Breast feeding

Abstract

A survey of available data shows that the reaction of infants to human and cow's milk differs in many respects. The differences are reflected in shape of the growth curve, in the amounts of nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus which are retained, in the plasma vitamin C levels, in the response of the blood sugar to lactose ingestion, in the incidence and severity of vitamin D deficiency disease and eczema, in the incidence of tetany during the newborn period, and in the frequency of respiratory infections. It is not our intention to present these data as evidence of the superiority of human over cow's milk in feeding babies, although the lowered incidence of respiratory infections and severe eczema in the breast-fed infant is a very real, practical consideration. Reasoning from the meager available information, it would appear that breast feeding is superior to artificial feeding from the psychologic viewpoint. In the last analysis, the choice of one or the other method of feeding stems from a general attitude. The physician who is impressed by the remarkable adaptibility of the human organism will, whether giving advice in the care of a well child or in ministering to the sick, interfere minimally with natural processes. We have erred too often in the past. This is not meant to minimize in any way the enormous value of artificial feeding for those infants who, for one reason or another, are unable to be fed at the breast. We do feel, however, that artificial feeding should be reserved for the instances where an honest attempt at breast feeding has failed. A survey of available data shows that the reaction of infants to human and cow's milk differs in many respects. The differences are reflected in shape of the growth curve, in the amounts of nitrogen, calcium, and phosphorus which are retained, in the plasma vitamin C levels, in the response of the blood sugar to lactose ingestion, in the incidence and severity of vitamin D deficiency disease and eczema, in the incidence of tetany during the newborn period, and in the frequency of respiratory infections. It is not our intention to present these data as evidence of the superiority of human over cow's milk in feeding babies, although the lowered incidence of respiratory infections and severe eczema in the breast-fed infant is a very real, practical consideration. Reasoning from the meager available information, it would appear that breast feeding is superior to artificial feeding from the psychologic viewpoint. In the last analysis, the choice of one or the other method of feeding stems from a general attitude. The physician who is impressed by the remarkable adaptibility of the human organism will, whether giving advice in the care of a well child or in ministering to the sick, interfere minimally with natural processes. We have erred too often in the past. This is not meant to minimize in any way the enormous value of artificial feeding for those infants who, for one reason or another, are unable to be fed at the breast. We do feel, however, that artificial feeding should be reserved for the instances where an honest attempt at breast feeding has failed.