ie) you are diabetic - you don't feel bad about
having to get a prescription for needles and insulin
filled - and far less of the population of women truly
phyically "can't" breastfeed - although there are many
of us (myself included) who quit, gave up, had a very
hard time continuing, etc......and possibly by putting
the formula behind the prescription counter - this might
give us the needed push to help us to keep going when
we get at the low periods. It also might force
the doctors to become better educated.....etc. There
may be some positive ripple-down effects from such
a system??{I'm not saying there WOULD be - I'm saying
there MIGHT be}.
And for those who truly do NOT want to breastfeed,
I can't see any doctor or midwife not providing
the prescription - although what might be nice,
is if a woman calls the office or clinic in a panic
because things are going very badly with breastfeeding
(thinking about my own situation) - maybe by having
to go through the caregiver first - you would get
referred to a Lactation Consultant, etc - for
some help - which might be a very good thing - I think
in my own situation it may have helped me continue
on......I'm not saying this is completely the right
way to go about it - but it is an idea worth
exploring fully. I also was wondering - that if
by putting the formula behind the prescription counter-
we may be highlighting the very important benefits
of breastfeeding - therefore maybe we would reach
those mothers who have never received good information
about the benefits of breastfeeding and just assume
formula is better - or just as good???
Anyways - I think it does deserve some thought though!!
But I know a few months ago - because I was still suffering
so much guilt over my decision to wean my daughter
very early - I tossed this idea out - without giving
it any thought at all....but I think if you look
at it without the thought that its to "guilt" women,
but rather it is to "help" women - it may be a little
less unattractive.
Just my thoughts...
Nancy
--
===========================================================
Nancy, mum-mum to Rhiannon Sylvia (June 9/95) and
number 2 Peanut due April 5/97
============================================================
Susanne Bullo
naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in article
<54linj$i...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
| Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
| > Anna Fiehler <afie...@mathworks.com> wrote in article
|
|
| > | 1) Moms who really have no choice if insured would have some of
| > | the cost of formula absorbed by their insurer. A nice break
| > | for them.
|
| that do cover prescription drugs have exclusions. (For example, mine
| won't cover birth control supplies, or anything related to infertility.)
| In the case of formula, I would imagine that some would cover it if
| medically necessary, but not otherwise.
|
| Suzanne said:
|
| > And some women don't have a lot time to be going to the drug store all
the
| > time to have their "prescription" of formula filled.
|
| Again, how is it more time consuming to go to the drugstore than the
| grocery store?
|
| Secondly, my
| > insurance company isn't all that understanding. It often times takes
an
| > extremely long time before they'll approve payment on something, if at
all.
| > Your second point brings me back to - what if a woman *cannot*
| > breast-feed? And their insurance company isn't as understanding???
|
| Then they would be no worse off than they are now. They would pay for the
| formula out of pocket. If the insurnace company approves it, they get
| reimbursed. If not, they don't.
|
| Naomi
|
I rethought this over today and came up with a basic conclusion. If it
were to be made only available via prescription, it would then become
classified as a drug, wouldn't it? It has not been proven that formula
feeding causes harm to the child. Breast-feeding has been proven to have
major benefits and health-related reasons for doing it. But the only thing
that I've seen proven is that it is healthier overall to breast-feed, not
that it causes your child to become ill when you formula feed. Do you see
my point here? As far as how is it more time consuming to go to the
drugstore than the grocery store, *I* don't even have the time to go to the
grocery store half the time. My husband and I go once every two weeks to
stock up. And the last time I did go to the pharmacy, I spent 20 minutes
waiting for things to get filled. 20 minutes vs. 1 minute tops to go to
the grocery store.
Susanne Bullo
formula
| > available only through prescription is a bit like taking aspirin off
the
| > shelves and making it available by prescription only. Sure, there are
| > other ways to alleviate headaches but imagine if those aren't working
for
| > you and you need to get rid of the headache. Call the doctor for a
| > prescription, get into your car, drive to the pharmacy, wait to get it
| > filled...etc... Then do this each time? I don't see that as very
feasible.
|
| headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
| relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
| a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
| to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
| gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
| store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
| mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
| everytime feeding time rolled around.
Sure I'm familiar with refills. But you don't initially get a refill. You
first get to go to your doctor, then get the prescription before refills
even begin. So what are we proposing here? I can't remember how long 1
can of formula lasted for me, but I do know it wasn't very long. Are we to
decide it's a case by case refill? I'm sorry, but it seems to be an
inconvenience when going to the store takes less time.
| > | we get at the low periods. It also might force
| > | the doctors to become better educated.....etc. There
| > | may be some positive ripple-down effects from such
| > | a system??{I'm not saying there WOULD be - I'm saying
| > | there MIGHT be}.
|
| > But what about those out there who do not think that formula feeding is
so
| > horrendously bad for their children? The way I see it, it wouldn't
just
| > stop there. What's to stop someone from deciding that processed baby
food
| > is evil and should be placed on prescription only so we can all make
our
| > own baby food? While I *did* make my own baby food, that was because I
had
| > the time and patience. Other mothers may not.
|
| Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
| Formula does not contain the same ingredients as breastmilk.
| And the point is, formula is NOT as good as breastmilk. It would be a
| good thing to encourage a woman to give the matter some thought before
| just deciding to feed formula rather than breastmilk. If she had to visit
| the doctor, or at least TALK to him before making that choice, she might
| get the help she needs to continue bf.
No, it is not better than breastmilk. But it is also not some evil pariah
that's it's been displayed as. I'm all for each and every woman going
through some instruction on the benefits of breast-feeding. It was done
for me with my doctor and in the hospital where I had my daughter. And I
did attempt breast-feeding, it just didn't work out for me. That's the
best alternative we can give women. Educate them on the benefits, show
them how it's done. But if it becomes impossible for them, don't further
frustrate the situation by making them get prescriptions filled for
formula. That doesn't seem to be a viable option, IMHO.
| > I do know my daughter has shown no ill effects from formula feeding.
She's
| > bright, extremely healthy, I couldn't ask for more. But to place
formula
| > in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
| > woman feel even more guilty?
|
|
| I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
| drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
|
That's not the same. Taking medication to correct a problem is not the
same as forcing a woman to get a prescription because she cannot
breast-feed.
Susanne Bullo
L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote in article <326E59...@teleport.com>...
| Susanne Bullo wrote:
| >
| > L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote in article
<326E45...@teleport.com>...
| > | Susanne Bullo wrote:
| > to
| > | > have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they
need
| > to
| > | > get formula? How completely idiotic!
| > | >
| >
I didn't feel a great deal of grief for not being able to breast-feed. On
the contrary. I felt an immense sense of relief that my baby and I were no
longer going to subject ourselves to a lot of pain. Formula feeding is
*not* better than breast-feeding. But for women who cannot, it's a great
sense of relief.
| I don't know if you realize this, but not so very long ago, a huge
| underground
| ring of counterfeit formula makers was uncovered. They made bundles of
| money
| selling pallets of what appeared to be the most common brands of formula
| to
| grocery stores. As a result, many infants were sickened. Some might
| have died,
| can't remember.
Yes, I do remember. It was around the time my daughter was born. I don't
believe any babies died. It was formula that wasn't made to standard. I
hate to tell you this but many things that are available to the open public
are subject to the same thing. Should we make all food stuff, sundries and
etc. available only via prescription?
| >
| > | Formula by prescription is a fabulous idea. At least it would force
| > | formula
| > | manufacturers to abide by higher standards (although that's
debatable).
| >
| > And it would be like having to call your doctor for a prescription to
| > aspirin or cold medicine or vitamins..etc.
|
| You know, equating what your baby eats lives on for the first six months
| with cold medicine or aspirin is kind of ludicrous.
How is it ludicrous? Other than the fact that formula is *not* a drug and
shouldn't be treated as such. That's what I find to be ludicrous. Like I
said above, how about we take all food stuffs and make them available only
through prescription? That's just about the same as proposing that formula
is made available that way.
| Sometimes taking extra steps to insure your child's health is necessary.
| It almost sounds like for you it would be just too much trouble. I wish
| your child continued good health.
You know, I was going to let myself be baited by such an asinine comment.
But I'm not. I know my daughter is exceptionally healthy and will continue
to be. I don't need someone such as yourself wishing my child to have what
she already has.
Beth A. Gould
In article <54lbe9$d...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>, npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
says...
>Why is it any harder to fill a prescription at the drug store than to run
>to the grocery every time you run out of formula? My local Krogers has a
>pharmacy right in the store!
just pointing out that this wouldn't work for everyone..our insurance
prescription plan dictates that we use revco pharmacy. but that's ALL we use
revco for because their prices tend to be higher on things. we usually buy
things at target or meijer <and are planning the same for when we have a baby
after comparison shopping>
therefore, formula by prescription would end up being a HUGE hassle should
something occur that i couldn't breastfeed...
beth
Susanne Bullo
| There are plenty of over-the-counter medicines that are harmful if
| taken incorrectly. So that can't be the only thing that makes
| an item subject to perscription. Remember that prenatal vitamins
| are prescribed. They're also available over-the-counter, but
| getting a prescription lets you reduce your cost.
I guess I have a hard time with thinking that formula would, in effect, be
classified as a drug. When it's not.
| I guess it depends on the insurance co. When I get a perscription,
| I have a card that I present when getting it so that the cost is
| greatly reduced. But even if the insurance company delayed paying
| for it, you'd still just be paying what you do right now.
|
| I doubt (if this pie in the sky idea ever really happened, which
| I can't believe) that an insurance company could deny a perscription
| to a woman, let's say, who has had a double masectomy. Maybe
| I just have a really nice ins co. :^)
|
| Now what if formula was available just like prenatal vitamins are,
| over-the-counter and via prescription? Then moms who really
| have no choice could reduce their costs by getting it via
| prescription. (Hmm, does this already happen anywhere?)
I don't suppose I'd have a problem with this. I would still be wondering
how and why they decided to classify formula as a drug.
naomi pardue
> available only through prescription is a bit like taking aspirin off the
> shelves and making it available by prescription only. Sure, there are
> other ways to alleviate headaches but imagine if those aren't working for
> you and you need to get rid of the headache. Call the doctor for a
> prescription, get into your car, drive to the pharmacy, wait to get it
> filled...etc... Then do this each time? I don't see that as very feasible.
Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
everytime feeding time rolled around.
> | we get at the low periods. It also might force
> | the doctors to become better educated.....etc. There
> | may be some positive ripple-down effects from such
> | a system??{I'm not saying there WOULD be - I'm saying
> | there MIGHT be}.
> But what about those out there who do not think that formula feeding is so
> horrendously bad for their children? The way I see it, it wouldn't just
> stop there. What's to stop someone from deciding that processed baby food
> is evil and should be placed on prescription only so we can all make our
> own baby food? While I *did* make my own baby food, that was because I had
> the time and patience. Other mothers may not.
Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
Formula does not contain the same ingredients as breastmilk.
And the point is, formula is NOT as good as breastmilk. It would be a
good thing to encourage a woman to give the matter some thought before
just deciding to feed formula rather than breastmilk. If she had to visit
the doctor, or at least TALK to him before making that choice, she might
get the help she needs to continue bf.
> I do know my daughter has shown no ill effects from formula feeding. She's
> bright, extremely healthy, I couldn't ask for more. But to place formula
> in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
> woman feel even more guilty?
I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
Naomi
Erin Johnson
First, I'd like to respond the the aspirin comparison; You cannot compare a
medication for an illness or pain to a nutritional supplement. That would
be like saying my body can produce aspirin for me, but I'd rather buy some
ready-made version. In addition, I feel bad for you with the trouble you
had with nursing, I had trouble also. I had cracked and bleeding nipples
and mastitis twice. (Both times on a Saturday, so I was forced to go to the
emergency room and wait for hours.) But my aunt said something once that
made me stop and think, "If there were no formula, like in the pioneer
days, are you telling me your baby would starve?" Sometimes some of the
most rewarding things are things you must struggle through. Don't get me
wrong, I struggled. It was tough, but It eventually worked out so great
that as I look back I realize that it made us even closer because we both
worked so hard for the same thing. We couldn't really communicate yet, but
we were both in it together. I only suggest making formula by prescription
to give people pause for thought. It's not the "same" as breastmilk and
therefore, a new mom should think for a while before making a decision.
It's just too easy to buy it and not try nursing first.
Terrina Dickinson Laing
In article <54ljgq$i...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>> But what about those out there who do not think that formula feeding is so
>> horrendously bad for their children? The way I see it, it wouldn't just
>> stop there. What's to stop someone from deciding that processed baby food
>> is evil and should be placed on prescription only so we can all make our
>> own baby food? While I *did* make my own baby food, that was because I had
>> the time and patience. Other mothers may not.
>
>Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
Sorry, but it doesn't. A recent marketing study in Canada showed that
the major babyfood brands contained anywhere from 70-80% *filler*
(carageenan, sugar, starch). For someone so up on baby nutrition, I'm
surprised you'd say something like the above. Unless of course you
bought the special babyfood, but even then, you were paying an
outlandish price for something you could make at home and cheaper at
that. And more nutritious since you'd be giving baby 100% food, not 20%.
>> I do know my daughter has shown no ill effects from formula feeding. She's
>> bright, extremely healthy, I couldn't ask for more. But to place formula
>> in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
>> woman feel even more guilty?
>
>I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
>drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
If we were to go the totally natural way, hypothetically, one could say that
because one can't conceive without meds, maybe one shouldn't be having
kids at all because there must be a natural reason why one is infertile
without meds. Which of course is absolute b*llsh*t, no one
deserves to be infertile and fertility drugs are an absolute godsend.
(I say this because lots of women, including me, need some sort of med
to conceive and/or maintain the pregnancy.)
But now, replace 'can't conceive without meds' with 'can't breastfeed'
(and I will state here, for *any* reason) and replace 'because there
must be a natural reason why one is infertile without meds' with 'because it's
unnatural not to breastfeed'. Sticky stuff, I guess it depends on the
definition of 'natural'. There's no way one should feel guilty for
needing meds to conceive. But in the same vein, why attempt to induce
guilt in women who don't choose to bf? Just a question.
Terrina
L&M
Susanne Bullo wrote:
>
> Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
> <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
> | My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
> |
>
> I'm sorry, I realize it's just your opinion, but it's the silliest one I've
> have to get a prescription filled for their babies every time they need to
> get formula? How completely idiotic!
>
For all those women out there (hypothetical though they be) who *cannot*
breastfeed: Are you willing to concede that unless formula existed,
your sweet little baby would probably die?
When you decide to feed your baby formula over nature's intended food:
human milk, you entrust the very life of your child to a pharmaceutical
company (except Carnation, which is not).
Formula by prescription is a fabulous idea. At least it would force
formula
manufacturers to abide by higher standards (although that's debatable).
Lori
Breastfeeding Extremist & mother of Claire, 10.5 mos.
J. Rachael Hamlet
"Susanne Bullo" <swee...@prostar.com> wrote:
> It has not been proven that formula
>feeding causes harm to the child. Breast-feeding has been proven to have
>major benefits and health-related reasons for doing it.
This statement is simple nonsense. To state that "breastfeeding has benefits"
assumes that formula-feeding is normal, and breastfeeding is something "extra"
and "special". Breastfed children are simply normal. Formula-fed children
(as a population, not as individuals) suffer from the ill-effects of using an
inferior product. Hundreds of medical studies have demonstrated that breastfed
babies, with normal immune systems that have received the immune factors that
they need, don't get sick nearly as often or as seriously as formula-fed babies
that have been deprived of these important elements found only in human milk.
J.Rachael Hamlet
e-mail: acti...@clark.net
Visit The Breastfeeding Advocacy Page at
http://www.clark.net/pub/activist/bfpage/bfpage.html
Anna Fiehler
Susanne Bullo wrote:
>
> Anna Fiehler <afie...@mathworks.com> wrote in article
> <326E53...@mathworks.com>...
> | There are plenty of over-the-counter medicines that are harmful if
> | taken incorrectly. So that can't be the only thing that makes
> | an item subject to perscription. Remember that prenatal vitamins
> | are prescribed. They're also available over-the-counter, but
> | getting a prescription lets you reduce your cost.
>
> I guess I have a hard time with thinking that formula would, in effect, be
> classified as a drug. When it's not.
>
> | over-the-counter and via prescription? Then moms who really
> | have no choice could reduce their costs by getting it via
> | prescription. (Hmm, does this already happen anywhere?)
>
> I don't suppose I'd have a problem with this. I would still be wondering
> how and why they decided to classify formula as a drug.
I guess the question I was trying to raise was missed.
Is everything that is prescribed considered a drug? I wonder
because prenatal vitamins are available this way, but are
vitamins (over-the-counter as well as prescription ones)
classified as drugs too?
Anna S. & Declan W. (20 OCT 95) & ? (Due late June 97)
naomi pardue
Distribution:
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in article
> I rethought this over today and came up with a basic conclusion. If it
> were to be made only available via prescription, it would then become
> classified as a drug, wouldn't it? It has not been proven that formula
> feeding causes harm to the child. Breast-feeding has been proven to have
> major benefits and health-related reasons for doing it. But the only thing
> that I've seen proven is that it is healthier overall to breast-feed, not
> that it causes your child to become ill when you formula feed.
Well, if you are sick less with bf, you are sick more with ff.
Therefore, logically, formula causes some sickness.
Oh, and what follows is a direct quote from the PDR listing for "SMA Iron
Fortified Infant Formula." (PDR, you understand, is a drug reference...)
"Breastmilk is best for babies. Infnat formula is intended to replace or
supplement breastmilk when breastfeeding is not possible or is
insufficient, or when mothers elect not to bf.... [snip discussion of
importance of not supplementing in early weeks]... professional advice
should be followed on all matters of infant feeding. Infant formula
should always be prepared and used as directed. *Unnecessary or improper
use of infant formula could present a health hazard.*
So yes, unnecessary use of formula could be a health hazard. Says it
right on the can!
Do you see
> my point here? As far as how is it more time consuming to go to the
> drugstore than the grocery store, *I* don't even have the time to go to the
> grocery store half the time. My husband and I go once every two weeks to
> stock up. And the last time I did go to the pharmacy, I spent 20 minutes
> waiting for things to get filled. 20 minutes vs. 1 minute tops to go to
> the grocery store.
So fine, so once every couple of months you (or your husband) goes to the
pharmacy and stocks up. Where's the problem? If you call in advance, they
would have it waiting for you to pick up!
Naomi
naomi pardue
Distribution:
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in article
> | Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
> | headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
> | relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
> | a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
> | to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
> | gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
> | store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
> | mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
> | everytime feeding time rolled around.
> Sure I'm familiar with refills. But you don't initially get a refill. You
> first get to go to your doctor, then get the prescription before refills
> even begin. So what are we proposing here? I can't remember how long 1
> can of formula lasted for me, but I do know it wasn't very long. Are we to
> decide it's a case by case refill? I'm sorry, but it seems to be an
> inconvenience when going to the store takes less time.
I really think you are making this procedure sound FAR more complex than
it actually is.
Ok... there are two likely situations where a woman would need formula.
A) Mother knows before delivery that she will need to formula feed. (She
is HIV positive or must take a contraindicated drug, or some other
medical or practical problem.) So fine, before the baby is even born, the
doctor could write her a prescription. SHe could get it filled and have
formula waiting in the house. At worst, the doctor could write it in the
hospital, and quite likely fill it directly from the hospital pharmacy.
The prescription would indicate unlimited refills (well, probably some
limitation on total amount, to prevent black-market sales...) for a year.
Mother could go the the pharmacy weekly, or monthly, or once in 6 months,
whatever is convenient for her.
B) Mother starts out bf, and develops problems. At that point she would
need to call the doctor. This is a GOOD THING. While some doctors would,
as I noted in my first post, be only too happy to call in a prescription
for her, others would ask her to come in, and see if the bf problem could
be SOLVED, before resorting to weaning. No baby is going to starve to
death in the time it takes to get a doctors appointment! (And if the baby
is really in dire straits, he would be taken to the emergency room, where
prescriptions would not be needed for such things.) Ideally, the doctor
or other professional would solve the bf problem, and mother would not
need formula. If the problem could not be solved, dr. would write a
prescription, and the situation would become exactly as in the other example.
> that's it's been displayed as. I'm all for each and every woman going
> through some instruction on the benefits of breast-feeding. It was done
> for me with my doctor and in the hospital where I had my daughter. And I
> did attempt breast-feeding, it just didn't work out for me. That's the
> best alternative we can give women. Educate them on the benefits, show
> them how it's done. But if it becomes impossible for them, don't further
> frustrate the situation by making them get prescriptions filled for
> formula. That doesn't seem to be a viable option, IMHO.
I just don't understand why you consider getting a prescritpion from a
doctor to be such a difficult thing. Inability to bf is a MEDICAL
problem. It should be dealt with medically. And some women DON"T get
sufficient instruction before the baby is born. If they have to see
doctor before weaning to formula later on, it will make it more likely
that they will get the help they need.
> | > in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
> | > woman feel even more guilty?
> |
> | I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
> | drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
> |
> That's not the same. Taking medication to correct a problem is not the
> same as forcing a woman to get a prescription because she cannot
> breast-feed.
Sure it is. As I said above, inability to breastfeed IS a medical
problem. If anything, I would think that getting a prescrition for
formula would make such a mother feel LESS guilty, becuase it would
emphasize to her that she has a medical problem and is not an inadqequate
or bad mother.
Naomi
naomi pardue
Terrina Dickinson Laing (ltdi...@TST-host.TST-MedHat.com) wrote:
> naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> >I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
> >drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
> If we were to go the totally natural way, hypothetically, one could say that
> because one can't conceive without meds, maybe one shouldn't be having
> kids at all because there must be a natural reason why one is infertile
> without meds. Which of course is absolute b*llsh*t, no one
> deserves to be infertile and fertility drugs are an absolute godsend.
> (I say this because lots of women, including me, need some sort of med
> to conceive and/or maintain the pregnancy.)
> But now, replace 'can't conceive without meds' with 'can't breastfeed'
> (and I will state here, for *any* reason) and replace 'because there
> must be a natural reason why one is infertile without meds' with 'because it's
> unnatural not to breastfeed'. Sticky stuff, I guess it depends on the
> definition of 'natural'. There's no way one should feel guilty for
> needing meds to conceive. But in the same vein, why attempt to induce
> guilt in women who don't choose to bf? Just a question.
But I am not doing that. If a woman cannot breastfeed, of COURSE she
should use formula. However, if a woman CAN breastfeed, she should do
so.
By the same token, a woman who CAN conceive naturally should not use
fertility drugs in an attempt to speed up the process a little, or
becuase she wants twins. To do so would put herself, and her future
children, at unnecessary risk.
Medical technology has a place in the world. It is a
lifesaver for millions of people. But it should not be used frivilously
just because it is there. At best it is a waste of resources. At worst it
creates additional risks that are part and parcel of the technology.
Naomi
Nancy Milinkovich
In article <01bbc1c3$e3ea7ec0$69a9...@sweetsue.prostar.com>, "Susanne Bullo" <swee...@prostar.com> writes:
|> Actually, I had a whole new perspective on this. Bear with me, here goes
|> an analogy:
|>
|> 1. We all know junk food isn't good for us, yet we eat it.
|>
|> 2. We all know that healthy food is much better for us than junk food.
|>
|> 3. We know that formula feeding isn't the *optimal* form of feeding a baby.
|>
|> 4. We also know that breast-feeding is the best form of feeding a baby.
|>
|> If we were to take the "place formula on a prescription" thought with this
|> and add the other premises, what's to stop us from placing junk food on the
|> same "prescription"? Can you imagine going to the doctors and saying "I
|> was feeling a bit like having a hamburger today and I realize it's not as
|> good as healthy food. But could you please fill out a prescription for me?
|> And make it refillable, please"? Sounds pretty silly doesn't it? That's
|> how I see the formula behind the counter as being.
|>
Yup! I completely understand where you are coming from :-)
I guess for me there are two questions that I asked
myself when I really decided to think about this
as objectively as I could. One question was "Are there
things that we as a society greatly persuade people
to do 'for their own good'? and "Should breastfeeding
be one of those things?". For instance - we say that
using an infant car seat is legally required - and to
back this up we have laws with fines for those that
don't. We also do the same (at least in Canada) with
cigarettes - you must be 18 to buy them - and
stores are subject to huge fines for selling them
to underage clients and all of the packs of cigarettes
have HUGE lettering on them saying stuff like "Smoking
Kills" "Smoking During Pregnancy Can Harm Your Baby", etc.
Now - I know no one has suggested laws - but if by
putting formula at arms-length away - if this
persuades people to keep trying, to keep going
or seek help - is this a good thing? And is it
worth the nominal (for most but not all) extra
effort required to get the formula? I answered
yes to both of the questions.
Ok - so after saying this if I look at the junk
food analogy. I don't see it in the same
category as making a decision to formula feed
or breastfeed. Partly - because we are talking
about a developing infant rather than an
adult, and partly because I think the potential
health risks (or increased illness or however
you want to put it) of formula outweighs the
risks associated with eating junk food. I also
think that for many women - the decision to formula
feed is made after much soul-searching and is
not as easy a decision as whether or not to have
a hamburger or not.
But I don't think we would need to put formula
behind a prescription shelf - if we really
put more emphasis on support, education
and role-modeling for breastfeeding. If there
was more support out there and if we saw
women breastfeeding all the time - as we
grew up - it would become the "norm" rather
than the exception....and then formula could
stay on the shelves as much as it wanted
to - but it would only be used rarely - rather
than often.
But there are many parts of this idea that I still
am not too sure on - whether it would really
have the positive effects that we think it
might.....it really might backfire completely - and
we would start to have underground formula makers,
putting more kids at risk, etc. I really just
don't know....I'm not convinced its a good
idea - but it does have some interesting ideas
surrounding it.
Anyways - enough blabbering on my part - but I also
see where you are coming from - and you may be
right - it may turn out in practice - to be
completely ridiculous and very difficult to
manage.
Shannon Lea Stelly
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
: I rethought this over today and came up with a basic conclusion. If it
: were to be made only available via prescription, it would then become
: classified as a drug, wouldn't it? It has not been proven that formula
: feeding causes harm to the child. Breast-feeding has been proven to have
: major benefits and health-related reasons for doing it. But the only thing
: that I've seen proven is that it is healthier overall to breast-feed, not
: that it causes your child to become ill when you formula feed. Do you see
: my point here?
Well, as has been pointed out before, it depends on what you consider the
norm... If formula, is then breastmilk is "extra." If breastmilk is
considered the norm then formula can be considered harmful in that
children are more likely to be sick. Instead of the benefits of
breastmilk, you could speak of the drawbacks of formula...
As far as how is it more time consuming to go to the
: drugstore than the grocery store, *I* don't even have the time to go to the
: grocery store half the time. My husband and I go once every two weeks to
: stock up. And the last time I did go to the pharmacy, I spent 20 minutes
: waiting for things to get filled. 20 minutes vs. 1 minute tops to go to
: the grocery store.
I'm not sold on the prescription idea myself, but.... Can't you call in
a prescription? Your grocery is a lot quicker than mine if you can get
in and out in 1 minute or less. And don't most grocery stores now have
pharmacies, as do Wal-Mart, K-Mart, etc-- it's pretty easy to drop a
prescription off and do other shopping. I don't remember when I last
went to a drug store for a prescription--I get them all filled at the
grocery store. Even if it's not time for a shopping trip, I usually can
pick up one or two things while it's being filled.
Shannon
Susanne Bullo
Actually, I had a whole new perspective on this. Bear with me, here goes
an analogy:
1. We all know junk food isn't good for us, yet we eat it.
2. We all know that healthy food is much better for us than junk food.
3. We know that formula feeding isn't the *optimal* form of feeding a baby.
4. We also know that breast-feeding is the best form of feeding a baby.
If we were to take the "place formula on a prescription" thought with this
and add the other premises, what's to stop us from placing junk food on the
same "prescription"? Can you imagine going to the doctors and saying "I
was feeling a bit like having a hamburger today and I realize it's not as
good as healthy food. But could you please fill out a prescription for me?
And make it refillable, please"? Sounds pretty silly doesn't it? That's
how I see the formula behind the counter as being.
L&M
Susanne Bullo wrote:
>
<snip discussion of formula by prescription> |
>
> First of all, formula would have to be placed in the same group as all
> prescribed medicine. As potentially harmful if taken incorrectly.
Formula is VERY potentially harmful if taken incorrectly. If mixed
incorrectly
or with contaminated water, formula can be FATAL. Breastmilk doesn't
kill
and it always comes in just the right temperature and amount.
>
Lori
Spiros Triantafyllopou
naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
: I just don't understand why you consider getting a prescritpion from a
: doctor to be such a difficult thing. Inability to bf is a MEDICAL
: problem. It should be dealt with medically. And some women DON"T get
Whoa, pardner. Let's say a woman returns to her job assembling TV's
at the RCA/Daewoo plant in Bloomington and can't breastfeed since
the male dominated factory is not likely to be sympathetic. Where
is the 'medical problem' there, and what can her doctor do out it?
: Sure it is. As I said above, inability to breastfeed IS a medical
: problem. If anything, I would think that getting a prescrition for
: formula would make such a mother feel LESS guilty, becuase it would
: emphasize to her that she has a medical problem and is not an inadqequate
: or bad mother.
ROTFL.
A prescription also implies additional expenses for the bureaucracy.
But then, formula feeding moms have lots of cash, right?
Pretty sad.
Spiros
--
[+=] EMAIL: stri...@indy.net URL: http://expert.cc.purdue.edu/~strianta
Graduate Student (CEE), Human Factors Engineering, Purdue University
Actively pursuing the 3 R's (Reading, 'Rithmetic, and Readnews) since 1983
Christos S. Christoforou
In article <326FED...@teleport.com>, L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote:
>Formula is VERY potentially harmful if taken incorrectly. If mixed
>incorrectly
>or with contaminated water, formula can be FATAL. Breastmilk doesn't
>kill
>and it always comes in just the right temperature and amount.
I guess what gets me about people who press the "Formula Kills" position
is that while there have been cases, it is pretty rare- at least in Western
countries. It is a bit like those (in my opinion) who press the "breastfeeding
is risky" rhetoric by talking about interviews they saw on Oprah where
the baby dies from dehydration from a breastfeeding mom.
Both are problems that one should know about, but shouldn't be *the*
reason for not breastfeeding or not formula feeding. Now the immunological
factors are another story..... :)
Erika
naomi pardue
But the immunological factors ARE the story. Many of the deaths that are
considered to result from formla feeding are the result of increased
incidence of various illnesses. The increased incidence is a direct
result of the lack of immunological factors. It isn't JUST incorrectly
mixed formula that can cause harm.
Naomi
naomi pardue
Spiros Triantafyllopou (stri...@expert.cc.purdue.edu) wrote:
> naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
> : I just don't understand why you consider getting a prescritpion from a
> : doctor to be such a difficult thing. Inability to bf is a MEDICAL
> : problem. It should be dealt with medically. And some women DON"T get
> Whoa, pardner. Let's say a woman returns to her job assembling TV's
> at the RCA/Daewoo plant in Bloomington and can't breastfeed since
> the male dominated factory is not likely to be sympathetic. Where
> is the 'medical problem' there, and what can her doctor do out it?
It would be highly inconvenient for a mother to breastfeed while working
in a factory. But it would not be impossible.
Of course most doctors would be sympathetic to such a situation and
willingly write the prescription, if asked, so the woman could still
happily formula feed.
> A prescription also implies additional expenses for the bureaucracy.
> But then, formula feeding moms have lots of cash, right?
Well, if they can afford to pay for formula at the grocery, then they can
afford to pay the insurance co-pay for prescription formula at the drug
store.
Naomi
lcfr...@ingr.com
In article <54p01h$2k...@tiger2.ocs.lsu.edu>, sst...@tiger.lsu.edu (Shannon Lea
Stelly) writes:
>I'm not sold on the prescription idea myself, but.... Can't you call in
>a prescription? Your grocery is a lot quicker than mine if you can get
>in and out in 1 minute or less. And don't most grocery stores now have
>pharmacies, as do Wal-Mart, K-Mart, etc-- it's pretty easy to drop a
>prescription off and do other shopping. I don't remember when I last
>went to a drug store for a prescription--I get them all filled at the
>grocery store. Even if it's not time for a shopping trip, I usually can
>pick up one or two things while it's being filled.
But see, for me, it's not the convenience, or lack thereof, that is
the underlying problem with this idea. It's the fact that if, as
a woman, you are unable to breastfeed (or if you simply do not want
to), you are being made to get a prescription for your child's FOOD.
When was the last time any of us had to have a prescription to eat?
(Whether WHAT we eat is good for us or not?)
-Leona-
"And when they carve my stone all they need to write on it,
Is *Once lived a man who got all he ever wanted.*
Tell me something, who could ask for more?
Than to be living in a moment you would die for."
-Ty Herndon
Dave & Colette
"Susanne Bullo" <swee...@prostar.com> wrote:
>Actually, I had a whole new perspective on this. Bear with me, here
>goes an analogy:
>1. We all know junk food isn't good for us, yet we eat it.
>2. We all know that healthy food is much better for us than junk food.
>3. We know that formula feeding isn't the *optimal* form of feeding a
> baby.
>4. We also know that breast-feeding is the best form of feeding a baby
>If we were to take the "place formula on a prescription" thought with
>this and add the other premises, what's to stop us from placing junk
>food on the same "prescription"?
What's to stop us? Well, perhaps the fact that breastmilk is more than
just a better food. It also contains hundreds of live substances that
are intended to help a baby build up is undeveloped immune system and
give hormonal support that helps the baby to develop properly.
Breastmilk is what our babies's bodies expect in order to develop as
intended. A child's immune system is not fully developed until age 4 - 6
(varies per child). And it has been shownin varios ways that babies fed
formula appear to have much slower-developing immune systems. By
comparing formula to junk food, you're attempting to reduce breastmilk
to being *only* a food, and it's much more.
In addition to the regular immune-supporting LIVE substances and
astoundingly higher proportion of essential fatty acids (needed for
neurological development) in breastmilk, there are also virus and
bacteria-specific antibodies that are produced in the breast and
passed on to the baby when the nursing couple is exposed to any
pathenogenic virus or bacteria. Breastmilk also coats the baby's
intestinal track with mucus, which helps prevent illness, something
else that formula does not do at all (in contrast it often weakens
the very little mucosal lining that a young baby may have developed
on it's own).
It's not really a good analagy, b/c of all the live substances that
are inherently lacking in formula as compared to breastmilk, like:
*all five of the common antibody types, especially
IgA, which adults have in large quantities throughout the gut
and repiratory system (I think it's contained in mucous, which is
where a lot of infection fighting goes on).
*oligosaccharides (formula companies have attempted to
include this in formula, but it's from fish oils, which may have
concentrated heavey metals)
*mucins
*lactoferrin
*transferrin
*B12 binding protein
*free fatty acids (these weaken the membranes of many
enveloped viruses
*fibronectin, which enhances the action of phagocytes
so that they can attack microbes before they've been tagged by
the immune system
*lysozyme is found in larger quantities in the urine
of breastfed babies (than that of formula fed babies)
*cortisol
*epidermal growth factor
*nerve growth factor
*insulinlike growth factor
*somatomedin C
*gonadotropin releasing hormone (thought to increase
the rate at which a newborn's testicles mature)
>Can you imagine going to the doctors and saying "I was feeling a bit
>like having a hamburger today and I realize it's not as good as healthy
>food. But could you please fill out a prescription for me? And make it
>refillable, please"? Sounds pretty silly doesn't it?
Yes it does sound silly, but, then again, an occaisonal hamburger for
an adult is nowhere near as compromising to one's health as being
fed only formula as a baby. You're comparing a full grown person with
what should be a fully developed gut and all the digestive enzymes
needed to digest the hamburger to a baby with a completely immature
gut that, if fed formula, would be missing out on all the gut-enhancing
features of breastmilk. Also, breastmilk is really the only food that
contains the caseins and lactose and proteins in the right form and
escact right proportins to be easily digested by human babies with their
immature guts.
Just compare the poops of breastfed baby and formula fed babies
sometime. The reason that brestmilk poop is softer and doesn't smell
bad at all is that there is much less waste, b/c the breastfed baby's
intestines can actually absorb most of what is in breastmilk. By
contrast, formula has to be laden with all sorts of chemicals, many
of which the baby cannot digest, or can only digest a small amount of,
so there has to be extra added (for example, with iron). Then this
immature gut is forced to try to process and deal with expelling all
these wastes that mother nature never designed for it to process at
such a young age in the first place!
>That's how I see the formula behind the counter as being.
And above, you see why I view breastmilk as much more than just a better
food.
Colette (mom to Amy, a beautiful homebirthed 23 m/o)
(and Jumping Jack who is expected sometime in late December!)
"Nature can provide for the needs of people; [she] can't provide for
the greeds of people." - Mohandas K. Gandhi
Spiros Triantafyllopou
naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
: > Whoa, pardner. Let's say a woman returns to her job assembling TV's
: > at the RCA/Daewoo plant in Bloomington and can't breastfeed since
: > the male dominated factory is not likely to be sympathetic. Where
: > is the 'medical problem' there, and what can her doctor do out it?
: It would be highly inconvenient for a mother to breastfeed while working
: in a factory. But it would not be impossible.
: Of course most doctors would be sympathetic to such a situation and
: willingly write the prescription, if asked, so the woman could still
: happily formula feed.
You don't seem to get it, Naomi... 'near impossible' is the time where
I get out the ole' benefit/risk chart. Sure, it's nice to cuddle and
feed, but if it means going on welfare or alienating everyone else,
it's curtains. Not everyone works in a nice office with a Medella in
the supply cabinet.
: > A prescription also implies additional expenses
for the
bureaucracy. : > But then, formula feeding moms have lots of cash, right?
: Well, if they can afford to pay for formula at the grocery, then they can
: afford to pay the insurance co-pay for prescription formula at the drug
: store.
heck the prices of OTC drugs vs
the same thing under prescription (Tylenol...) and then we talk.
As I said, pretty sad. To think that several months' worth of arguments
went to waste because people can't get the fact that not everyone lives the
nice protected life they do.
Sharon McKenna
--
The opinions expressed are my own.
I feel I need to chime in on this thread because of how tangential it
has become. A prescription for formula? Towards what end? To make it
more difficult for those mothers who have chosen not (or physically are
unable) to breastfeed? Isn't having an infant to contend with difficult
enough? And what about those families that do not have insurance? It
is a silly thought and I cannot believe I am prolonging this thread by
commenting on it. Amazing.
I bf for 4 and a half months, and with my next one, I intend to go at
least that long, if not longer. It was a very rewarding experience, and
I enjoyed it (and I *know* Teddy enjoyed it.) But I just cannot see how
a prescription for formula will have any positive effect. Is it
just me? Am I missing some crucial piece of information?
Sharon, Proud mom to Teddy, already 1 year old.
naomi pardue
lcfr...@ingr.com wrote:
> In article <54ljgq$i...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>, npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
> (naomi pardue) writes:
> But Naomi, we're talking FOOD here. Sustenance. Not migraines or
> headaches. Or even sinus infections, etc. (And when prescription
> refills run out, MY Dr. DOES make me come back in to see him before
> he'll write another one.) This is something your child, and yourself,
> need on a daily basis.
Most prescriptions can be written to be refilled for as much as a year,
sometimes longer. Babies don't need formula for more than a year. There
would be no reason, therefore for the mother to have to return to the
doctor for another prescription. (And, of course, mothers generally take
their babies for well-baby checks several times in the first year anyway.)
> By your analogy doctors should
start writing prescriptions for
> cheesecake (because apples are more healthy for you) or steaks (because
> chicken and fish are better for you than red meat), etc. I mean you're
> implying that we make it harder for mothers, that are having a hard
> time breastfeeding, to feed their children. And I honestly don't think
> that's what you mean to imply. You might want to rethink your argument.
I think it SHOULD be a little harder for a mother to decide, frivilously
that she'll just give on breastfeeding and switch to formula.
The decision to go out and buy a cheesecake today will not mean that I'm
going to then eat cheesecake 3 times a day for the rest of my life. But
the decision to switch to formula IS often irrevocable. Plenty of mothers
decide, during a particularly rough patch, to give a bottle, or wean
totally. If the mom had to make a doctors appointment, she would stick to
it a little longer, and maybe get PAST the rough patch. (My SIL sent her
husband out to Krogers at 2 a.m. the night she got home from the
hospital, becuase the baby suddenly refused to nurse. Baby was fully
weaned by the next day...)
If we can
encourage the mother to try a little harder, why is this a bad thing?
Also, cheesecake and steak are only a small part of anybody's diet.
Breastmilk or formula is the ONLY food a baby gets for the first 4-6
months. That makes it more important that the one food be a good one.
> >I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
> >drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
> Semantics. Would you have DIED without your metrodin? No. Without
> FOOD a child will.
Very true. But without formula, the vast majority of babies can be given
breastmilk. Even if the milk is SO insufficent that the baby is becoming
dehydrated, there is still time to take the child to the doctor, or the
emergency room.
Parenting is hard enough without making the basic
> *life sustaining elements* harder to get. Prescriptions for bottled
> water (because tap can be bad for you)? And yes, while a mother has
> the breast and this will sustain life, it's not always an option.
It is an option for long enough to keep the baby from starving to death.
> So, instead of helping women through a particularly rough time we strap
But this WOULD help the women through a rough time. It would require
them to get help for their bf problems. If the problem could not be
solved, there would be no difficulty giving her a prescription.
> a Scarlet Letter "F" across her forehead and send her to the drugstore
> to show the world she has failed at something she may have no control
> over?
So... why would a mother feel guilty about standing in line at the
pharmacy, but NOT feel guilty about standing in line at the grocery with
a cart full of formula?
As I noted earlier, being able to attribute the
need to a MEDICAL problem would be likely to decrease guilt. When I see
the mom with a cart full of formula I feel a bit angry, wondering if she
might have breastfed if she'd tried. (Not that I would ever say anything...)
But if I saw the same women at
the drug store, I would feel sad that she was clearly unable to bf, and
needed to feed her child formula.
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
| First, I'd like to respond the the aspirin comparison; You cannot compare
a
| medication for an illness or pain to a nutritional supplement. That
would
| be like saying my body can produce aspirin for me, but I'd rather buy
some
Actually, I revised my opinion on that. Comparing it to aspirin was a bad
choice. I did decide it was a lot like making junk food available by
prescription only. *That* is ridiculous.
| ready-made version. In addition, I feel bad for you with the trouble you
| had with nursing, I had trouble also. I had cracked and bleeding nipples
| and mastitis twice. (Both times on a Saturday, so I was forced to go to
the
| emergency room and wait for hours.) But my aunt said something once that
| made me stop and think, "If there were no formula, like in the pioneer
| days, are you telling me your baby would starve?" Sometimes some of the
| most rewarding things are things you must struggle through. Don't get me
| wrong, I struggled. It was tough, but It eventually worked out so great
| that as I look back I realize that it made us even closer because we both
| worked so hard for the same thing. We couldn't really communicate yet,
but
| we were both in it together. I only suggest making formula by
prescription
| to give people pause for thought. It's not the "same" as breastmilk and
| therefore, a new mom should think for a while before making a decision.
| It's just too easy to buy it and not try nursing first.
I'm glad you were able to continue. I was not. I made what I feel was the
best decision for both my baby and me at the time. Making formula
available by prescription only is still, in my mind, a very bad idea.
Terrina Dickinson Laing
In article <54ntaa$e...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
>Terrina Dickinson Laing (ltdi...@TST-host.TST-MedHat.com) wrote:
>> But now, replace 'can't conceive without meds' with 'can't breastfeed'
>> (and I will state here, for *any* reason) and replace 'because there
>> must be a natural reason why one is infertile without meds' with 'because it's
>> unnatural not to breastfeed'. Sticky stuff, I guess it depends on the
>> definition of 'natural'. There's no way one should feel guilty for
>> needing meds to conceive. But in the same vein, why attempt to induce
>> guilt in women who don't choose to bf? Just a question.
>
>But I am not doing that. If a woman cannot breastfeed, of COURSE she
>should use formula. However, if a woman CAN breastfeed, she should do
>so.
You missed my comment in parentheses. *Any* reason. Including those
who 'can' physically but 'can't' for whatever reason (psychological,
physical, choose not to). One word about semantics here too, while
we're at it: the use of 'should'. As a word, it's used to indicate
'duty, propriety or expediency' (Random House Webster's College
Dictionary). Therefore, you're implying that just because a person
CAN do something, he/she's OBLIGATED to do it. Doesn't work. For
example, I CAN take a knife and stab someone in the back. Does that
mean I have to? Is it my duty to stab that person? We CAN do lots of
things, but don't, and the reasons for not doing them vary as much as
leaves on the tree. In the ideal world, yes, women should bf because
it's best. Do they have a duty to? You would say yes. But duty
means different things to different people as well and some duties
have higher priority.
As to guilt. No one has a duty to feel guilty either. But as everyone
knows, guilt is one of the strongest weapons in any arsenal. And even
though some will say, 'But I'm not making you feel guilty', fact is,
guilt is a selling tactic. It's a tactic that plays on someone's
emotions and lack of
confidence. It's a control measure, and it's often used subtly. No
one is confident about everything, all the time. That's why people
are vulnerable to it. The message that induces guilt is conveyed not
in words, but tone and other non-verbal expressions. But guilt
backfires ultimately: people just come to resent it.
I agree medical technology shouldn't be used frivolously. But I don't
see the use of formula as 'frivolous' either. Certainly not in the
terms you would use frivolous for.
Terrina
lcfr...@ingr.com
In article <54ljgq$i...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>, npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
(naomi pardue) writes:
>Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
>> Nancy Milinkovich <the...@bnr.ca> wrote in article
[taking aspirin off the shelves and using prescriptions]
>Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
>headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
>relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
>a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
>to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
>gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
>store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
>mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
>everytime feeding time rolled around.
But Naomi, we're talking FOOD here. Sustenance. Not migraines or
headaches. Or even sinus infections, etc. (And when prescription
refills run out, MY Dr. DOES make me come back in to see him before
he'll write another one.) This is something your child, and yourself,
need on a daily basis.
By your analogy doctors should start writing prescriptions for
cheesecake (because apples are more healthy for you) or steaks (because
chicken and fish are better for you than red meat), etc. I mean you're
implying that we make it harder for mothers, that are having a hard
time breastfeeding, to feed their children. And I honestly don't think
that's what you mean to imply. You might want to rethink your argument.
>> | we get at the low periods. It also might force
>> | the doctors to become better educated.....etc. There
>> | may be some positive ripple-down effects from such
>> | a system??{I'm not saying there WOULD be - I'm saying
>> | there MIGHT be}.
>
>> But what about those out there who do not think that formula feeding is so
>> horrendously bad for their children? The way I see it, it wouldn't just
>> stop there. What's to stop someone from deciding that processed baby food
>> is evil and should be placed on prescription only so we can all make our
>> own baby food? While I *did* make my own baby food, that was because I had
>> the time and patience. Other mothers may not.
>
>Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
>Formula does not contain the same ingredients as breastmilk.
>And the point is, formula is NOT as good as breastmilk. It would be a
>good thing to encourage a woman to give the matter some thought before
>just deciding to feed formula rather than breastmilk. If she had to visit
>the doctor, or at least TALK to him before making that choice, she might
>get the help she needs to continue bf.
Now here I can agree with you. It should be mandatory that doctors
speak to their patients about the benefits of breastfeeding. They
should also educate their staff and have them encourage mothers to
breastfeed. It might even be nice to assign a lactating consultant
to *every* mother for a period of time.
But all of this should be done LONG before the mother walks out of
the hospital with her baby and under no circumstances should it be
a LAW.
>> I do know my daughter has shown no ill effects from formula feeding. She's
>> bright, extremely healthy, I couldn't ask for more. But to place formula
>> in a prescription status, can't you see how that could possibly make a
>> woman feel even more guilty?
>>
>I can't conceive without medication. Did I feel guilty when I went to the
>drug store to get my prescription filled for metrodin? No, I did not.
Semantics. Would you have DIED without your metrodin? No. Without
FOOD a child will. Parenting is hard enough without making the basic
*life sustaining elements* harder to get. Prescriptions for bottled
water (because tap can be bad for you)? And yes, while a mother has
the breast and this will sustain life, it's not always an option.
So, instead of helping women through a particularly rough time we strap
a Scarlet Letter "F" across her forehead and send her to the drugstore
to show the world she has failed at something she may have no control
over?
-Leona-
lil
Hypothetically speaking, IF formula was made a substance one could only get
by prescription, what would that do to all the women out there who *don't*
have health insurance coverage in any way--and let's just say that they
were unable to bf for one reason or another. Keep in mind that not everyone
is covered by Medicaid or qualifies for foodstamps or any other type of
help. These people are also working at jobs where they can't afford to be
running to the doctor every time they need formula or where no type of
insurance is provided by their employer. What would these women do? What
about men/younger siblings who are caring for a baby for one reason or
another yet have no health coverage? These people do exist btw. I live in a
border town where it is *very* common to see this situation.
Just opening another can of worms...
naomi pardue
Spiros Triantafyllopou (stri...@expert.cc.purdue.edu) wrote:
> naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
> : > Whoa, pardner. Let's say a woman returns to her job assembling TV's
> : > at the RCA/Daewoo plant in Bloomington and can't breastfeed since
> : > the male dominated factory is not likely to be sympathetic. Where
> : > is the 'medical problem' there, and what can her doctor do out it?
> : It would be highly inconvenient for a mother to breastfeed while working
> : in a factory. But it would not be impossible.
> : Of course most doctors would be sympathetic to such a situation and
> : willingly write the prescription, if asked, so the woman could still
> : happily formula feed.
> You don't seem to get it, Naomi... 'near impossible' is the time where
> I get out the ole' benefit/risk chart. Sure, it's nice to cuddle and
> feed, but if it means going on welfare or alienating everyone else,
> it's curtains. Not everyone works in a nice office with a Medella in
> the supply cabinet.
Hmmm... can't say I've heard of anyone getting fired from RCA and being
forced onto welfare for choosing to spend her breaks pumping milk... or
even (gasp!) breastfeeding while at home...
Sure, it's harder to bf if you work in a factory. And, as I noted, 99% of
doctors would cheerfully whip out the prescription pad if mom said "I
have to get a prescription for formula becuase I'll be going back to work
at RCA in 6 weeks." So... where's the problem?
> As I said, pretty sad. To think that several months' worth of arguments
> went to waste because people can't get the fact that not everyone lives the
> nice protected life they do.
Says the man who lives in a ritzy suburb and drives a what... a volvo? to
the woman who lives in a 1000 square foot house on the cheap end of town
and drives a neon...
Naomi
naomi pardue
Terrina Dickinson Laing (ltdi...@TST-host.TST-MedHat.com) wrote:
> In article <54ntaa$e...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
> naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote:
> >Terrina Dickinson Laing (ltdi...@TST-host.TST-MedHat.com) wrote:
> >> But now, replace 'can't conceive without meds' with 'can't breastfeed'
> >> (and I will state here, for *any* reason) and replace 'because there
> >> must be a natural reason why one is infertile without meds' with 'because it's
> >> unnatural not to breastfeed'. Sticky stuff, I guess it depends on the
> >
> >But I am not doing that. If a woman cannot breastfeed, of COURSE she
> >should use formula. However, if a woman CAN breastfeed, she should do
> >so.
> You missed my comment in parentheses. *Any* reason. Including those
> who 'can' physically but 'can't' for whatever reason (psychological,
> physical, choose not to).
I'm sorry, but I do not accept that 'does not want to' is synoymous with
'cannot.' I am quite willing to understand that there are a wide range of
reasons that a woman might be unable to bf (work situation, prolonged
difficulties, medication, triplets...etc.). Howeve, I just do not believe
that "doesn't feel like it," or "thinks she might not like it so isn't
going to try" can be defined as 'can't.'
One word about semantics here too, while
> we're at it: the use of 'should'. As a word, it's used to indicate
> 'duty, propriety or expediency' (Random House Webster's College
> Dictionary). Therefore, you're implying that just because a person
> CAN do something, he/she's OBLIGATED to do it. Doesn't work. For
> example, I CAN take a knife and stab someone in the back. Does that
> mean I have to? Is it my duty to stab that person?
No. Obviously stabbing someone is a bad thing. But if you saw some ELSE
attemting to stab someone, you WOULD have a duty to call the police, if you
had access to a telephone. (In other words, if yo COULD do that postiive
thing, you would have a duty to do it.)
As humans I believe that we DO have a duty to do as many positive things
as we are reaonsbly capable of.
> leaves on the tree. In the ideal world, yes, women should bf because
> it's best. Do they have a duty to? You would say yes. But duty
> means different things to different people as well and some duties
> have higher priority.
Yes, but how does not wanting to do something make not doing it a high
priority? Surely the priority depends on what the alternative would be.
I don't like washing the dishes. But I like even less having
roaches living in my kitchen, and cooking in dirty pots. So I wash them.
On the other hand, a cluttered, toy-strewn living room isn't a major
concern for me, so THAT kind of housework gets done less often...
Surely the desire to have a healthy, well-nourished child should be a top
priority for any mother.
Naomi
Erin Johnson
David Innes <dav...@msn.com> wrote in article
<01bbc2be$1255ac80$a8842299@davidinneshome>...
> Erin Johnson <er...@pacifier.com> wrote in article
> <01bbc032$bedbe340$1a04a3ce@default>...
> > My two cents>>> Formula should be available only by prescription.
> >
>
> My two cents? Don't post lame flame bait. Be creative and say something
> even more stupid like "Circumcision is a giant plot by the formula
> companies -- once circumcised, men are never able to breast fed their
> babies."
>
> The more relentlessly flogged threads you tie together, the more points
you
> get.
>
> Quote: A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the
> subject. (Winston Churchill)
>
> Disclaimer: If my foolish newsreader had a kill file, we could all
> relentlessly repeated ourselves with the same once-fresh-but-now-dull
> claims and counter claims.
> -- David Innes
>
>
Boy, You win... that is very stupid and creative... are you bored?
--
Erin... Proud Mommy of Kelsi (5) and Kyle (3)
naomi pardue
Sharon McKenna (smck...@hr.house.gov) wrote:
> --
> The opinions expressed are my own.
> I feel I need to chime in on this thread because of how tangential it
> has become. A prescription for formula? Towards what end? To make it
> more difficult for those mothers who have chosen not (or physically are
> unable) to breastfeed? Isn't having an infant to contend with difficult
> enough? And what about those families that do not have insurance? It
> is a silly thought and I cannot believe I am prolonging this thread by
> commenting on it. Amazing.
But I just cannot see how
> a prescription for formula will have any positive effect. Is it
> just me? Am I missing some crucial piece of information?
As I noted in my first post on the thread, it would probably have minimal
effect, becuase the large majority of doctors would happily write a
prescrition for any mother who asked for one.
However, ideally it would have some positive effect. It would require a
woman to talk to her doctor about her infant feeding choices. If her
choice was to formula feed, ideally her doctor would discuss it with her,
and find if her choice was based on misinformation, and hopefully
convince her to give bf a try. Also, if a woman had difficulty
breastfeeding, it would require her to get help and try to solve the
problem, rathe than just dahsing out to the store for formula.
This is, in general, a good thing. It may slightly inconvenience some
mothers, but surely being inconvenienced for a good cause is worthwhile.
(It is inconventient for me to take Shaina to the doctor when she is
sick. But I do so becuase it is important for her health.)
I also believe that you are overestimating the level of inconveneine that
would be involved.
I don't think any of use are actually ADVOCATING making formula available
by prescription only. We are only noting that it is not an absurd, or
impossibly inconvienient thing if it were to come about.
Naomi
David Innes
lil
In article <54ro0a$8...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
> However, ideally it would have some positive effect. It would require a
> woman to talk to her doctor about her infant feeding choices. If her
> choice was to formula feed, ideally her doctor would discuss it with her,
> and find if her choice was based on misinformation, and hopefully
> convince her to give bf a try.
I was going to let this by but felt strongly compelled to respond. Naomi,
the thought of talking to the doc is good one...unfortunately, 90% of the
doctors I or my son have had do not really care what choice the mother
makes in regards to feeding. Believe me, I've gone to some *great*
pediatricians who never asked me how much or how long my son nursed. They
just cared about whether or not he was gaining the right amount of weight
for his age. My own GP discouraged me from bf-ing after I developed a
breast infection. My OB has not even asked me yet whether or not I intend
to bf this coming baby (and I'm already 25+ weeks along). The *only*
pediatrician I had that cared enough about that was a women who, very
unfortunately, we lost when my husband's employer switched to another HMO.
So while the thought of talking to a dr. about bf is a great one, finding a
dr. (at least in my neck of the woods) who will support you through bf-ing
is pretty tough. And, like you stated, most drs. all too willingly will
write out that prescription in order to not lose the patient.
-lil
Laurel Halbany
npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
>headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
>relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
>a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
>to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
>gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
>store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
>mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
>everytime feeding time rolled around.
No, just anytime she ran out of formula. Have you ever run out of
diapers, or aspirin, in the middle of the night? Or said to your
partner "I thought YOU bought the X!" Or needed to get a prescription
refilled Right Now, had the doctor shillyshally around before filling
it, had the pharmacy backed up, or had them screw up?
Sorry, but I think this whole idea is self-righteous nonsense. "Make
it harder to get--that'll discourage those selfish bitches!"
And perhaps you ought to think about the flip side. You think that too
many doctors push formula now? Imagine a new, confused mother getting
a PRESCRIPTION from her OB for formula. Do you think she's going to
refuse to get a DOCTOR'S PRESCRIPTION filled? Don't you think she
might take being GIVEN A PRESCRIPTION as a little more serious push
towards bottle-feeding than just being handed a can of formula or some
pamphlets?
The way to encourage moms to bf is to make sure they and their medical
practitioners have access to complete, honest information, to give
them support, to treat them with respect, to help them with their
problems, and to encourage them. It's NOT to try and keep formula off
the grocery store shelf.
>Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
It does? You put cornstarch and extra salt in your homemade baby food?
I didn't.
>If she had to visit
>the doctor, or at least TALK to him before making that choice, she might
>get the help she needs to continue bf.
How nice for everybody who can visit the doctor whenever they choose.
And it might just backfire on you when doctors start handing out
formula prescriptions like candy to new moms. It's even EASIER than
formula samples! After all, no storing cans, no shipping samples to
the OB--just get him or her to write a script for your product.
----------------------------------------------------------
Laurel Halbany
myt...@agora.rdrop.com
http://www.rdrop.com/users/mythago/
naomi pardue
> >Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
> >headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
> >relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor writes
> >a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at hand,
> >to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out, she
> >gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the drug
> >store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
> >mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
> >everytime feeding time rolled around.
> No, just anytime she ran out of formula. Have you ever run out of
> diapers, or aspirin, in the middle of the night?
Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at 2
a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem. In any case, the worse
that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
formula refilled.
Please explain to me (in words of one sylable) how it is THAT TERRIBLY
incovnenient to have to buy formula at the prescription counter rather
than at the grocery?
Or said to your
> partner "I thought YOU bought the X!" Or needed to get a prescription
> refilled Right Now, had the doctor shillyshally around before filling
> it, had the pharmacy backed up, or had them screw up?
Since babies normally drink formula for a year, I would imagine that any
prescirption for formula would be refillable for a full 12 months, so you
would NEVER need to return to the doctor just to get a new prescirpition.
> Sorry, but I think this whole idea is self-righteous nonsense. "Make
> it harder to get--that'll discourage those selfish bitches!"
No, make it harder to get. That will encourage mothers to try a little
harder... or try at all, rather than immediately rushing out for formula.
> And perhaps you ought to think about the flip side. You think that too
> many doctors push formula now? Imagine a new, confused mother getting
> a PRESCRIPTION from her OB for formula. Do you think she's going to
> refuse to get a DOCTOR'S PRESCRIPTION filled? Don't you think she
> might take being GIVEN A PRESCRIPTION as a little more serious push
> towards bottle-feeding than just being handed a can of formula or some
> pamphlets?
How many OBs would routinely write prescriptions for formula for all
their patients? While some OBs and peds aren't as supportive as we might
like, I don't think very many would force a women to buy formula if she
wanted to bf.
(Oh, and I have opted to not fill prescritions giving to me by my docotr...)
> The way to encourage moms to bf is to make sure they and their medical
> practitioners have access to complete, honest information, to give
> them support, to treat them with respect, to help them with their
> problems, and to encourage them. It's NOT to try and keep formula off
> the grocery store shelf.
Yes, of course all of thsoe are important. Unfortunately, many women opt
to ff regardless. (A study was done at a hospital that had just insituted
a new 'pro-bf' stance. All women were encouraged to bf, and given
education about it. As a result, a majority of mothers bf in the
hospital. However, within a week of arriving home, most of them had
already weaned to formula. (Most common reason they gave was that they
didn't have enough milk...)
> >Processed babyfood contains the same ingredients in the home-made stuff.
> It does? You put cornstarch and extra salt in your homemade baby food?
> I didn't.
Neither did I. I also didn't buy babyfood with added cornstarch and salt.
> >If she had to visit
> >the doctor, or at least TALK to him before making that choice, she might
> >get the help she needs to continue bf.
> How nice for everybody who can visit the doctor whenever they choose.
> And it might just backfire on you when doctors start handing out
> formula prescriptions like candy to new moms. It's even EASIER than
> formula samples! After all, no storing cans, no shipping samples to
> the OB--just get him or her to write a script for your product.
As I noted in my first post, since most doctors would be only to happy to
give a prescription to any mother who asked, such a program would be of
limited usefulness. However, if it could be combined with eduation for
doctors, and a comittment on their part to help women succeeeed at bf, it
could go a long way in increasing bf rates.
As for your first sentence in this paragraph. I saw my pediatrician
before Shaina was born. I saw him in the hosiptal. I saw him several
times during a bout with jaundice. I saw him at 2 weeks, 4 weeks, 2
months... etc. If she had been ill at any time during infancy, I would
have taken her to see him. If a mother is having difficulty with bf, she
should get help with it, just as she'd get help with any other major
problem that could affect her own health or that of her baby.
According to your logic, we'd better make amoxicillan
available at the grocery stores. After all, we can't expect a new mother
to be able to
take her baby to the doctor every time he gets an ear infection...
Naomi
naomi pardue
kc$j...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> <01bbc465$6f5b0e40$a5a9...@sweetsue.prostar.com>
Distribution:
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote in article
> | > No, just anytime she ran out of formula. Have you ever run out of
> | > diapers, or aspirin, in the middle of the night?
> |
> | Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
> | be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at 2
> | a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem. In any case, the worse
> | that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
> | drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
> | formula refilled.
> So, you're saying it's perfectly ok to let your baby be hungry for 6-7
> hours until the store opens??? That is one thing I have never done. And,
> as awful as it may sound, many parents (especially new ones) *are* a bit
> unorganized. It happens.
Perfectly ok? No. Likely to cause lasting harm to mother and or baby?
Also no. Will mother quickly learn to buy more formula before she takes
the last scoop out of the last can? You bet.
I'm really not understanding how that many mothers would find themselves
with NO formula at 2 a.m. on a regular basis. A product that is used, in
fairly predictable amounts on a many-times-daily basis, and that does not
spoil, should NEVER be run out of, no matter disorganized you may be.
When you open the last case, or the
last can, or whatever, you know it's time to go to the store for more...
Naomi
Mary Gordon
I was really shocked lately when I heard recently that the food item in
greatest demand at the local food bank is...baby formula. Apparently,
they go through tons of the stuff. Blew my socks off.
Spiros Triantafyllopou
Dave & Colette (lnrp...@ripco.com) wrote:
: Again, what do they do now? Do you mean that you think by making
: formula a prescription, the price would go up? [I'm not saying it
: wouldn't; I guess if one thinks about it, it probably would.] For those
: who are really poor, in my county, they can get hooked up with the
: county hospital clinics, where prespscriptions are filled for very
: little money or for free (on a sliding scale).
Your thought pattern is most impressive. Just because it does not cost
the poor, it does not mean it is free. We (as in, the idiots with
health insurance) pay for it, whether it is birth control pills
or antibiotics.
Laurel Halbany
npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>I think it SHOULD be a little harder for a mother to decide, frivilously
>that she'll just give on breastfeeding and switch to formula.
Then you should make it harder by presenting lots of good reasons for
her to keep breastfeeding. Assuming that she is acting "frivolously"
is mean-spirited and dense. Making it harder for her to get formula is
not going to get a mother past the difficulties of bf.
>The decision to go out and buy a cheesecake today will not mean that I'm
>going to then eat cheesecake 3 times a day for the rest of my life. But
>the decision to switch to formula IS often irrevocable. Plenty of mothers
>decide, during a particularly rough patch, to give a bottle, or wean
>totally. If the mom had to make a doctors appointment, she would stick to
>it a little longer, and maybe get PAST the rough patch. (My SIL sent her
>husband out to Krogers at 2 a.m. the night she got home from the
>hospital, becuase the baby suddenly refused to nurse. Baby was fully
>weaned by the next day...)
Aren't you the one insisting anecdotal proof about bottlefeeding
benefits is worthless?
Maybe we should just require formula-feeding wannabes to do fifty
pushups at the grocery store before we let them buy Enfamil. That
would show those lazy, frivolous bitches something, eh?
> If we can
>encourage the mother to try a little harder, why is this a bad thing?
The ends justify the means, do they?
How about you stick to ENCOURAGING BF instead of punishing
bottlefeeding?
>Also, cheesecake and steak are only a small part of anybody's diet.
Oh? Maybe a small part of yours. I know many people who eat red meat
every day, feed their kids fast food three times a week, and have
dessert after every meal. Perhaps a prescription for Doritos would
discourage these people.
Laurel Halbany
npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>The main PROBLEM with such an idea is that most doctors would be only too
>happy to write such a prescription for any woman who asked, so it would
>do little or nothing to increase the incidence of breastfeeding. (And
>some women would just resort to feeding home-made formulas, which are
>even less desirable than commercial ones.)
Bingo!
Let alone the fact that some doctors would give these prescriptions
UNASKED. How many new, scared moms are going to tell their doctor to
take back a *prescription*?
Y'know, one thing I think some of the 'prescription for formula'
advocates are missing here is that bottlefeeding really isn't easy or
convenient. (Maybe since many of them never tried it!)
Sure, it seems like it at first--when you're just establishing bf. But
think about all the equipment you need--bottles, nipples, a brush,
pots for sterilizing, caps, maybe those plastic bottles. If you buy
ready-made it's damned expensive; if you don't you have to worry about
mixing everything correctly and probably need to pay for pure water
too.
Then you have to keep it at the right temperature. (I don't care if
you have a family bed, you can't just roll over and make the bottle
appear unless you have a microwave and a fridge right next to the
bed!) And worry about it spoiling, or being contaminated. Then if baby
doesn't eat all you prepared, you have to throw it out. Never mind if
you make up a bottle and s/he decides not to eat after all...
Laurel Halbany
npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>It would be highly inconvenient for a mother to breastfeed while working
>in a factory. But it would not be impossible.
>Of course most doctors would be sympathetic to such a situation and
>willingly write the prescription, if asked, so the woman could still
>happily formula feed.
I believe you are one of the people who mentions that doctors are
often quite ignorant about BF. Don't you think that, in this
situation, the doctor would be *less* likely to give help about
pumping and *more* likely to just write out a prescription and say
"Here, get some Enfamil"?
I think we also need to get away from issues of 'convenience.' That
makes it sounds as though a mom is just too busy buffing her nails in
the lunchroom when she could be pumping. A hostile workplace, poor
facilities, poor storage, less-than-perfect pumping equipment,
irregular breaks and working hours, DAY AFTER DAY, can affect not only
the ability to pump, but let-down and milk supply. (And let's not
forget that if you're using your breaks to pump, you're not using them
to eat or drink.)
The solution is to make it easier for moms to pump at work, not to
make it harder for them to get formula.
>Well, if they can afford to pay for formula at the grocery, then they can
>afford to pay the insurance co-pay for prescription formula at the drug
>store.
Assuming they have insurance--a rather big assumption on your part.
Danie AA
<< You *really* don't get it, Naomi. Prescription drugs have a fairly
well defined usage pattern "2 of this every day". With Formula,
it is impossible to predict a pattern. I don't know of very many
prescriptions that are open-ended (i.e. all you can consume). >>
Actually, Spiros, my asthma meds are prescribed just
this way. Since I take some inhalers (preventative) at
a regular dosage daily, and others (for acute symptoms)
as needed, this works out wonderfully. It's not "all you
can consume", tho. It's "refill for one year."
Danie
naomi pardue
lil (ld...@nmsu.edu) wrote:
> In article <54ro0a$8...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>,
> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>
>
> > However, ideally it would have some positive effect. It would require a
> > woman to talk to her doctor about her infant feeding choices. If her
> > choice was to formula feed, ideally her doctor would discuss it with her,
> > and find if her choice was based on misinformation, and hopefully
> > convince her to give bf a try.
>
> I was going to let this by but felt strongly compelled to respond. Naomi,
> the thought of talking to the doc is good one...unfortunately, 90% of the
> doctors I or my son have had do not really care what choice the mother
> makes in regards to feeding.
As I've noted, if formula-by-perscription were to become a reality, it
would have to be combined with an intensive educational/motivational
campaign for DOCTORS, to make sure that they knew how to help women bf
successful, at that they would work with women to help them make the best
choice for them, and not just hand out prescirptions to any woman who
asked for one.
Naomi
naomi pardue
Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
> "Erin Johnson" <er...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>
> >I only suggest making formula by prescription
> >to give people pause for thought. It's not the "same" as breastmilk and
> How insulting of you to assume that moms DON'T already give pause for
> thought, and that requiring them to turn to a doctor for permission to
> bottlefeed is necessary to get them to use their brains.
>
> I find it highly ironic that some of the same people who encourage
> women's empowerment, education about our bodies, and taking control
> over childbearing and rearing instead of being subservient to doctors,
> are the same ones insisting that women who bottlefeed ought to turn
> over the final decision on how their baby will be fed to their OB's
> discretion.
>
Sadly, some mothers (and some humans of all genders and family
compositions) DON"T think about important choices. If you simply assume
that everyone will seek out information and do their best to make
eduated, informed choices without any help or encouragement, you end up
with a lot of people making poor choices, becuase they don't have the
time, interest, or ability to seek out the necessary info. Here on the
net most of us are well informed, but even here there is much faulty
information floating around. Less educated women have even less access to
information. (A fact that is reflected in the far lower bf rates among
poor and less educated women.)
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
Which is why I believe the prescription basis is completely unreasonable.
Right now, if you run out at 2 am in the morning, you can run to the store
that's open all night and get another can. With a prescription, you can't
do that.
| I'm really not understanding how that many mothers would find themselves
| with NO formula at 2 a.m. on a regular basis. A product that is used, in
| fairly predictable amounts on a many-times-daily basis, and that does not
| spoil, should NEVER be run out of, no matter disorganized you may be.
| When you open the last case, or the
| last can, or whatever, you know it's time to go to the store for more...
I've run out of diapers at an odd time of the day/night. And, early on
with my daughter, I've run out of formula at weird times (being a new mom I
didn't always gauge the amount left vs how hungry she was going to be) and
had to run to the store late at night. This didn't always happen but I do
remember it happening once or twice. To this day, I still run out of
diapers at weird times. Sheesh, imagine diapers being on a prescription
basis.....
Laurel Halbany
the...@bnr.ca (Nancy Milinkovich) wrote:
>For instance - we say that
>using an infant car seat is legally required - and to
>back this up we have laws with fines for those that
>don't. We also do the same (at least in Canada) with
>cigarettes - you must be 18 to buy them - and
>stores are subject to huge fines for selling them
>to underage clients and all of the packs of cigarettes
>have HUGE lettering on them saying stuff like "Smoking
>Kills" "Smoking During Pregnancy Can Harm Your Baby", etc.
But we don't actually keep cigs away from pregnant women or moms, do
we?
>Ok - so after saying this if I look at the junk
>food analogy. I don't see it in the same
>category as making a decision to formula feed
>or breastfeed. Partly - because we are talking
>about a developing infant rather than an
>adult, and partly because I think the potential
>health risks (or increased illness or however
>you want to put it) of formula outweighs the
>risks associated with eating junk food.
Oh? Have you seen any of the current literature on what kinds of food
DEVELOPING CHILDREN eat? The rise in childhood obesity and the high
fat and salt intake? By your analogy, we should indeed forbid anyone
under 18 from purchasing Doritos, and we should require moms to get a
prescription before they can bring home a box of Ho-Hos.
>I also
>think that for many women - the decision to formula
>feed is made after much soul-searching and is
>not as easy a decision as whether or not to have
>a hamburger or not.
In which case, getting a prescription is not going to help them choose
bf, is it? "Oh, all this reasons lead me to bottlefeed, but since I
have to get a prescription I won't do it." Huh?
>But I don't think we would need to put formula
>behind a prescription shelf - if we really
>put more emphasis on support, education
>and role-modeling for breastfeeding. If there
>was more support out there and if we saw
>women breastfeeding all the time - as we
>grew up - it would become the "norm" rather
>than the exception....and then formula could
>stay on the shelves as much as it wanted
>to - but it would only be used rarely - rather
>than often.
Exactly.
>Anyways - enough blabbering on my part - but I also
>see where you are coming from - and you may be
>right - it may turn out in practice - to be
>completely ridiculous and very difficult to
>manage.
Yes to both of those things. And, as I mentioned in a different post,
it would likely ENCOURAGE bottlefeeding.
Laurel Halbany
"Erin Johnson" <er...@pacifier.com> wrote:
>I only suggest making formula by prescription
>to give people pause for thought. It's not the "same" as breastmilk and
>therefore, a new mom should think for a while before making a decision.
>It's just too easy to buy it and not try nursing first.
How insulting of you to assume that moms DON'T already give pause for
thought, and that requiring them to turn to a doctor for permission to
bottlefeed is necessary to get them to use their brains.
I find it highly ironic that some of the same people who encourage
women's empowerment, education about our bodies, and taking control
over childbearing and rearing instead of being subservient to doctors,
are the same ones insisting that women who bottlefeed ought to turn
over the final decision on how their baby will be fed to their OB's
discretion.
This is a mean-spirited, ill-conceived, and unworkable idea.
Glenn and Susan Kraft
Maybe I have missed something... But isn't the idea here that there are
some studies that say that breast is better. FINE! Give it a rest.
Formula is now, has been for years and will continue to be, an option in
feeding the babies of this world. Not all babies take to breast
feeding, nor do all mothers - first timers or not. And further,
lactation consultants can't solve every problem. It is time that you
agree to disagree and move on. You have made a point, over and over,
but it is still an opinion (just as this is). I for one (and I am
probably not alone) look to this group for advise and kinship. Why tear
that apart??
Laurel Halbany
sst...@tiger.lsu.edu (Shannon Lea Stelly) wrote:
>I'm not sold on the prescription idea myself, but.... Can't you call in
>a prescription? Your grocery is a lot quicker than mine if you can get
>in and out in 1 minute or less. And don't most grocery stores now have
>pharmacies, as do Wal-Mart, K-Mart, etc-- it's pretty easy to drop a
>prescription off and do other shopping. I don't remember when I last
>went to a drug store for a prescription--I get them all filled at the
>grocery store. Even if it's not time for a shopping trip, I usually can
>pick up one or two things while it's being filled.
Fine for those who live near a drugstore, don't have to worry about
transportation, and have the time to wait around.
J. Rachael Hamlet
rb...@facstaff.wisc.edu (R.Bull/B.Bauer) wrote:
> Dave & Colette <lnrp...@ripco.com> wrote:
>
<snip>
>> since many problems are cause by hospital policies like early
>> separation, lavaging (is that the correct term?) to check for meconium
>> (this is sticking a tube down the baby's throat and sucking out
>> all the esophogeal contents, often down to the stomach; many women don't
>> even realize it's been done and when the baby is returned it's less
>> inclined to nurse)
>And back to the lavage issue: I have never seen
>gastric lavage done except in cases where there is suspicion of infection,
>and the gastric sample is obtained in order to culture for what bacteria
>is present (gastric aspirate should be sterile if no infection), or when
>there is meconium present.
I think Colette was referring to aggressive suctioning, which in some hospitals
seems to be done on most babies, regardless of whether or not they appear to
have aspirated meconium. Lactation consultants see the results of such
suctioning: babies who are so orally aversive that some of them won't even
take a bottle, much less a breast. Some of these babies never get to
breastfeed because they are so traumatized by the intrusion into their mouths
that they cannot be taught to take the enough of the breast into their mouths
to nurse. In light of the importance of breastfeeding, and the impact of the
routine use of this procedure I think that there should be clear guidelines on
when the benefits of suctioning outweigh the trauma to the baby and the risk of
losing the breastfeeding relationship.
J.Rachael Hamlet
e-mail: acti...@clark.net
Visit The Breastfeeding Advocacy Page at
http://www.clark.net/pub/activist/bfpage/bfpage.html
lil
I think it's rather moot to argue about making formula a prescription-based
food because, frankly, it's never going to happen. The formula companies
are too large and too powerful to allow this to happen. If the tobacco and
alcohol companies have gotten away for years knowing full well that their
products *have* been proven to harm people but they are still allowed to
remain on the market with only a few restrictions, who's going to ban
advertising or open-market sales by the formula companies when their
product is only an alternative to breastfeeding? Yes, we can all band
together to persuade the FDA to make formula prescription-based but *why*
when my main concern is to keep my child from getting his hands on tobacco
and alcohol before the legal age?
-lil
ld...@nmsu.edu
Susanne Bullo
| Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
| > npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
|
| > >Ummm.... are you not familiar with the concept of 'refills'? Your
| > >headache analogy is a good one. Many people with migraines do not get
| > >relief from standard OTC drugs like asprin or tylenol. The doctor
writes
| > >a prescrition for an appopriate drug. THe patient keeps a bottle at
hand,
| > >to use when she feels a migraine coming on. When the bottle runs out,
she
| > >gets it refilled. She does NOT have to go to the doctor, or even the
drug
| > >store, everytime she gets a headache. Similarly, the formula feeding
| > >mother would not have to go to the drugstore for a bottle of formula
| > >everytime feeding time rolled around.
|
| > No, just anytime she ran out of formula. Have you ever run out of
| > diapers, or aspirin, in the middle of the night?
|
| Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
| be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at 2
| a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem. In any case, the worse
| that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
| drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
| formula refilled.
So, you're saying it's perfectly ok to let your baby be hungry for 6-7
hours until the store opens??? That is one thing I have never done. And,
as awful as it may sound, many parents (especially new ones) *are* a bit
unorganized. It happens.
(remainder of post deleted because I only wanted to address one issue)
Spiros Triantafyllopou
naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
: Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
: a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem. In any case, the worse
You ignore really basic things here, Naomi.
First of all, you still have not answered the major point, being, that
prescriptizing anything, be it dental floss or the birth control pill,
hikes its price into stardom. "The bitches can pay" (your favorite
answer) is not a good one.
Second, the strategy above deletes all competition in pricing. Since
you live in Indiana you may know the stores I'm talking about. When we
were helping build a new Similac plant a few years ago, we noticed
that formula prices varied wildly, not only among stores, but among
different locations of the same store. "The bitches can pay", right.
Another thing is the quantities involved. In case you haven't noticed,
most stores limit the amount you can buy for formula to about a case per
visit. Even with that in mind, our favorite store for low priced
formula would run out once in a while (because most kids born
here were born in St. Someone Hospital, whose formula feeders
recommend Similac (hilarious to see *all* Similac GONE and no
other brand touched :-). If the store has to STOCK enough,
that means more costs to the consumers ("the bitches can pay
again") and major inconvenience to the parents.
: Since babies normally drink formula for a year, I would imagine that any
: prescirption for formula would be refillable for a full 12 months, so you
: would NEVER need to return to the doctor just to get a new prescirpition.
You *really* don't get it, Naomi. Prescription drugs have a fairly
well defined usage pattern "2 of this every day". With Formula,
it is impossible to predict a pattern. I don't know of very many
prescriptions that are open-ended (i.e. all you can consume).
: No, make it harder to get. That will encourage mothers to try a little
: harder... or try at all, rather than immediately rushing out for formula.
You mean, like the war on drugs?
: According to your logic, we'd better make amoxicillan
: available at the grocery stores. After all, we can't expect a new mother
: to be able to
: take her baby to the doctor every time he gets an ear infection...
Another synaptic failure... Did the word 'dosage' ever come up in
conversation, or you're just arguing for the fun of it?
naomi pardue
Spiros Triantafyllopou (stri...@expert.cc.purdue.edu) wrote:
> naomi pardue (npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu) wrote:
> : Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
> : be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at 2
> : a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem. In any case, the worse
>
> You ignore really basic things here, Naomi.
>
> First of all, you still have not answered the major point, being, that
> prescriptizing anything, be it dental floss or the birth control pill,
> hikes its price into stardom. "The bitches can pay" (your favorite
> answer) is not a good one.
Last I checked, formula has already been priced into stardom. Also, last
I checked, some prescrition drugs (amoxicillan comes to mind) are dirt
cheap.
>
> Second, the strategy above deletes all competition in pricing. Since
> you live in Indiana you may know the stores I'm talking about. When we
> were helping build a new Similac plant a few years ago, we noticed
> that formula prices varied wildly, not only among stores, but among
> different locations of the same store. "The bitches can pay", right.
>
Which is relevent to what? If you cant afford the formula prices at your
local store, you can drive to another, just as you do now.
> : Since babies normally drink formula for a year, I would imagine that any
> : prescirption for formula would be refillable for a full 12 months, so you
> : would NEVER need to return to the doctor just to get a new prescirpition.
>
> You *really* don't get it, Naomi. Prescription drugs have a fairly
> well defined usage pattern "2 of this every day". With Formula,
> it is impossible to predict a pattern. I don't know of very many
> prescriptions that are open-ended (i.e. all you can consume).
FIrst of all, babies DO drink a fairly well defined quantity. It is a
rare baby who drinks 12 ounces a day for 6 months, then suddenly incrases
to 50 ounces a day. In reality, baby may drink 20 ounces today, 22 ounces
tomorrow, maybe 15 ounces the next day, then back up to 20 again.
As for open-ended... I have gotten some like this. My prescriptions for
cortisone lotions have specified unlimited refills for 12 months (since
my eczema varies widely in severity.) When I was on fertility drugs,
dosage varied, so I could get as many ampules as I needed in any given
month.
For formula you would need some sort of upper limit, to minimize
black-market sales, but that limit would cover the maximum needs of
any given baby. (And if you have a REALLY huge baby and find that your
years allotment has run out by 10 months, a call to the doctor would
solve the problem.)
> : According to your logic, we'd better make amoxicillan
> : available at the grocery stores. After all, we can't expect a new mother
> : to be able to
> : take her baby to the doctor every time he gets an ear infection...
>
> Another synaptic failure... Did the word 'dosage' ever come up in
> conversation, or you're just arguing for the fun of it?
What's the problem? The appropriate dosage of amoxicillan could be
written right on the bottle... just as the appropriate dosage of Tylenol
is written on the bottle.
Naomi
Dave & Colette
First of all, let me say that I see both sides of the issue. I
can see how maybe making formula available for prescription might
make some women try harder to breastfeed. OTOH, I don't necessarily
think that doctors, in general, know enough about breastfeeding to
be good judges about whether or not a woman is doing things correctly
(i.e. positioning, frequency, how to get a baby to latch-on). Also,
since many problems are cause by hospital policies like early
separation, lavaging (is that the correct term?) to check for meconium
(this is sticking a tube down the baby's throat and sucking out
all the esophogeal contents, often down to the stomach; many women don't
even realize it's been done and when the baby is returned it's less
sugarwater or pacifiers while the baby is in the nursery (or do it w/o
the mom knowing), periodic separation -- all of those things can lead to
troubles in the beginning. I realize things are improving, but that's
still the norm in many hospitals, and change is slow in happening in
such institutions. So why should we depend on the establishement that
so often thwarts the breastfeeding relationship to begin with to judge
whether or not a woman needs formula?
It seems to me that the women who post here, just by the fact that they
are in a newsgroup like this, have taken the time to do at lest some
research regarding infant feeding and realize that breastmilk is better.
But I don't think that most women in the U.S. (mind you I live in a
mixed inner-city neighborhood, so I probably see more ignorant things
going on than a lot of you reading this, and that may taint my
viewpoint) really know what the facts are. They really are not educated
about how beneficial breastmilk is, and they are not receiving any kind
of support to even try breastfeeding. Would those women benefit from
having much more compelling reasons to try, like having formula only
available by prescription? Probably, but again, how many doctors
truly can evaluate breastfeeding problems accurately and offer necessary
help?
ld...@nmsu.edu (lil) wrote:
>Hypothetically speaking, IF formula was made a substance one could only >getby prescription, what would that do to all the women out there who
>*don't* have health insurance coverage in any way--and let's just say
>that they were unable to bf for one reason or another. Keep in mind
>that not everyone is covered by Medicaid or qualifies for foodstamps or
>any other type of help.
What do they do now? Formula is pretty darn expensive, and WIC is
one of the easiest programs to qualify for.
>These people are also working at jobs where they can't afford to be
>running to the doctor every time they need formula
I got a 12 month refill for the birth control pill when I was on it,
and children only need formula for one year of life, so no one would
not have to run to the doctor 'every time they need[ed] formula."
>or where no type of
>insurance is provided by their employer. What would these women do?
Again, what do they do now? Do you mean that you think by making
formula a prescription, the price would go up? [I'm not saying it
wouldn't; I guess if one thinks about it, it probably would.] For those
who are really poor, in my county, they can get hooked up with the
county hospital clinics, where prespscriptions are filled for very
little money or for free (on a sliding scale).
>What
>about men/younger siblings who are caring for a baby for one reason or
>another yet have no health coverage? These people do exist btw. I live >in a border town where it is *very* common to see this situation.
And I live in a racially and economically mixed "changing" neighborhood
with lots of poor people; they seem to manage to buy lots of junk
food and formula (from what I see in their carts at the grocery store).
[BTW - I don't think food stamps should be used for gum, candy, ice
cream, soda, or entenmann's, but they can be, and it's quite common to see people use food stamps to buy tons of junk food at my neighborhood
grocery store. I think people should be allowed to buy diapers and
toilet paper and soap with food stamps, but they can't. At least with
WIC, people can onlyuse the vouchers to buy basically nutritious foods and formula.] I think out system is too screwed up to rely on them to
judge who should and should not get formula. While, in theory I can see
the advantages to such a system, I don't think it would ever really
work.
Colette (mom to Amy, a beautiful homebirthed 23 m/o)
(and Jumping Jack who is expected sometime in late December!)
"Nature can provide for the needs of people; [she] can't provide for
the greeds of people." - Mohandas K. Gandhi
naomi pardue
Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>
> >in a factory. But it would not be impossible.
> >Of course most doctors would be sympathetic to such a situation and
> >willingly write the prescription, if asked, so the woman could still
> >happily formula feed.
>
> I believe you are one of the people who mentions that doctors are
> often quite ignorant about BF. Don't you think that, in this
> situation, the doctor would be *less* likely to give help about
> pumping and *more* likely to just write out a prescription and say
> "Here, get some Enfamil"?
>
combination with an education program for physicians, so they would be
willing and able to help women learn to bf, rather than just handing out
prescriptions.
> I think we also need to get away from issues of 'convenience.' That
> makes it sounds as though a mom is just too busy buffing her nails in
> the lunchroom when she could be pumping. A hostile workplace, poor
> facilities, poor storage, less-than-perfect pumping equipment,
> irregular breaks and working hours, DAY AFTER DAY, can affect not only
> the ability to pump, but let-down and milk supply. (And let's not
> forget that if you're using your breaks to pump, you're not using them
> to eat or drink.)
Yes. And some women in such work situations would find it impossible to
pump (Though they might be able to bf part time, esp. if they are able to
take a reasonable maternity leave.) And yes, I absolutely agree that more
supportive workplaces are of vital importance.
However, an unsupportive workplace still only makes it more difficult to
pump, not impossible. A bathroom is not the most pleasant place to pump,
but one can do it. Breastmilk keeps at room temp for 8 hours or more, so
storage shouldn't be an issue.
An unsupportive work situation is an obstacle. As with many obstacles,
some women are willing and able to overcome them. Other women are not.
(And, as will many obstacles, for wome women the willingness is what is
lacking, for others, the ability.)
> > The solution is to make it easier for
moms to pump at work, not to > make it harder for them to get formula.
>
> >Well, if they can afford to pay for formula at the grocery, then they can
> >afford to pay the insurance co-pay for prescription formula at the drug
> >store.
>
> Assuming they have insurance--a rather big assumption on your part.
>
But if they don't have insurance, they are doing exactly what they were
doing before; paying for formula out-of-pocket.
Naomi
Anna Fiehler
Laurel Halbany wrote:
> (And let's not
> forget that if you're using your breaks to pump, you're not using them
> to eat or drink.)
Have you pumped? I eat, drink, read, knit, or even do paper work while
pumping without a problem. I don't have the 'hands-free' stuff,
I just sit close enough to the desk so that it holds everything in
place. Even if you can't use the desk to do this, you still have
at least one hand free.
Anna S. & Declan W. (20 OCT 95) & ? (Due late June 97)
--
==================================================================
Anna S. Fiehler | afie...@mathworks.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
The MathWorks, Inc. | email: in...@mathworks.com
24 Prime Park Way | WWW : http://www.mathworks.com
Natick, MA 01760-1500 | FTP : ftp.mathworks.com
------------------------------------------------------------------
"Life is like a sewer, what you get out of it depends on what you
put into it." - Tom Lehrer
==================================================================
Spiros Triantafyllopou
naomi pardue (npa...@indiana.edu) wrote:
: Last I checked, formula has already been priced into stardom. Also, last
I.e. The "the bitches can pay" argument.
: Which is relevent to what? If you cant afford the formula prices at your
: local store, you can drive to another, just as you do now.
Adding to time wasted, right. Not only "the bitches can pay", but
they can drive their Lexus all around town, too.
: FIrst of all, babies DO drink a fairly well defined quantity. It is a
: rare baby who drinks 12 ounces a day for 6 months, then suddenly incrases
: to 50 ounces a day. In reality, baby may drink 20 ounces today, 22 ounces
: tomorrow, maybe 15 ounces the next day, then back up to 20 again.
Meaning that you can't really predict accurately till you're done
feeding (1 year). Modeling the above is exactly what I do at school this
semester; I have all my daughter's feeding records, and while there
are some *trends* predicting amounts for this *week* is hard. Add solid
feedings to the equation and it's even more entertaining.
(wouldn't this be an interesting project... model formula usage :-)
: > Another synaptic failure... Did the word 'dosage' ever come up in
: > conversation, or you're just arguing for the fun of it?
: What's the problem? The appropriate dosage of amoxicillan could be
: written right on the bottle... just as the appropriate dosage of Tylenol
: is written on the bottle.
You *are* arguing for the fun of it. Why don't you call the FDA and ask
why antibiotics are not OTC? 'cause of things like dosage (proportional
to things like severity, age, weight, etc, not some general Tylenol like
guidelines.
It's a lost cause to argue with you, of course...
Mary Beth Williams
In <550mr0$j...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
(naomi pardue) writes:
>
>Ummmm.... they'd do the same thing they do now. They'd go to the store
and
>buy formula. The only difference would be that they would get it at
the
>drug-store, rather than the grocery store or walmart. And, they would
>need to consult their doctor for a prescription. (However, this does
not
>mean running to the doctor EVERY TIME they need a new can. They would
>consult him ONCE (probably at a normal well-baby visit, or even in the
>hospital after giving birth), and get a refillable prescription good
for
>the first year.)
> Presumably even those men who are caring for babies
>would be taking their babies to pediatricians for regular visits.
It seems to me that your intention is not only to make it more
difficult to purchase, but more expensive as well, by giving drugstores
a monopoly.
I also don't think that you're thinking about this very rationally...
Formula is considered a *foodstuff*, and by requiring a prescription
for food, you're opening up an entire Pandora's box regarding federal
regulation -- heck, its been hard enough to get herbal *remedies*
regulated (not to mention the flack over nicotine)... How do expect
people will react to a having what they see as a *common* food
regulated to the point that you need a prescription to obtain it.
MB (mom to Phelan (12/20/85) and Sarah Grace (9/13/96))
Mary Beth Williams
In <54ro0a$8...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
(naomi pardue) writes:
>
>Sharon McKenna (smck...@hr.house.gov) wrote:
>> --
>> The opinions expressed are my own.
>> I feel I need to chime in on this thread because of how tangential
it
>> has become. A prescription for formula? Towards what end? To make
it
>> more difficult for those mothers who have chosen not (or physically
are
>> unable) to breastfeed? Isn't having an infant to contend with
difficult
>> enough? And what about those families that do not have insurance?
It
>> is a silly thought and I cannot believe I am prolonging this thread
by
>> commenting on it. Amazing.
>
>But I just cannot see how
>> a prescription for formula will have any positive effect. Is it
>> just me? Am I missing some crucial piece of information?
>
>As I noted in my first post on the thread, it would probably have
minimal
>effect, becuase the large majority of doctors would happily write a
>prescrition for any mother who asked for one.
>However, ideally it would have some positive effect. It would require
a
>woman to talk to her doctor about her infant feeding choices. If her
>choice was to formula feed, ideally her doctor would discuss it with
her,
>and find if her choice was based on misinformation, and hopefully
>breastfeeding, it would require her to get help and try to solve the
>problem, rathe than just dahsing out to the store for formula.
>
>This is, in general, a good thing. It may slightly inconvenience some
>mothers, but surely being inconvenienced for a good cause is
worthwhile.
>(It is inconventient for me to take Shaina to the doctor when she is
>sick. But I do so becuase it is important for her health.)
>I also believe that you are overestimating the level of inconveneine
that
>would be involved.
>
>I don't think any of use are actually ADVOCATING making formula
available
>by prescription only. We are only noting that it is not an absurd, or
>impossibly inconvienient thing if it were to come about.
>
>Naomi
(I'm typing one-handed as I breastfeed my 7 week old, btw...)
The problem I have with this line of thinking is that it seems to be a
reversal from what we're attempting during pregnancy, i.e., moving
_away_ from the *medical establishment* and trusting ourselves as women
to make responsible _choices_... Yes, we all know that *breastfeeding
is best*... In my own mind, I also feel that natural childbirth is
best, but I'm certainly not going to require women who want epidurals
to go through extensive counselling in order to get one... Its a
personal choice, and one that I'm willing to assume that the other
person has thought about.
Lets be honest, here, breastfeeding can be a pain...Constantly leaking,
not getting enough sleep, engorgement, struggling with a pump, lack of
sexual interest, etc., etc., etc.... Its not all fun and cuddles... I
breastfeed, and will continue to do so until we decide next spring to
get pregnant again, but its not a bowl of cherries, with either this
child or my first. And this child won't take expressed milk from a
bottle, but will take formula, so the idea that if I want to subliment
for any reason (trip to the store w/o baby, a few hours uninterrupted
sleep, chance for the DH to feed, etc.) I have to get a prescription
from my health care provider is both annoying and time consuming... I
should be trusted with making the decision... I was trusted with
*growing* the baby, making the decisions on how to have her born, and
so should be trusted with making the decisions on how best to nourish
her after her birth.
If we assume that a doctor will just whip out their prescription pad if
a woman asks for formula, why make her go thru the hassle in the first
place... Why make her decision subordinate to the medical
professionals? I thought we were trying to empower women...Why not
just provide as much information as possible and trust her to make the
best decision.
MB, mom to Cathering *Phelan* (12/20/85) and Sarah *Grace* (9/13/96)
naomi pardue
Mary Beth Williams (mbwi...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
> In <550mr0$j...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu
>
> It seems to me that your intention is not only to make it more
> difficult to purchase, but more expensive as well, by giving drugstores
> a monopoly.
A monopoly? If anything, there are many more drugstores in most
communities than there are grocery stores. Every major grocery in town
ALSO has a pharmacy. In most communities (I haven't paid attention here),
many of the discount stores (Walmart and the like) also have pharmacy
counters. Plus there are all the free-standing drug stores.
>
> regulated (not to mention the flack over nicotine)... How do expect
> people will react to a having what they see as a *common* food
> regulated to the point that you need a prescription to obtain it.
>
Perhaps the idea here is to make formula a little bit LESS *common* a
food....
Naomi
naomi pardue
Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
> npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>
> >happy to write such a prescription for any woman who asked, so it would
> >do little or nothing to increase the incidence of breastfeeding. (And
> >some women would just resort to feeding home-made formulas, which are
> >even less desirable than commercial ones.)
>
> Bingo!
>
> Let alone the fact that some doctors would give these prescriptions
> UNASKED. How many new, scared moms are going to tell their doctor to
> take back a *prescription*
While many pediatricians are not especially supportive of bf, or are
happy to let the mother make whatever choice she prefers without
argument, I have run across none who are actually opposed to bf, and
would insist that all their patients feed formula.
And frankly, if a 'scared new mother' is really ignorant about the
benefits of bf, I don't see how
handing her a prescription would be any worse than just telling her to
wean and give her baby formula.
> Y'know, one thing I think some of the 'prescription for formula'
> advocates are missing here is that bottlefeeding really isn't easy or
> convenient. (Maybe since many of them never tried it!)
>
> Sure, it seems like it at first--when you're just establishing bf. But
> think about all the equipment you need--bottles, nipples, a brush,
> pots for sterilizing, caps, maybe those plastic bottles. If you buy
> ready-made it's damned expensive; if you don't you have to worry about
> mixing everything correctly and probably need to pay for pure water
> too.
>
You are correct the bottlefeeding isn't necessarily more convenient
(though in my community, tap water is acceptable and no sterilzation is
needed, so it's just a matter of mixing formula in a bottle). However,
once the mtoher realizes that ff isn't as convenient as she'd hoped, it's
pretty much too late to go back. Even if her milk supply hasn't dried up,
her baby is probably well trained to the bottle nipple, and trying to
relactate/retrain would be even more inconvenient that ff. (And, of
course, everyone TELLS mothers that ff is so much more convenient, so
they are more likely to assume that the hassles of ff are just a normal
part of parenting, while the hassles of bf are a terrible sacrifice...)
Naomi
naomi pardue
Spiros Triantafyllopou (stri...@expert.cc.purdue.edu) wrote:
> naomi pardue (npa...@indiana.edu) wrote:
> : FIrst of all, babies DO drink a fairly well defined quantity. It is a
> : rare baby who drinks 12 ounces a day for 6 months, then suddenly incrases
> : to 50 ounces a day. In reality, baby may drink 20 ounces today, 22 ounces
> : tomorrow, maybe 15 ounces the next day, then back up to 20 again.
>
> Meaning that you can't really predict accurately till you're done
> feeding (1 year). Modeling the above is exactly what I do at school this
> semester; I have all my daughter's feeding records, and while there
> are some *trends* predicting amounts for this *week* is hard. Add solid
> feedings to the equation and it's even more entertaining.
Wrong. Meaning that you CAN predict that, if you have 4 cans of powdered
formula in your cupboard today, it is HIGHLY unlikely that your baby is
suddenly going to drain all 4 cans before tomorrow, and you will find
yourself with an empty cupboard at midnight, and a baby who will then
scream until the store opens at 8 a.m. Meaning that you know that, in the
above example, your young baby seems to average around 20 ounces of
formula per day, and if she increases her need, it will be gradual enough
that you won't find yourself totally without formula at 2 a.m., becuase
your baby suddenly ate every drop you had in the house.
Meaning that you will quickly grasp a rough sense of how often you will
need to go to the drug-store, and how many cans/cases you will need to
buy, to last you until your next visit.
I don't know about you, but I have never bought supplies (diapers,
babyfood, diaper wipes, or anything else) one at a time, as I needed
them.
Meaning that the doctor
could make a reasonable assumption, based on milllions of other babies,
what the MAXIMUM number of cans you will need over the course of the year
will be, and that, if you have an uncommonly hungry baby and purchase
your maximum allotment at 10 months, you can call the doctor and have him
phone in an extension for you.
> : > Another synaptic failure... Did the word 'dosage' ever come up in
> : > conversation, or you're just arguing for the fun of it?
>
> : What's the problem? The appropriate dosage of amoxicillan could be
> : written right on the bottle... just as the appropriate dosage of Tylenol
> : is written on the bottle.
>
> You *are* arguing for the fun of it. Why don't you call the FDA and ask
> why antibiotics are not OTC? 'cause of things like dosage (proportional
> to things like severity, age, weight, etc, not some general Tylenol like
> guidelines.
First of all, I am debating for the fun of it, not becuase I'm going to
march out tomorrow and lobby congress for formula-by-prescription.
Second of all, dosages aren't THAT carefully titrated. You have pretty
basic doses for most drugs, based on the weight of the child, and the
severity of the infection. The tylenol bottle also gives doses by weight.
Ear infections that respond to amoxicillan are pretty much 'non-severe'
infections.
Hmmm... I just pulled 'PDR Generics' off the shelf. Under 'dosage' it
says:
"Dosage and administration for pediatric drops. Usual dosage for all
indications except infections of the lower respiratory tract:
under 6 kg. .75 ml every 8 hours.
6-7 kg. 1 ml. every 8 hours
8 kg. 1.25 kg. every 8 hours.
[Then gives dosage for respirator infections.]
Dosage for older children is simply 20 mg/kg/day in divided doses, 40
mg/kg/day for respiratory infections...and, of course, the doses are
rounded off to the nearest few kgs, since the pediatrician has never
weighed Shaina immediately prior to writing the prescrition.
No reason on earth such info could not be printed on a bottle of OTC
antibiotics.
So tell me again, why is it so much more impossibly inconvenient to
expect a mother to go to her doctor for advice on feeding than it is to
expect her to go for a prescription to treat an infection?
Naomi
Shannon Lea Stelly
: >The main PROBLEM with such an idea is that most doctors would be only too
: >happy to write such a prescription for any woman who asked, so it would
: >do little or nothing to increase the incidence of breastfeeding. (And
: >some women would just resort to feeding home-made formulas, which are
: >even less desirable than commercial ones.)
: Bingo!
: Let alone the fact that some doctors would give these prescriptions
: UNASKED. How many new, scared moms are going to tell their doctor to
: take back a *prescription*?
All you'd have to do is NOT FILL IT. There's no need for the doctor to
give it back. I suspect some doctors would give them out to everyone
"just in case." I've had docs give me prescriptions "just in case," a
couple for codeine after dental work come to mind, that I never filled.
My OB gave me a painkiller prescription while pregnant--never filled it
either. Is this terribly uncommon?
Shannon
Shannon Lea Stelly
4p01h$2k...@tiger2.ocs.lsu.edu> <3274de0e...@hermes.rdrop.com>:
Distribution:
Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
: sst...@tiger.lsu.edu (Shannon Lea Stelly) wrote:
: >I'm not sold on the prescription idea myself, but.... Can't you call in
: >a prescription? Your grocery is a lot quicker than mine if you can get
: >in and out in 1 minute or less. And don't most grocery stores now have
: >pharmacies, as do Wal-Mart, K-Mart, etc-- it's pretty easy to drop a
: >prescription off and do other shopping. I don't remember when I last
: >went to a drug store for a prescription--I get them all filled at the
: >grocery store. Even if it's not time for a shopping trip, I usually can
: >pick up one or two things while it's being filled.
: Fine for those who live near a drugstore, don't have to worry about
: transportation, and have the time to wait around.
Did you read what I just wrote?
Um, my point was that in MANY areas it's possible to get a prescription
filled somewhere OTHER than a drugstore. Namely, grocery stores, places
like Wal-Mart, etc. Places where many people buy formula now. And by
getting formula at these places, where you'll be shopping anyway, you
don't have to "wait around" because you can do other shopping--if you
don't call the prescription in. And I fail to see how finding
transportation to a drugstore (even if you have to go there) is
automatically more difficult than going to a grocery store (and I live in
a city with atrocious mass transit, so I know getting around can be
hard--I just haven't noticed that drugstores, or grocery stores with
pharmacies, are noticably less accessible).
As I said, I'm not a big fan of the prescription idea. For one thing, I
think most docs would offer prescriptions so easily that it wouldn't
increase breastfeeding rates much if at all (if docs really supported
breastfeeding, I suspect rates would go up without the prescription
idea). But I don't think it would make life nearly as inconvenient as
people are claiming.
Shannon
Laurel Halbany
"David Innes" <dav...@msn.com> wrote:
>My two cents? Don't post lame flame bait. Be creative and say something
>even more stupid like "Circumcision is a giant plot by the formula
>companies -- once circumcised, men are never able to breast fed their
>babies."
You need to throw in something about disposable diapers and spanking,
too. Maybe 'Circumcision is a giant plot by the formula companies to
trick fathers into thinking they can't breastfeed--so they work
outside the home and put their kids into daycare in order to pay for
the disposable diapers, instead of staying home full-time and spanking
the kids when needed." :*
Cinnamon Minx
First David sez:
> >My two cents? Don't post lame flame bait. Be creative and say something
> >even more stupid like "Circumcision is a giant plot by the formula
> >companies -- once circumcised, men are never able to breast fed their
> >babies."
Then Laurel sez:
> You need to throw in something about disposable diapers and spanking,
> too. Maybe 'Circumcision is a giant plot by the formula companies to
> trick fathers into thinking they can't breastfeed--so they work
> outside the home and put their kids into daycare in order to pay for
> the disposable diapers, instead of staying home full-time and spanking
> the kids when needed." :*
Thanks for the giggle. I really needed that. ;-)
Jennifer (in Boston)
Due 10/16, but convinced that I'll be pregnant *forever*
Laurel Halbany
>naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote: in article
>|Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
>|be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at 2
>|a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem.
It only needs to happen ONCE to be a problem, Naomi. And it's the
baby's problem, too.
> In any case, the worse
> that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
> drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
> formula refilled.
The baby STARVES during the night, you mean. "Sorry, kid, have some
evaporated milk to tide you over the next eight hours." Huh?
Susanne Bullo
Laurel Halbany <myt...@agora.rdrop.com> wrote in article
<32771217...@hermes.rdrop.com>...
> >naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote: in article
>
> >|Actually, I haven't. And I really can't imagine that many parents would
> >|be THAT disorganized that they are constantly running out of formla at
2
> >|a.m. If they are, perhaps that's their problem.
>
> It only needs to happen ONCE to be a problem, Naomi. And it's the
> baby's problem, too.
I was thinking that it must be *wonderful* to always be perfectly
organized. I'm not and it's always been that way. It's only going to get
worse with the new baby on the way. Can you imagine having a 6+ months
supply of formula in your house? I have barely enough room for me, my
hubby and my toddler now as it is!
> > In any case, the worse
> > that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
> > drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
> > formula refilled.
>
> The baby STARVES during the night, you mean. "Sorry, kid, have some
> evaporated milk to tide you over the next eight hours." Huh?
This is the question I asked as well. 2 am you realize "oh god! out of
formula" and your little one is going to wait patiently until 8-9 am, yeah
right....
Sheri Durham
Spiros Triantafyllopou <stri...@expert.cc.purdue.edu> wrote in article <
<MAJOR SNIPPAGE>
> Another synaptic failure... Did the word 'dosage' ever come up in
> conversation, or you're just arguing for the fun of it?
>
> Spiros
> --
> [+=] EMAIL: stri...@indy.net URL:
http://expert.cc.purdue.edu/~strianta
> Graduate Student (CEE), Human Factors Engineering, Purdue
University
> Actively pursuing the 3 R's (Reading, 'Rithmetic, and Readnews) since
1983
What do you think WIC is, if not a "prescription" for formula? You get a
set amount each month, that's it. The "dosage" is very simple; if you over
feed formula to a baby you can cause kidney failure due to the high sodium
content. You simply DO NOT give the baby over X oz/per day. This is why
formula fed babies (unlike breastfed babies) need water.
Formula is already subsidized to the poor; why should it matter if it comes
via Medicaid or WIC?
Sheri
mom to Adrian 3-23-92
wife to Jon since 8-2-96
trying for number two!
L&M
lil wrote:
>
> Hypothetically speaking, IF formula was made a substance one could only get
> by prescription, what would that do to all the women out there who *don't*
> have health insurance coverage in any way--and let's just say that they
> were unable to bf for one reason or another. Keep in mind that not everyone
> is covered by Medicaid or qualifies for foodstamps or any other type of
> running to the doctor every time they need formula or where no type of
> insurance is provided by their employer. What would these women do?
Well, they could breastfeed...
The paradox of formula: Somehow even the poorest parents can afford it,
yet they cannot afford to take their children to the doctor for
check-ups, immunizations, routine illnesses.
Lori
L&M
L&M wrote:
>
> lil wrote:
> >
> > Hypothetically speaking, IF formula was made a substance one could only get
> > by prescription, what would that do to all the women out there who *don't*
> > have health insurance coverage in any way--and let's just say that they
> > were unable to bf for one reason or another.
woops.
I guess in this case these women should really rethink their inability
to breastfeed.
Seriously, the number of women who actually cannot breastfeed is so low,
this scenario isn't worth pondering. I mean, there's always the county
health department, isn't there?
per...@ere.umontreal.ca
curious as to if there is as much venom for women who are unable to bf as
for those who "simply" choose to ff. for instance, one of my friends had
a baby with a messed up digestive problems and he wouldn't take anything
but a formula that actually ended up being a prescription formula. he was
one miserable baby. my stepmom is a recovering anorexic who was very good
through pregnancy and had a fantastic OB who never ever put her on a scale
ONCE and had her seeing a great therapist... she ate well while
pregnant... but after james was born she just *couldn't* eat well enough
to make enough milk for him (although she was eating enough for her to
be.. "ok") so she had to switch him to a formula after a few months which
ended up also being a prescipt due to tummy problems.
oh yea, and could someone tell the poor innocent newbie (who plans on bf
and pumping so daddy can help too, and is very lucky enough to be stay at
home mommy) what is a family bed (I assume a big bed everyone sleeps in?)
and what does YMMV mean?
wendey
due with olivier 2/08
naomi pardue
Distribution:
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> Laurel Halbany <myt...@agora.rdrop.com> wrote in article
> <32771217...@hermes.rdrop.com>...
> > >naomi pardue <npa...@ezinfo.ucs.indiana.edu> wrote: in article
>
> I was thinking that it must be *wonderful* to always be perfectly
> organized. I'm not and it's always been that way. It's only going to get
> worse with the new baby on the way.
No, I'm not perfectly organized. (Take a look at my house sometime...;-))
But I do NOT routinely run out of things that I use on a many times daily
basis. I honestly do not understand how you could not NOTICE that you've
just opened the last can of formula, and not realize that you have
actually run out until you go to the cupboard at 2 a.m. and find it
empty.
Can you imagine having a 6+ months
> supply of formula in your house? I have barely enough room for me, my
> hubby and my toddler now as it is!
>
Then you wouldn't buy a 6 month supply. You would do what most mothers do
today, and buy a week's supply, or a month's, or whatever you find
convenient. The point was that if you WERE in a sitatuion where you
coldn't possibly get to the drugstore on a regular basis for refills, you
COULD, if you chose, buy a 6 months supply. Since I live 5 blocks from
the nearest Kroger pharmacy, and about a mile from the nearest Revco, if
I were in a position to feed formula and it WERE a prescription only
item, I would probably buy it weekly, or thereabouts.
>
> This is the question I asked as well. 2 am you realize "oh god! out of
> formula" and your little one is going to wait patiently until 8-9 am, yeah
> right....
No, he won't wait patiently. But I suspect that you will suffer more than
he will, and that will teach you to keep a better eye on your supplies.
(Like an old friend of mine once said, 'Life teaches us lessons. If we
don't learn them the first time, they come around again...")
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
L&M <mer...@teleport.com> wrote in article <3277D7...@teleport.com>...
> lil wrote:
> >
> > Hypothetically speaking, IF formula was made a substance one could only
get
> > by prescription, what would that do to all the women out there who
*don't*
> > have health insurance coverage in any way--and let's just say that they
everyone
> > is covered by Medicaid or qualifies for foodstamps or any other type of
> > help. These people are also working at jobs where they can't afford to
be
> > running to the doctor every time they need formula or where no type of
> > insurance is provided by their employer. What would these women do?
>
> Well, they could breastfeed...
Somehow, I think you missed that particular part of this post "...they were
unable to bf for one reason or another."
>
> The paradox of formula: Somehow even the poorest parents can afford it,
> yet they cannot afford to take their children to the doctor for
> check-ups, immunizations, routine illnesses.
>
> Lori
>
>
I could barely afford it. I was unable to breastfeed after 3 weeks and had
to switch to formula feeding. On top of this, I was working for a
temporary company and was unable to afford the insurance (over $100/month).
Somehow, I think if I had been forced to pay for formula via prescription,
I would have been in a world of hurt.
Spiros Triantafyllopou
L&M (mer...@teleport.com) wrote:
: The paradox of formula: Somehow even the poorest parents can afford it,
: yet they cannot afford to take their children to the doctor for
: check-ups, immunizations, routine illnesses.
That should convince you that the problem is deeper than skin-deep...
naomi pardue
> > that happens is that baby fusses during the night, and as soon as the
> > drug store opens at 8 a.m. you dash over to get your prescription for
> > formula refilled.
>
> The baby STARVES during the night, you mean. "Sorry, kid, have some
> evaporated milk to tide you over the next eight hours." Huh?
Sorry, I'm not familiar with any medical cases where a healthy well fed
baby starved to death from going without food for 8 hours. Lest we
forget, not so long ago babies were routinely left to scream for feedings
for 2-3 hours at a time, or longer (4 hour schedule and no night feedings
permitted. So if baby got hungry at midnight, (2 hours after his
scheduled 10 p.m. feed) he waiting until his next
scheduled feeding at 6 a.m.... night after night after night.) So I doubt
that one night of being hungry would cause lasting harm to a baby.
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
naomi pardue <npa...@indiana.edu> wrote in article
<5591de$1...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
I'm sorry but this doesn't seem to "jibe" with the attitude of caring and
making sure your baby is completely healthy and happy. Letting them go
without food for an extended period of time (such as 6-8 hours) borders on
child abuse in my mind.
naomi pardue
Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> naomi pardue <npa...@indiana.edu> wrote in article
> <5591de$1...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
> > baby starved to death from going without food for 8 hours. Lest we
> > forget, not so long ago babies were routinely left to scream for feedings
> > for 2-3 hours at a time, or longer (4 hour schedule and no night feedings
> > permitted. So if baby got hungry at midnight, (2 hours after his
> > scheduled 10 p.m. feed) he waiting until his next
> > scheduled feeding at 6 a.m.... night after night after night.) So I doubt
> > that one night of being hungry would cause lasting harm to a baby.
>
> making sure your baby is completely healthy and happy. Letting them go
> without food for an extended period of time (such as 6-8 hours) borders on
> child abuse in my mind.
>
babies go without food. (Though if there is no way to avoid it, I'd
hardly call it child abuse.)
I am certainly not RECOMMENDING that parents allow their
babies to be hungry for long periods. The point is only that IF it was
decided that formula by perscription was, in general, a good thing, and
IF it was decided that this was how things would be, the possiblity that
an occassional mother MIGHT find herself without formula at 2 a.m. due to
her own lack of forthought and carelessness would not be a pressing
reason to scrap the program.
After all, plenty of people live in communities without easy access to an
24 hour grocery stores. (Or in communities where it is highly unsafe to
go out in the middle of the night.)
So if THEY ran out of formula at 2 a.m.,
even with it available OTC, they would still have to wait until morning to
restock. The whole concept of 24 hour stores is a fairly recent one.
Even today there are going to be mothers who find themselves with a
hungry baby at 2 a.m. and no formula, and no easy way to get it.
Naomi
Laurel Halbany
npa...@indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>Sadly, some mothers (and some humans of all genders and family
>compositions) DON"T think about important choices. If you simply assume
>that everyone will seek out information and do their best to make
>eduated, informed choices without any help or encouragement, you end up
>with a lot of people making poor choices, becuase they don't have the
>time, interest, or ability to seek out the necessary info. Here on the
>net most of us are well informed, but even here there is much faulty
>information floating around. Less educated women have even less access to
>information. (A fact that is reflected in the far lower bf rates among
>poor and less educated women.)
So is the solution to restrict access to formula? That won't help: it
means that these same uninformed women will get prescriptions from
their uninformed doctors, and women who can't or won't will do equally
uninformed things like feeding their babies home-made 'formula'.
I really don't appreciate the straw-man argument of yours, Naomi. I
never said that I assume everybody knows enough to seek out all
information. Seems to me like THAT is the solution--to educate and
inform, so that women who don't know about bf as a choice can find out
about it. But restricting access to formula is NOT going to get
anybody informed. I mean, come on. "Oh, I have to get a prescription
for Enfamil. Guess I'll go look for an LLL consultant." Yeah, right!
Mary Beth Williams
In <3278EA...@hydro.on.ca> Mary Gordon <mary....@hydro.on.ca>
writes:
>Keep in mind that pumping and expressing are not a cakewalk and
>introducing bottles when you do not HAVE to can be part of the
slippery
>slope to earlier weaning than you may have planned. Most experts also
^^^^^^^
>suggest no bottles at all for at LEAST the first 12 weeks to avoid
nipple
>confusion, supply problems etc.
Yes, I know that, as a scientist, I'm a stickler for facts and
supported research, but I'd really love to see hard evidence for this,
as I've never yet heard, other than through heresay, of anyone whose
child suffered from *nipple* confusion.
Can anyone point me to published medical or scientific research which
support this, particularly since I've seen it claimed here on m.k.p.
that *confusion* rates run as high as 95%.
As I stated in another thread, by now a significant number of the BFing
moms on the September96-moms list have given EBM or formula bottles,
and none have complained of nipple confusion...Do we all fall into that
rare 5%?
MB
Susanne Bullo
> Distribution:
>
> Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> > Laurel Halbany <myt...@agora.rdrop.com> wrote in article
> > <32771217...@hermes.rdrop.com>...
> > organized. I'm not and it's always been that way. It's only going to
get
> > worse with the new baby on the way.
>
> No, I'm not perfectly organized. (Take a look at my house sometime...;-))
> But I do NOT routinely run out of things that I use on a many times daily
> basis. I honestly do not understand how you could not NOTICE that you've
> just opened the last can of formula, and not realize that you have
> actually run out until you go to the cupboard at 2 a.m. and find it
> empty.
I'm a housecleaner. My home looks wonderful (after all, I can't very well
do a good job elsewhere if my own place looks like a truck ran through it).
But always ensuring that I have the right amount of detergent, milk,
flour, etc. isn't in me. I constantly run out of things at odd times. 99%
of the time it's something I can wait on until the next day to purchase.
Formula would not be one of those things. I like the idea that I or my
husband can get into the car and run down to the local 24 hour grocery
store to get things like that. Having formula available only by
prescription would not work that way at all. We don't have a 24 hour
pharmacy around, do you?
> Can you imagine having a 6+ months
> > supply of formula in your house? I have barely enough room for me, my
> > hubby and my toddler now as it is!
> >
> Then you wouldn't buy a 6 month supply. You would do what most mothers do
> today, and buy a week's supply, or a month's, or whatever you find
> convenient. The point was that if you WERE in a sitatuion where you
> coldn't possibly get to the drugstore on a regular basis for refills, you
> COULD, if you chose, buy a 6 months supply. Since I live 5 blocks from
> the nearest Kroger pharmacy, and about a mile from the nearest Revco, if
> I were in a position to feed formula and it WERE a prescription only
> item, I would probably buy it weekly, or thereabouts.
My whole feeling on this is that it is essentially wrong and, quite
frankly, something I'm sure the insurance companies would *not* go for. I
have an extremely hard time swallowing this "make a food item available by
prescription only" theory.
> > This is the question I asked as well. 2 am you realize "oh god! out
of
> > formula" and your little one is going to wait patiently until 8-9 am,
yeah
> > right....
>
> No, he won't wait patiently. But I suspect that you will suffer more than
> he will, and that will teach you to keep a better eye on your supplies.
> (Like an old friend of mine once said, 'Life teaches us lessons. If we
> don't learn them the first time, they come around again...")
>
> Naomi
>
As I said in a previous post, letting your child go hungry for 6-8 hours
borders on child abuse in my mind. When they're more able to, fine. But
it seems to be a lot like letting my toddler go all day long without food.
naomi pardue
Distribution:
Laurel Halbany (myt...@agora.rdrop.com) wrote:
> npa...@indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
>
> >Sadly, some mothers (and some humans of all genders and family
> >compositions) DON"T think about important choices. If you simply assume
> >that everyone will seek out information and do their best to make
> >eduated, informed choices without any help or encouragement, you end up
> >with a lot of people making poor choices, becuase they don't have the
> >time, interest, or ability to seek out the necessary info. Here on the
> So is the solution to restrict access to formula? That won't help: it
> means that these same uninformed women will get prescriptions from
> their uninformed doctors, and women who can't or won't will do equally
> uninformed things like feeding their babies home-made 'formula'.
The thing is, if this were to become reality (and note that I am not
arguing IN FAVOR of it. I am simply argueing against some very weak
arguements AGAINT it), it could not happen in a vacuum. It would have to
be combined with education for mothers, and doctors. It would have to be
combined with a committment by doctors to help every woman who can bf, do
so. It would also have to combined with a wide understanding that
breastmilk and formula are NOT simply interchangable foodstuffs.
And the idea is NOT to 'restrict access to formula.' It is, to my mind,
to ensure that every woman has the best possible chance to breastfeed
successfully, and give her child the best chance at health.
Let me provide an analogy.
#1 My child gets sick. I suspect he has bronchitis. Under the arguments
beting presented here, I
should be able to run down to the local Krogers at any hour and buy
antibiotics. After all, taking him to the doctor is a terrible
inconvenience. (And if he gets sick in teh middle of the night, I would
even have to wait until MORNING, allowing him to be uncomfortable for a
few hours first.)
But... lets say that I do end up taking him to the doctor. Dr. diagnoses
a cold, and tells me to treat the symptoms. 'But Doctor,' I say 'I'd
really feel better if you'd give him an antibiotic.' Doctor explains that
antibiotic isn't' in his best interest. I demand it. So... is the doctor
required to give me the antibiotic perscription, on the idea that, as a
parent, I must KNOW what is best for my child? Or can he insist that I
try to do what is best for the child, and not give him unneeded drugs?
By the same token, if a mother is having difficulty bf, why is it a good
thing for her to decide that she'll just give up and give the baby
formula? Since the choice is a medical issue (breastmilk protects against
disease in mother nd baby), why shouldn't a doctor be involved here?
> about it. But restricting access to formula is NOT going to get
> anybody informed. I mean, come on. "Oh, I have to get a prescription
> for Enfamil. Guess I'll go look for an LLL consultant." Yeah, right!
No, but it would put them into a setting where education could be
provided. If they have to speak to the docotr, AND the doctor is
committed to helping women bf, the mother will get the necessary
information and help, and, where possible, succeed in bf.
Naomi
Susanne Bullo
naomi pardue <npa...@indiana.edu> wrote in article
<55ah6j$3...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
> Susanne Bullo (swee...@prostar.com) wrote:
> > naomi pardue <npa...@indiana.edu> wrote in article
> > <5591de$1...@dismay.ucs.indiana.edu>...
> > > Sorry, I'm not familiar with any medical cases where a healthy well
fed
> > > baby starved to death from going without food for 8 hours. Lest we
> > > forget, not so long ago babies were routinely left to scream for
feedings
> > > for 2-3 hours at a time, or longer (4 hour schedule and no night
feedings
> > > permitted. So if baby got hungry at midnight, (2 hours after his
> > > scheduled 10 p.m. feed) he waiting until his next
> > > scheduled feeding at 6 a.m.... night after night after night.) So I
doubt
> > > that one night of being hungry would cause lasting harm to a baby.
> >
> > I'm sorry but this doesn't seem to "jibe" with the attitude of caring
and
> > making sure your baby is completely healthy and happy. Letting them go
> > without food for an extended period of time (such as 6-8 hours) borders
on
> > child abuse in my mind.
> >
> You are absoutely correc that it is not, in general, a good thing to let
> babies go without food. (Though if there is no way to avoid it, I'd
> hardly call it child abuse.)
> I am certainly not RECOMMENDING that parents allow their
> babies to be hungry for long periods. The point is only that IF it was
> decided that formula by perscription was, in general, a good thing, and
> IF it was decided that this was how things would be, the possiblity that
> an occassional mother MIGHT find herself without formula at 2 a.m. due to
> her own lack of forthought and carelessness would not be a pressing
> reason to scrap the program.
I believe that if it happened to show that it was more of an inconvenience
due to things such as running out at bad times, not covered by insurance,
the mother/father have no insurance, etc., this "idea" would be scrapped
and in a hurry. My point is, not all mothers are *blessed* with the
ability to breast-feed. Making formula a prescription only *food-stuff*
is, in my mind, almost a punishment for not being able to breast-feed. Why
should we make it harder for those unable to breast-feed to feed their
children? This makes NO sense to me at all.
> After all, plenty of people live in communities without easy access to an
> 24 hour grocery stores. (Or in communities where it is highly unsafe to
> go out in the middle of the night.)
> So if THEY ran out of formula at 2 a.m.,
> even with it available OTC, they would still have to wait until morning
to
> restock. The whole concept of 24 hour stores is a fairly recent one.
> Even today there are going to be mothers who find themselves with a
> hungry baby at 2 a.m. and no formula, and no easy way to get it.
These are people who are used to their particular situation. I am not. I
have never lived in a community that was too far from a "convenience" store
nor have I lived in an area that would present a danger to me or my family.
People who live in these situations tend to be better prepared for such
things. I'll be the first to admit I love being right next to everything I
need. I prefer to live that way and always will. It goes well with my
ability to be unorganized.
Duane Deen
On 31 Oct 1996 15:38:59 GMT, npa...@indiana.edu (naomi pardue) wrote:
In my opinion, if you can and are willing to breast feed - Great!
If you can't or don't want to - use formula.
Be thankful that your child has a healthy heart, brain, lungs, two
arms and legs etc....
I can think of a lot worse things for a new mother to have to worry
about than breast or bottle.
Just my two cents.
Sincerely,
Anne Deen, Mom to Dylan born 09/24/96
dd...@tcac.com