The Quiet Revolution: Breastfeeding Transformed With the Use of Breast Pumps

Division of Nutritional Sciences, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853, USA.
American Journal of Public Health (Impact Factor: 4.23). 06/2011; 101(8):1356-9. DOI: 10.2105/AJPH.2011.300136
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT A quiet revolution has been taking place in the feeding of US infants in the form of women using electric breast pumps. This revolution in milk expression may be a boon for both mothers and infants if more infants are fed human milk or if they receive human milk for a longer period. Milk expression may also be problematic for mothers, and it may be particularly problematic for infants if they are fed too much, fed milk of an inappropriate composition, or fed milk that is contaminated. As a result, the time has come to determine the prevalence of exclusive and periodic breast milk expression and the consequences of these behaviors for the health of mothers and their infants.


Available from: Kathleen M Rasmussen, Jun 02, 2015
1 Follower
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Abstract Background: Breastmilk is the best source of nourishment for infants and young children, and breastfeeding is one of the most effective ways to ensure child health and survival. In May 1981, the World Health Assembly adopted the International Code of Marketing Breast-Milk Substitutes. Since then several subsequent resolutions have been adopted by the World Health Assembly, which both update and clarify the articles within the International Code (herein after the term "Code" refers to both the International Code and all subsequent resolutions). The Code is designed to regulate "inappropriate sales promotion" of breastmilk substitutes and instructs signatory governments to ensure the implementation of its aims through legislation. The Chinese Regulations of the Code were adopted by six government sectors in 1995. However, challenges in promotion, protection, and support of breastfeeding remain. This study aimed to monitor the implementation of the Code in China. Subjects and Methods: Six cities were selected with considerable geographic coverage. In each city three hospitals and six stores were surveyed. The International Baby Food Action Network Interview Form was adapted, and direct observations were made. Research assistants administered the questionnaires to a random sample of mothers of infants under 6 months old who were in the outpatient department of the hospitals. In total, 291 mothers of infants, 35 stores, 17 hospitals, and 26 companies were surveyed. Results: From the whole sample of 291 mothers, the proportion who reported exclusively breastfeeding their infant was 30.9%; 69.1% of mothers reported feeding their infant with commercially available formula. Regarding violations of the Code, 40.2% of the mothers reported receiving free formula samples. Of these, 76.1% received the free samples in or near hospitals. Among the stores surveyed, 45.7% were found promoting products in a way that violates the Code. Also, 69.0% of the labeling on the formula products did not comply with the regulations set out in the Code. Conclusions: As the social and economic developments continue, the interactions of more and more factors curb further success in breastfeeding. Support from all sectors of the society is needed in order to create a social environment to enable the promotion of breastfeeding, in addition to the efforts already made by the healthcare system.
    Breastfeeding Medicine 07/2014; 9(9). DOI:10.1089/bfm.2014.0053 · 1.73 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Exclusive breastfeeding for six months is recommended but few parents achieve this; particularly younger and less well-educated mothers. Many parents introduce infant formula milk to manage feeding but describe a desire to express breastmilk alongside a lack of support or information. The Internet is highlighted as a key resource. This study aimed to examine UK websites on expressing breastmilk to identify key messages and how information is provided. Methods: We used search terms in Google to identify websites with information rich content on expressing breastmilk and breast pumps. Ten sites were purposively selected at two time points in 2013 and 2014 to represent 3 categories: commercial, NHS or 3rd sector (voluntary or not for profit). Each site was reviewed by two researchers, data and reflective analytical notes were uploaded into NVivo and thematic data analysis undertaken. Results: Sites varied considerably in their design, use of images, videos, audio files, product placement and marketing opportunities. Three key themes emerged: depiction of expressing; reasons to express; and recommendations about expressing. Inconsistent and conflicting information was common within and between sites. Expressing was portrayed as similar to, but easier than, breastfeeding although at the same time difficult and requiring to be learned. Expressed breastmilk is promoted by mainly commercial sites as immediately available, although pumps were also presented as needing to be concealed, not heard or seen. Health benefits were the overarching reason for expressing. Although predicated on separation from the baby, commercial sites identified this as a positive choice while other sites focused on separation due to circumstance. Commercial sites emphasised restrictions related to breastfeeding, lack of sleep and bonding with the father and wider family. Non-commercial sites emphasised hand expression, with some not mentioning breast pumps. Practical information about starting expressing in relation to infant age or duration of breastfeeding was conflicting. Conclusions: Internet information about expressing breastmilk is inconsistent, incomplete and not evidence informed. The lack of research evidence on the relationship between expressing and feeding outcomes has provided opportunities for commercial companies, which have the potential to further exacerbate observed health inequalities. Access to good quality information based on robust evidence is urgently required.
    BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth 04/2015; 15(81). DOI:10.1186/s12884-015-0509-0 · 2.15 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To explore whether feeding only directly from the breast in the first 24-48 h of life increases the proportion of infants receiving any breast milk at 6 months. A prospective cohort study. Three maternity hospitals in Melbourne, Australia. 1003 postpartum English-speaking women with a healthy singleton term infant, who intended to breast feed, were recruited between 2009 and 2011. Women were excluded if they or their infant were seriously ill. 92% (n=924) were followed up at 6 months postpartum. Main exposure variable -type of infant feeding in hospital up to time of study recruitment (24-48 h postpartum), categorised as 'fed directly at the breast only' or 'received at least some expressed breast milk (EBM) or infant formula'. Primary outcome-proportion of infants receiving any breast milk feeding at 6 months postpartum. Secondary outcomes-proportion of infants receiving only breast milk feeding at 6 months; breast milk feeding duration; and maternal characteristics associated with giving any breast milk at 6 months. Infants who had fed only at the breast prior to recruitment were more likely to be continuing to have any breast milk at 6 months than those who had received any EBM and/or infant formula (76% vs 59%; adjusted OR 1.76, 95% CI 1.24 to 2.48 (adjusted for parity, type of birth, breastfeeding intention, breastfeeding problems at recruitment, public/private status, epidural for labour or birth, maternal body mass index and education)). Healthy term infants that fed only directly at the breast 24-48 h after birth were more likely to be continuing to breast feed at 6 months than those who received any EBM and/or formula in the early postpartum period. Support and encouragement to initiate breastfeeding directly at the breast is important. Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to
    BMJ Open 05/2015; 5(5):e007512. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2014-007512 · 2.06 Impact Factor