Protective breathing reflex absent in newborns
NEW YORK (Reuters Health) - Research suggests that healthy newborn infants do not have what doctors call "nasoaxillary reflex" -- a protective reflex that helps keep their nasal passages open.
In adults lying on their side, the nasoaxillary reflex ensures that the uppermost nasal airway is open, Dr. Christopher O'Callaghan of the University of Leicester, UK, and colleagues explain in the journal Archives of Diseases of Childhood.
The researchers used acoustic rhinometry, a technique that measures nasal patency, to see whether the nasoaxillary reflex is present in 11 healthy term newborns.
Acoustic rhinometry emits wide band noise into the nose and analyzes the reflected sound in order to measure cross sectional area/distance mapping of the nasal cavity. The measurements were made while the infants were lying on their back (the supine position) and on their side (the lateral position).
The investigators were unable to show a protective nasoaxillary reflex in the infants.
When the newborns were turned from a back position to a side position, the team observed a significant decrease in the total minimum cross sectional area of the nasal cavity. This was associated with a decrease in the total nasal volume.
"The finding that the total minimal cross sectional area decreases when infants move from a supine to a lateral (side) sleeping position is of interest," O'Callaghan's team contends.
"As newborns tend to be obligate nose breathers, a decrease in the minimal cross sectional area of the nasal cavity is likely to be linked to an increase in nasal resistance and in the work of breathing."
They note that the side sleeping position has been associated in one study with a slightly greater risk of SIDS than in the back sleeping position, and that the back sleeping position "has unequivocally been recommended as being preferred to any other position to prevent SIDS."
SOURCE: Archives of Diseases in Childhood September 2006.
Nasal congestion has many causes and can range from a mild annoyance to a life-threatening condition. The newborn infant can only breathe through the nose (newborns are "obligate nose breathers"). Nasal congestion in an infant in the first few months of life can interfere with breastfeeding and cause life-threatening respiratory distress.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Milk or Dairy Allergy vs. Lactose Intolerance
A milk or dairy allergy is a reaction to the protein in milk. There are two milk proteins, casein and whey. Some people are allergic only to one or the other. Most are allergic to both. The safest course in either case is to avoid all dairy products.
Lactose intolerance, also called lactase deficiency, means you aren't able to fully digest the milk sugar (lactose) in dairy products. The problem behind lactose intolerance is a deficiency of lactase — an enzyme produced by the lining of your small intestine.
With LI, most people can still have small or moderate amounts of milk. What's the difference? An allergy is an immune system reaction. Your immune system fights foreign invaders to the body using what are called antibodies. When these invaders are harmful bacteria or viruses, this is a very good thing. In people with allergies, however, the immune system reacts in the same way to dairy proteins that leak into the bloodstream instead of being properly digested. This can lead to a huge number of possible symptoms.
Children are the most likely sufferers of both allergies and hypersensitivities. Even breast-fed babies who have never touched formula can suffer from allergies, because dairy proteins can leak into the mother's milk. And even if this does not happen, they can rapidly develop allergies after their first exposure to milk-based formula or milk itself.
Taken from the Australian Breast Feeding Website:
There are some common fallacies about lactose intolerance that you may hear in the community:
1. Lactose in the breastmilk will be reduced if the mother stops eating dairy products.
2. Lactose intolerance in other family members (adults) means baby is more likely to be lactose intolerant.
3. If a mother is lactose intolerant then her baby will be as well.
4. A baby with symptoms of lactose intolerance should immediately be taken off the breast and fed on soy-based infant formula, or other special lactose-free formula.
5. Lactose intolerance is the same as intolerance or allergy to cows' milk protein.
Lactose intolerance is not possible in a baby unless it is an extremely rare genetic condition. That being true normal life would not be possible without medical intervention. A truly lactose intolerant baby would fail to thrive from birth (ie. not even start to gain weight), and show obvious symptoms of malabsorption and dehydration - a medical emergency case needing a special diet from soon after birth.
Anything that damages the gut lining, even subtly, can cause secondary lactose intolerance. The enzyme lactase is produced in the very tips of folds of the intestine, and anything that causes damage to the gut may wipe off these tips and reduce the enzyme production.
Note that cows' milk protein allergy (or intolerance) is often confused with lactose intolerance, and they are thought by many people to be the same thing. This confusion probably arises because cows' milk protein and lactose are both in the same food, ie dairy products. Also contributing to this confusion is the fact that allergy or intolerance to this protein can be a cause of secondary lactose intolerance, so they may be present together.
Secondary lactose intolerance is a temporary state as long as the gut damage can heal. When the cause of the damage to the gut is removed, for example the food to which a baby is allergic is taken out of the diet, the gut will heal even if the baby is still fed breastmilk. If your doctor does diagnose 'lactose intolerance' you need to know that this is not harmful to your baby as long as she is otherwise well and growing normally.
Occasionally it is considered preferable to reduce the immediate symptoms, by reducing the amount of lactose in the diet for a time, particularly if the baby has been losing weight. In this case, it may be suggested that the mother alternate breastfeeding and feeding the baby with a lactose-free artificial baby milk. Sensitivity of the baby to foreign protein (cow or soy) should be considered before introduction to artificial baby milk, as types other than the truly hypoallergenic ones may make the problem worse. Although commonly advised, there is no good evidence to support taking the baby off the breast altogether. In the case of a baby recovering from severe gastroenteritis, average recovery time for the gut is four weeks, but may be up to eight weeks for a young baby under three months. For older babies, over about 18 months, recovery may be as rapid as one week.
References:Brodribb W (ed), 2nd ed. Breastfeeding Management in Australia, Merrily Merrily Enterprises Pty Ltd 1997.Lawlor-Smith C & Lawlor-Smith L, 1998, Lactose intolerance, Breastfeeding Review 6(1): 29-30Leeson R, 1995, Lactose intolerance: What does it mean? ALCA News 6(1): 24-25, 27.Minchin M, Food for Thought, Alma Publications 1986.Rings EHHM et al, 1994, Lactose intolerance and lactase deficiency in children, Current Opinion in Pediatrics 6: 562-567.Woolridge M, Fisher C 1988, Colic, 'overfeeding' and symptoms of lactose malabsorption in the breast-fed baby: a possible artifact of feed management? Lancet (ii): 382-384.
If there is a concern regarding a baby’s sensitivity to lactose, please bring it to the health care professional and ask their advice regarding a lactose-free formula.
Lactose intolerance, also called lactase deficiency, means you aren't able to fully digest the milk sugar (lactose) in dairy products. The problem behind lactose intolerance is a deficiency of lactase — an enzyme produced by the lining of your small intestine.
With LI, most people can still have small or moderate amounts of milk. What's the difference? An allergy is an immune system reaction. Your immune system fights foreign invaders to the body using what are called antibodies. When these invaders are harmful bacteria or viruses, this is a very good thing. In people with allergies, however, the immune system reacts in the same way to dairy proteins that leak into the bloodstream instead of being properly digested. This can lead to a huge number of possible symptoms.
Children are the most likely sufferers of both allergies and hypersensitivities. Even breast-fed babies who have never touched formula can suffer from allergies, because dairy proteins can leak into the mother's milk. And even if this does not happen, they can rapidly develop allergies after their first exposure to milk-based formula or milk itself.
Taken from the Australian Breast Feeding Website:
There are some common fallacies about lactose intolerance that you may hear in the community:
1. Lactose in the breastmilk will be reduced if the mother stops eating dairy products.
2. Lactose intolerance in other family members (adults) means baby is more likely to be lactose intolerant.
3. If a mother is lactose intolerant then her baby will be as well.
4. A baby with symptoms of lactose intolerance should immediately be taken off the breast and fed on soy-based infant formula, or other special lactose-free formula.
5. Lactose intolerance is the same as intolerance or allergy to cows' milk protein.
Lactose intolerance is not possible in a baby unless it is an extremely rare genetic condition. That being true normal life would not be possible without medical intervention. A truly lactose intolerant baby would fail to thrive from birth (ie. not even start to gain weight), and show obvious symptoms of malabsorption and dehydration - a medical emergency case needing a special diet from soon after birth.
Anything that damages the gut lining, even subtly, can cause secondary lactose intolerance. The enzyme lactase is produced in the very tips of folds of the intestine, and anything that causes damage to the gut may wipe off these tips and reduce the enzyme production.
Note that cows' milk protein allergy (or intolerance) is often confused with lactose intolerance, and they are thought by many people to be the same thing. This confusion probably arises because cows' milk protein and lactose are both in the same food, ie dairy products. Also contributing to this confusion is the fact that allergy or intolerance to this protein can be a cause of secondary lactose intolerance, so they may be present together.
Secondary lactose intolerance is a temporary state as long as the gut damage can heal. When the cause of the damage to the gut is removed, for example the food to which a baby is allergic is taken out of the diet, the gut will heal even if the baby is still fed breastmilk. If your doctor does diagnose 'lactose intolerance' you need to know that this is not harmful to your baby as long as she is otherwise well and growing normally.
Occasionally it is considered preferable to reduce the immediate symptoms, by reducing the amount of lactose in the diet for a time, particularly if the baby has been losing weight. In this case, it may be suggested that the mother alternate breastfeeding and feeding the baby with a lactose-free artificial baby milk. Sensitivity of the baby to foreign protein (cow or soy) should be considered before introduction to artificial baby milk, as types other than the truly hypoallergenic ones may make the problem worse. Although commonly advised, there is no good evidence to support taking the baby off the breast altogether. In the case of a baby recovering from severe gastroenteritis, average recovery time for the gut is four weeks, but may be up to eight weeks for a young baby under three months. For older babies, over about 18 months, recovery may be as rapid as one week.
References:Brodribb W (ed), 2nd ed. Breastfeeding Management in Australia, Merrily Merrily Enterprises Pty Ltd 1997.Lawlor-Smith C & Lawlor-Smith L, 1998, Lactose intolerance, Breastfeeding Review 6(1): 29-30Leeson R, 1995, Lactose intolerance: What does it mean? ALCA News 6(1): 24-25, 27.Minchin M, Food for Thought, Alma Publications 1986.Rings EHHM et al, 1994, Lactose intolerance and lactase deficiency in children, Current Opinion in Pediatrics 6: 562-567.Woolridge M, Fisher C 1988, Colic, 'overfeeding' and symptoms of lactose malabsorption in the breast-fed baby: a possible artifact of feed management? Lancet (ii): 382-384.
If there is a concern regarding a baby’s sensitivity to lactose, please bring it to the health care professional and ask their advice regarding a lactose-free formula.
Monday, August 23, 2010
Excessive Crying and Newborns.
Science Says: Excessive Crying Could Be Harmful to Babies
Gentle Ventures thinks is is very important for you to know both sides of the story. There is research out there that 'proves' that crying may be harmful to babies. We have included this study in our literature as you may be approached by parents who have read this research and we want to make sure you understand the implications of 'excessive' crying.
We have copied the following so there will be no misunderstanding of what the researchers have said. Each is referenced with the researched articles so you can also do your own research and come to your own conclusions.
We, at Gentle Ventures believe the operative word is 'excessive'. We do not believe that the gentle method of crying we use starting at 1 min would be considered 'excessive. We believe using this method the babies gradually learn to self soothe. Even allowing a baby to cry for 45 minutes we are checking on the baby and if necessary we are changing positions, offering the pacifier, or patting the baby.
"The more we know about brain development, the more we know that when a mother is not responsive, it's linked to [poor] cognitive development and social behavior," says Leach. a British developmental child psychologist, "The hazard is of a child with too little conviction that he is really loved, as in unconditional love. If you don't respond to him when he cries, he comes to distrust the validity of his own feelings and your willingness to respond to them."
In the research we find that when babies cry alone and they are not attended in any form they can experience stress symptoms. Scientific studies show their brains and bodies are flooded with adrenaline and cortisol stress hormones. We also know from studies that when this happens for a prolonged period of time those nerves won't form the proper connections to other nerves. So is there permanent damage? Here is what we found.
Chemical and hormonal imbalances in the brain
According to Dr. Sears.com: Research has shown that infants who are routinely separated from parents in a stressful way have abnormally high levels of the stress hormone cortisol, as well as lower growth hormone levels. These imbalances inhibit the development of nerve tissue in the brain, suppress growth, and depress the immune system. (5, 9, 11, 16)
Researchers at Yale University and Harvard Medical School found that intense stress early in life can alter the brain’s neurotransmitter systems and cause structural and functional changes in regions of the brain similar to those seen in adults with depression. (17)
One study showed infants who experienced persistent crying episodes were 10 times more likely to have ADHD as a child, along with poor school performance and antisocial behavior. The researchers concluded these findings may be due to the lack of responsive attitude of the parents toward their babies. (14.)
Dr. Bruce Perry’s research at Baylor University may explain this finding. He found when chronic stress over-stimulates an infant’s brain stem (the part of the brain that controls adrenaline release), and the portions of the brain that thrive on physical and emotional input are neglected (such as when a baby is repeatedly left to cry alone), the child will grow up with an over-active adrenaline system. Such a child will display increased aggression, impulsivity, and violence later in life because the brain stem floods the body with adrenaline and other stress hormones at inappropriate and frequent times. (6 )
Dr. Allan Schore of the UCLA School of Medicine has demonstrated that the stress hormone cortisol (which floods the brain during intense crying and other stressful events) actually destroys nerve connections in critical portions of an infant’s developing brain. In addition, when the portions of the brain responsible for attachment and emotional control are not stimulated during infancy (as may occur when a baby is repeatedly neglected) these sections of the brain will not develop. The result – a violent, impulsive, emotionally unattached child. He concludes that the sensitivity and responsiveness of a parent stimulates and shapes the nerve connections in key sections of the brain responsible for attachment and emotional well-being. (7, 8 )
Decreased intellectual, emotional, and social development
Infant developmental specialist Dr. Michael Lewis presented research findings at an American Academy of Pediatrics meeting, concluding that “the single most important influence of a child’s intellectual development is the responsiveness of the mother to the cues of her baby.”
Researchers have found babies whose cries are usually ignored will not develop healthy intellectual and social skills. (19)
Dr. Rao and colleagues at the National Institutes of Health showed that infants with prolonged crying (but not due to colic) in the first 3 months of life had an average IQ 9 points lower at 5 years of age. They also showed poor fine motor development. (2)
Researchers at Pennsylvania State and Arizona State Universities found that infants with excessive crying during the early months showed more difficulty controlling their emotions and became even fussier when parents tried to console them at 10 months. (15)
Other research has shown that these babies have a more annoying quality to their cry, are more clingy during the day, and take longer to become independent as children (1).
1.P. Heron, “Non-Reactive Cosleeping and Child Behavior: Getting a Good Night’s Sleep All Night, Every Night,” Master’s thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Bristol, 1994.
2.M R Rao, et al; Long Term Cognitive Development in Children with Prolonged Crying, National Institutes of Health, Archives of Disease in Childhood 2004; 89:989-992.
3.J pediatrics 1988 Brazy, J E. Mar 112 (3): 457-61. Duke University
4.Ludington-Hoe SM, Case Western U, Neonatal Network 2002 Mar; 21(2): 29-36
5.Butler, S R, et al. Maternal Behavior as a Regulator of Polyamine Biosynthesis in Brain and Heart of Developing Rat Pups. Science 1978, 199:445-447.
6.Perry, B. (1997), “Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the Cycle of Violence,” Children in a Violent Society, Guilford Press, New York.
7.Schore, A.N. (1996), “The Experience-Dependent Maturation of a Regulatory System in the Orbital Prefrontal Cortex and the Origen of Developmental Psychopathology,” Development and Psychopathology 8: 59 – 87.
8.Karr-Morse, R, Wiley, M. Interview With Dr. Allan Schore, Ghosts From the Nursery, 1997, pg 200.
9.Kuhn, C M, et al. Selective Depression of Serum Growth Hormone During Maternal Deprivation in Rat Pups. Science 1978, 201:1035-1036.
10.Hollenbeck, A R, et al. Children with Serious Illness: Behavioral Correlates of Separation and Solution. Child Psychiatry and Human Development 1980, 11:3-11.
11.Coe, C L, et al. Endocrine and Immune Responses to Separation and Maternal Loss in Non-Human Primates. The Psychology of Attachment and Separation, ed. M Reite and T Fields, 1985. Pg. 163-199. New York: Academic Press.
12.Rosenblum and Moltz, The Mother-Infant Interaction as a Regulator of Infant Physiology and Behavior. In Symbiosis in Parent-Offspring Interactions, New York: Plenum, 1983.
13.Hofer, M and H. Shair, Control of Sleep-Wake States in the Infant Rat by Features of the Mother-Infant Relationship. Developmental Psychobiology, 1982, 15:229-243.
14.Wolke, D, et al, Persistent Infant Crying and Hyperactivity Problems in Middle Childhood, Pediatrics, 2002; 109:1054-1060.
15.Stifter and Spinrad, The Effect of Excessive Crying on the Development of Emotion Regulation, Infancy, 2002; 3(2), 133-152.
16.Ahnert L, et al, Transition to Child Care: Associations with Infant-mother Attachment, Infant Negative Emotion, and Cortisol Elevations, Child Development, 2004, May-June; 75(3):649-650.
17.Kaufman J, Charney D. Effects of Early Stress on Brain Structure and Function: Implications for Understanding the Relationship Between Child Maltreatment and Depression, Developmental Psychopathology, 2001 Summer; 13(3):451-471.
18.Teicher MH et al, The Neurobiological Consequences of Early Stress and Childhood Maltreatment, Neuroscience Biobehavior Review 2003, Jan-Mar; 27(1-2):33-44.
19.Leiberman, A. F., & Zeanah, H., Disorders of Attachment in Infancy, Infant Psychiatry 1995, 4:571-587.
Gentle Ventures thinks is is very important for you to know both sides of the story. There is research out there that 'proves' that crying may be harmful to babies. We have included this study in our literature as you may be approached by parents who have read this research and we want to make sure you understand the implications of 'excessive' crying.
We have copied the following so there will be no misunderstanding of what the researchers have said. Each is referenced with the researched articles so you can also do your own research and come to your own conclusions.
We, at Gentle Ventures believe the operative word is 'excessive'. We do not believe that the gentle method of crying we use starting at 1 min would be considered 'excessive. We believe using this method the babies gradually learn to self soothe. Even allowing a baby to cry for 45 minutes we are checking on the baby and if necessary we are changing positions, offering the pacifier, or patting the baby.
"The more we know about brain development, the more we know that when a mother is not responsive, it's linked to [poor] cognitive development and social behavior," says Leach. a British developmental child psychologist, "The hazard is of a child with too little conviction that he is really loved, as in unconditional love. If you don't respond to him when he cries, he comes to distrust the validity of his own feelings and your willingness to respond to them."
In the research we find that when babies cry alone and they are not attended in any form they can experience stress symptoms. Scientific studies show their brains and bodies are flooded with adrenaline and cortisol stress hormones. We also know from studies that when this happens for a prolonged period of time those nerves won't form the proper connections to other nerves. So is there permanent damage? Here is what we found.
Chemical and hormonal imbalances in the brain
According to Dr. Sears.com: Research has shown that infants who are routinely separated from parents in a stressful way have abnormally high levels of the stress hormone cortisol, as well as lower growth hormone levels. These imbalances inhibit the development of nerve tissue in the brain, suppress growth, and depress the immune system. (5, 9, 11, 16)
Researchers at Yale University and Harvard Medical School found that intense stress early in life can alter the brain’s neurotransmitter systems and cause structural and functional changes in regions of the brain similar to those seen in adults with depression. (17)
One study showed infants who experienced persistent crying episodes were 10 times more likely to have ADHD as a child, along with poor school performance and antisocial behavior. The researchers concluded these findings may be due to the lack of responsive attitude of the parents toward their babies. (14.)
Dr. Bruce Perry’s research at Baylor University may explain this finding. He found when chronic stress over-stimulates an infant’s brain stem (the part of the brain that controls adrenaline release), and the portions of the brain that thrive on physical and emotional input are neglected (such as when a baby is repeatedly left to cry alone), the child will grow up with an over-active adrenaline system. Such a child will display increased aggression, impulsivity, and violence later in life because the brain stem floods the body with adrenaline and other stress hormones at inappropriate and frequent times. (6 )
Dr. Allan Schore of the UCLA School of Medicine has demonstrated that the stress hormone cortisol (which floods the brain during intense crying and other stressful events) actually destroys nerve connections in critical portions of an infant’s developing brain. In addition, when the portions of the brain responsible for attachment and emotional control are not stimulated during infancy (as may occur when a baby is repeatedly neglected) these sections of the brain will not develop. The result – a violent, impulsive, emotionally unattached child. He concludes that the sensitivity and responsiveness of a parent stimulates and shapes the nerve connections in key sections of the brain responsible for attachment and emotional well-being. (7, 8 )
Decreased intellectual, emotional, and social development
Infant developmental specialist Dr. Michael Lewis presented research findings at an American Academy of Pediatrics meeting, concluding that “the single most important influence of a child’s intellectual development is the responsiveness of the mother to the cues of her baby.”
Researchers have found babies whose cries are usually ignored will not develop healthy intellectual and social skills. (19)
Dr. Rao and colleagues at the National Institutes of Health showed that infants with prolonged crying (but not due to colic) in the first 3 months of life had an average IQ 9 points lower at 5 years of age. They also showed poor fine motor development. (2)
Researchers at Pennsylvania State and Arizona State Universities found that infants with excessive crying during the early months showed more difficulty controlling their emotions and became even fussier when parents tried to console them at 10 months. (15)
Other research has shown that these babies have a more annoying quality to their cry, are more clingy during the day, and take longer to become independent as children (1).
1.P. Heron, “Non-Reactive Cosleeping and Child Behavior: Getting a Good Night’s Sleep All Night, Every Night,” Master’s thesis, Department of Psychology, University of Bristol, 1994.
2.M R Rao, et al; Long Term Cognitive Development in Children with Prolonged Crying, National Institutes of Health, Archives of Disease in Childhood 2004; 89:989-992.
3.J pediatrics 1988 Brazy, J E. Mar 112 (3): 457-61. Duke University
4.Ludington-Hoe SM, Case Western U, Neonatal Network 2002 Mar; 21(2): 29-36
5.Butler, S R, et al. Maternal Behavior as a Regulator of Polyamine Biosynthesis in Brain and Heart of Developing Rat Pups. Science 1978, 199:445-447.
6.Perry, B. (1997), “Incubated in Terror: Neurodevelopmental Factors in the Cycle of Violence,” Children in a Violent Society, Guilford Press, New York.
7.Schore, A.N. (1996), “The Experience-Dependent Maturation of a Regulatory System in the Orbital Prefrontal Cortex and the Origen of Developmental Psychopathology,” Development and Psychopathology 8: 59 – 87.
8.Karr-Morse, R, Wiley, M. Interview With Dr. Allan Schore, Ghosts From the Nursery, 1997, pg 200.
9.Kuhn, C M, et al. Selective Depression of Serum Growth Hormone During Maternal Deprivation in Rat Pups. Science 1978, 201:1035-1036.
10.Hollenbeck, A R, et al. Children with Serious Illness: Behavioral Correlates of Separation and Solution. Child Psychiatry and Human Development 1980, 11:3-11.
11.Coe, C L, et al. Endocrine and Immune Responses to Separation and Maternal Loss in Non-Human Primates. The Psychology of Attachment and Separation, ed. M Reite and T Fields, 1985. Pg. 163-199. New York: Academic Press.
12.Rosenblum and Moltz, The Mother-Infant Interaction as a Regulator of Infant Physiology and Behavior. In Symbiosis in Parent-Offspring Interactions, New York: Plenum, 1983.
13.Hofer, M and H. Shair, Control of Sleep-Wake States in the Infant Rat by Features of the Mother-Infant Relationship. Developmental Psychobiology, 1982, 15:229-243.
14.Wolke, D, et al, Persistent Infant Crying and Hyperactivity Problems in Middle Childhood, Pediatrics, 2002; 109:1054-1060.
15.Stifter and Spinrad, The Effect of Excessive Crying on the Development of Emotion Regulation, Infancy, 2002; 3(2), 133-152.
16.Ahnert L, et al, Transition to Child Care: Associations with Infant-mother Attachment, Infant Negative Emotion, and Cortisol Elevations, Child Development, 2004, May-June; 75(3):649-650.
17.Kaufman J, Charney D. Effects of Early Stress on Brain Structure and Function: Implications for Understanding the Relationship Between Child Maltreatment and Depression, Developmental Psychopathology, 2001 Summer; 13(3):451-471.
18.Teicher MH et al, The Neurobiological Consequences of Early Stress and Childhood Maltreatment, Neuroscience Biobehavior Review 2003, Jan-Mar; 27(1-2):33-44.
19.Leiberman, A. F., & Zeanah, H., Disorders of Attachment in Infancy, Infant Psychiatry 1995, 4:571-587.
Baby's Only Organic Formula for Newborns
After many inquiries into whether or not Baby's Only Organic's Toddlers formula was safe for a newborn, I sent an official query to Baby's Only. Here is the response.
Many thanks for your recent inquiry and also your interest in our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas. Regarding the use of our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas during infancy, similar to other commercially available infant formulas, our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas provide the correct balance of proteins, carbohydrates, essential fatty acids, vitamins and minerals needed to support normal growth and development of full term, healthy infants. No extra dilution is needed. Nothing needs to be added to make the formula more “complete” when prepared according to label instructions. It is because of our strong position on breastfeeding that we prefer to maintain a “toddler” status, thereby not encouraging mothers to use our product when breast milk is available. Thus, we state that “Baby’s Only Organic® is not intended for infants under 1-year of age unless specified by a healthcare professional.”
However, we also recognize that long term breast feeding or exclusive breastfeeding is not feasible for every mother. There are many fine and very personal reasons, such as you mentioned, that may necessitate the use of a formula. In those cases, we are happy to provide an alternative. Therefore, we formulated all of Baby’s Only Organic® formulas to provide the same nutrition as popular infant formulas. Baby’s Only Organic® formulas meet the nutritional composition requirements of the Infant Formula Act and the Academy of Pediatrics’ guidelines on nutritional content for an infant formula.
The U.S Infant Formula Act requirements and also the Academy of Pediatrics guidelines on nutrient composition of an infant formula specify ranges for most nutrients including vitamins and minerals. As noted previously, Baby’s Only Organic® formulas all meet the requirements. You will note in our comparison charts, shown be clicking on the links below, that all infant formulas are similar in overall nutrient composition because of these requirement and guidelines. The differences in formulas are mainly based on the type and source of ingredients. As you know, we take great pride in our organic ingredients. Please see the following links for nutritional comparisons of Baby’s Only Organic® to other popular brands.
Dairy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/chart.pdf
Organic Dairy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/organic_chart.pdf
Soy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/chart_soy.pdf
Organic Soy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/soy_organic_chart.pdf
Lactose Free nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/lactose-free_chart.pdf
Many thanks for your recent inquiry and also your interest in our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas. Regarding the use of our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas during infancy, similar to other commercially available infant formulas, our Baby’s Only Organic® formulas provide the correct balance of proteins, carbohydrates, essential fatty acids, vitamins and minerals needed to support normal growth and development of full term, healthy infants. No extra dilution is needed. Nothing needs to be added to make the formula more “complete” when prepared according to label instructions. It is because of our strong position on breastfeeding that we prefer to maintain a “toddler” status, thereby not encouraging mothers to use our product when breast milk is available. Thus, we state that “Baby’s Only Organic® is not intended for infants under 1-year of age unless specified by a healthcare professional.”
However, we also recognize that long term breast feeding or exclusive breastfeeding is not feasible for every mother. There are many fine and very personal reasons, such as you mentioned, that may necessitate the use of a formula. In those cases, we are happy to provide an alternative. Therefore, we formulated all of Baby’s Only Organic® formulas to provide the same nutrition as popular infant formulas. Baby’s Only Organic® formulas meet the nutritional composition requirements of the Infant Formula Act and the Academy of Pediatrics’ guidelines on nutritional content for an infant formula.
The U.S Infant Formula Act requirements and also the Academy of Pediatrics guidelines on nutrient composition of an infant formula specify ranges for most nutrients including vitamins and minerals. As noted previously, Baby’s Only Organic® formulas all meet the requirements. You will note in our comparison charts, shown be clicking on the links below, that all infant formulas are similar in overall nutrient composition because of these requirement and guidelines. The differences in formulas are mainly based on the type and source of ingredients. As you know, we take great pride in our organic ingredients. Please see the following links for nutritional comparisons of Baby’s Only Organic® to other popular brands.
Dairy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/chart.pdf
Organic Dairy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/organic_chart.pdf
Soy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/chart_soy.pdf
Organic Soy nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/soy_organic_chart.pdf
Lactose Free nutritional comparison: http://www.naturesone.com/documents/lactose-free_chart.pdf
Swaddle Update
Parents and professionals in certain parts of the United States and Australia are being given erroneous information about swaddling. Not only is the message confusing and disingenuous at best, it's potentially harmful at worst. These messages are being delivered via education and through mislabeled products. These misguided messages are being propagated, in some instances, for reputational gain and in others for profit and they absolutely fly in the face of ALL the research done - over decades - on the subject.
Examples:
The term "swaddling" is being exploited and illegitimately applied to various non-swaddling items in order to validate the use of clinical studies to promote those products for profit.
Parents are being advised that swaddling a baby with their hands at their sides, or inside the blanket, prevents on-going development and soothing, even though all studies done on swaddling have been performed with the arms and hands in this position and have still shown improved development.
Parents are being told that the AAP advises swaddling could be hazardous to newborns in the crib due to the risk of loose bedding. This is patently false: The AAP has advocated swaddling on many occasions and has, on several occasions, written about the benefits of swaddling. Additionally, we have never been able to find a single incident of injury of this kind linked to swaddling even though there are so many millions of parents swaddling around the world, every night.
We have in our possession, several (nearly all), well-known, scientific studies that clearly define swaddling as wrapping an infant snugly with arms to the side to make a newborn feel more secure and to limit the startle reflex thus preventing unwanted arousal. As you know, proper swaddling also allows infants to safely stay asleep on their back even when they otherwise prefer the risky stomach-sleeping position. Because of this, swaddling has become perhaps the single most effective tool available to new parents when it comes to providing safe sleep for infants and has even been shown to significantly reduce the risk of SIDS by as much as 30% according to an exhaustive study done in Australia.
Because of our own experience of swaddling nearly one million newborns with the Miracle Blanket (with a still-perfect safety record, in spite of the statistical likelihood of SIDS deaths with that many users) we are extremely concerned about parents being incorrectly educated regarding sleep positions that have not been clinically studied.
Nowhere is this trend more directly evident than in North Carolina. As part of the implementation of the "Infant Safe Sleep Campaign" the NC Healthy Start Foundation says the long held tradition of swaddling could lead to suffocation due to loose bedding. While loose bedding is a serious problem, it is altogether separate from swaddling safety and this theory linking it to swaddling lacks evidence, data and/or clinical studies. It goes directly against decades of research and empirical data from around the world.
Equally disturbing, in the U.S. and Australia, emerging products are being marketed as "swaddlers" when they are in fact lacking the very discernible scientifically-proven attributes that make swaddling safe and effective. While these products do serve a purpose by eliminating loose bedding, they are misleading parents who are missing out on the very real benefits of a true swaddle which include SIDS reduction, soothing of stress/colic/crying, elimination/reduction of startle reflex/waking, and lateral belly pressure.
Our intention here is three-fold. Not only do we feel an urgent need to bring this to your attention, we would be grateful for your feedback and thoughts. We are also assembling a coalition of professionals that understand and support legitimate swaddling as defined in all studies done on the subject. This will be part of a campaign we plan to roll out that will properly educate parents on how to swaddle. Please feel free to send your comments to me at Mike@MiracleBlanket.com.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing back from you!
Examples:
The term "swaddling" is being exploited and illegitimately applied to various non-swaddling items in order to validate the use of clinical studies to promote those products for profit.
Parents are being advised that swaddling a baby with their hands at their sides, or inside the blanket, prevents on-going development and soothing, even though all studies done on swaddling have been performed with the arms and hands in this position and have still shown improved development.
Parents are being told that the AAP advises swaddling could be hazardous to newborns in the crib due to the risk of loose bedding. This is patently false: The AAP has advocated swaddling on many occasions and has, on several occasions, written about the benefits of swaddling. Additionally, we have never been able to find a single incident of injury of this kind linked to swaddling even though there are so many millions of parents swaddling around the world, every night.
We have in our possession, several (nearly all), well-known, scientific studies that clearly define swaddling as wrapping an infant snugly with arms to the side to make a newborn feel more secure and to limit the startle reflex thus preventing unwanted arousal. As you know, proper swaddling also allows infants to safely stay asleep on their back even when they otherwise prefer the risky stomach-sleeping position. Because of this, swaddling has become perhaps the single most effective tool available to new parents when it comes to providing safe sleep for infants and has even been shown to significantly reduce the risk of SIDS by as much as 30% according to an exhaustive study done in Australia.
Because of our own experience of swaddling nearly one million newborns with the Miracle Blanket (with a still-perfect safety record, in spite of the statistical likelihood of SIDS deaths with that many users) we are extremely concerned about parents being incorrectly educated regarding sleep positions that have not been clinically studied.
Nowhere is this trend more directly evident than in North Carolina. As part of the implementation of the "Infant Safe Sleep Campaign" the NC Healthy Start Foundation says the long held tradition of swaddling could lead to suffocation due to loose bedding. While loose bedding is a serious problem, it is altogether separate from swaddling safety and this theory linking it to swaddling lacks evidence, data and/or clinical studies. It goes directly against decades of research and empirical data from around the world.
Equally disturbing, in the U.S. and Australia, emerging products are being marketed as "swaddlers" when they are in fact lacking the very discernible scientifically-proven attributes that make swaddling safe and effective. While these products do serve a purpose by eliminating loose bedding, they are misleading parents who are missing out on the very real benefits of a true swaddle which include SIDS reduction, soothing of stress/colic/crying, elimination/reduction of startle reflex/waking, and lateral belly pressure.
Our intention here is three-fold. Not only do we feel an urgent need to bring this to your attention, we would be grateful for your feedback and thoughts. We are also assembling a coalition of professionals that understand and support legitimate swaddling as defined in all studies done on the subject. This will be part of a campaign we plan to roll out that will properly educate parents on how to swaddle. Please feel free to send your comments to me at Mike@MiracleBlanket.com.
Thank you for your time. I look forward to hearing back from you!
Breast Milk Storage
This is a quote from a mother who was not identified:
I have to say that for the better part of the 8+ years I have been pumping and breast feeding my four kids, I have never left it out this long, but the most definitive research performed says you can leave fresh breast milk at room temperature for 10 HOURS!
Breast milk has anti-bacterial qualities which inhibit bacterial growth in the milk, even at room temperature. In fact, the bigger issue is not from the milk itself, but rather from other contaminants that affect the milk collection process, such as germs on mom’s hands and skin, the bottle, cap, etc.
Here are a couple of really interesting references for the 10 hour figure. There was a landmark study done in 1987 by researchers named Barger and Bull that compared milk in clean but not sterile containers left for 10 hours at room temperature and 10 hours in the refrigerator. The study found no statistically different bacteria levels! Just amazing! Here are some articles in order of preference.....
http://www.llli.org/FAQ/milkstorage.html
http://members.tripod.com/~bmsg/storageconcerns.htm
http://www.llli.org/NB/NBJulAug98p109.html
http://parenting.ivillage.com/baby/bbreastfeed/0,,3x9q,00.html
I myself, never left milk out longer than probably four hours or so. There were a few times when at work I realized I forgot the ice packs and it stayed warm the whole day. There were no ill effects on junior! All of this may have had more to do with my germ paranoia than actual science.
When my youngest was in the NICU and I was hospitalized after his birth I was pumping. I couldn’t get out of bed to deliver his milk to the NICU, and the poor nurses were often too busy to cart it down there for me. So I often worried about it "spoiling". Once when the neonatologist visited me to discuss my son I asked him about the milk at room temperature. I didn’t believe him at the time, but he said expressed breast milk was fine for up to 12 hours, and in fact has been used over the course of history in medicine to treat the wounds of patients who were injured in emergency situations when no other form of treatment was available. Again, just AMAZING!
Enjoy your breastfeeding experience and good luck with the pumping. What a wonderful gift for your baby!!
I have to say that for the better part of the 8+ years I have been pumping and breast feeding my four kids, I have never left it out this long, but the most definitive research performed says you can leave fresh breast milk at room temperature for 10 HOURS!
Breast milk has anti-bacterial qualities which inhibit bacterial growth in the milk, even at room temperature. In fact, the bigger issue is not from the milk itself, but rather from other contaminants that affect the milk collection process, such as germs on mom’s hands and skin, the bottle, cap, etc.
Here are a couple of really interesting references for the 10 hour figure. There was a landmark study done in 1987 by researchers named Barger and Bull that compared milk in clean but not sterile containers left for 10 hours at room temperature and 10 hours in the refrigerator. The study found no statistically different bacteria levels! Just amazing! Here are some articles in order of preference.....
http://www.llli.org/FAQ/milkstorage.html
http://members.tripod.com/~bmsg/storageconcerns.htm
http://www.llli.org/NB/NBJulAug98p109.html
http://parenting.ivillage.com/baby/bbreastfeed/0,,3x9q,00.html
I myself, never left milk out longer than probably four hours or so. There were a few times when at work I realized I forgot the ice packs and it stayed warm the whole day. There were no ill effects on junior! All of this may have had more to do with my germ paranoia than actual science.
When my youngest was in the NICU and I was hospitalized after his birth I was pumping. I couldn’t get out of bed to deliver his milk to the NICU, and the poor nurses were often too busy to cart it down there for me. So I often worried about it "spoiling". Once when the neonatologist visited me to discuss my son I asked him about the milk at room temperature. I didn’t believe him at the time, but he said expressed breast milk was fine for up to 12 hours, and in fact has been used over the course of history in medicine to treat the wounds of patients who were injured in emergency situations when no other form of treatment was available. Again, just AMAZING!
Enjoy your breastfeeding experience and good luck with the pumping. What a wonderful gift for your baby!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)