This Policy Statement was revised. See https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2022-057988.
Breastfeeding and human milk are the normative standards for infant feeding and nutrition. Given the documented short- and long-term medical and neurodevelopmental advantages of breastfeeding, infant nutrition should be considered a public health issue and not only a lifestyle choice. The American Academy of Pediatrics reaffirms its recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for about 6 months, followed by continued breastfeeding as complementary foods are introduced, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by mother and infant. Medical contraindications to breastfeeding are rare. Infant growth should be monitored with the World Health Organization (WHO) Growth Curve Standards to avoid mislabeling infants as underweight or failing to thrive. Hospital routines to encourage and support the initiation and sustaining of exclusive breastfeeding should be based on the American Academy of Pediatrics-endorsed WHO/UNICEF “Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding.” National strategies supported by the US Surgeon General’s Call to Action, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and The Joint Commission are involved to facilitate breastfeeding practices in US hospitals and communities. Pediatricians play a critical role in their practices and communities as advocates of breastfeeding and thus should be knowledgeable about the health risks of not breastfeeding, the economic benefits to society of breastfeeding, and the techniques for managing and supporting the breastfeeding dyad. The “Business Case for Breastfeeding” details how mothers can maintain lactation in the workplace and the benefits to employers who facilitate this practice.
Introduction
Six years have transpired since publication of the last policy statement of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) regarding breastfeeding.1 Recently published research and systematic reviews have reinforced the conclusion that breastfeeding and human milk are the reference normative standards for infant feeding and nutrition. The current statement updates the evidence for this conclusion and serves as a basis for AAP publications that detail breastfeeding management and infant nutrition, including the AAP Breastfeeding Handbook for Physicians,2 AAP Sample Hospital Breastfeeding Policy for Newborns,3 AAP Breastfeeding Residency Curriculum,4 and the AAP Safe and Healthy Beginnings Toolkit.5 The AAP reaffirms its recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding for about 6 months, followed by continued breastfeeding as complementary foods are introduced, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by mother and infant.
Epidemiology
Information regarding breastfeeding rates and practices in the United States is available from a variety of government data sets, including the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Immunization Survey,6 the NHANES,7 and Maternity Practices and Infant Nutrition and Care.8 Drawing on these data and others, the CDC has published the “Breastfeeding Report Card,” which highlights the degree of progress in achieving the breastfeeding goals of the Healthy People 2010 targets as well as the 2020 targets (Table 1).9,–11
. | 2007a . | 2010 Target . | 2020 Target . |
---|---|---|---|
Any breastfeeding | |||
Ever | 75.0 | 75 | 81.9 |
6 mo | 43.8 | 50 | 60.5 |
1 y | 22.4 | 25 | 34.1 |
Exclusive breastfeeding | |||
To 3 mo | 33.5 | 40 | 44.3 |
To 6 mo | 13.8 | 17 | 23.7 |
Worksite lactation support | 25 | — | 38.0 |
Formula use in first 2 d | 25.6 | — | 15.6 |
. | 2007a . | 2010 Target . | 2020 Target . |
---|---|---|---|
Any breastfeeding | |||
Ever | 75.0 | 75 | 81.9 |
6 mo | 43.8 | 50 | 60.5 |
1 y | 22.4 | 25 | 34.1 |
Exclusive breastfeeding | |||
To 3 mo | 33.5 | 40 | 44.3 |
To 6 mo | 13.8 | 17 | 23.7 |
Worksite lactation support | 25 | — | 38.0 |
Formula use in first 2 d | 25.6 | — | 15.6 |
2007 data reported in 2011.10
The rate of initiation of breastfeeding for the total US population based on the latest National Immunization Survey data are 75%.11 This overall rate, however, obscures clinically significant sociodemographic and cultural differences. For example, the breastfeeding initiation rate for the Hispanic or Latino population was 80.6%, but for the non-Hispanic black or African American population, it was 58.1%. Among low-income mothers (participants in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children [WIC]), the breastfeeding initiation rate was 67.5%, but in those with a higher income ineligible for WIC, it was 84.6%.12 Breastfeeding initiation rate was 37% for low-income non-Hispanic black mothers.7 Similar disparities are age-related; mothers younger than 20 years initiated breastfeeding at a rate of 59.7% compared with the rate of 79.3% in mothers older than 30 years. The lowest rates of initiation were seen among non-Hispanic black mothers younger than 20 years, in whom the breastfeeding initiation rate was 30%.7
Although over the past decade, there has been a modest increase in the rate of “any breastfeeding” at 3 and 6 months, in none of the subgroups have the Healthy People 2010 targets been reached. For example, the 6-month “any breastfeeding” rate for the total US population was 43%, the rate for the Hispanic or Latino subgroup was 46%, and the rate for the non-Hispanic black or African American subgroup was only 27.5%. Rates of exclusive breastfeeding are further from Healthy People 2010 targets, with only 13% of the US population meeting the recommendation to breastfeed exclusively for 6 months. Thus, it appears that although the breastfeeding initiation rates have approached the 2010 Healthy People targets, the targets for duration of any breastfeeding and exclusive breastfeeding have not been met.
Furthermore, 24% of maternity services provide supplements of commercial infant formula as a general practice in the first 48 hours after birth. These observations have led to the conclusion that the disparities in breastfeeding rates are also associated with variations in hospital routines, independent of the populations served. As such, it is clear that greater emphasis needs to be placed on improving and standardizing hospital-based practices to realize the newer 2020 targets (Table 1).
Infant Outcomes
Methodologic Issues
Breastfeeding results in improved infant and maternal health outcomes in both the industrialized and developing world. Major methodologic issues have been raised as to the quality of some of these studies, especially as to the size of the study populations, quality of the data set, inadequate adjustment for confounders, absence of distinguishing between “any” or “exclusive” breastfeeding, and lack of a defined causal relationship between breastfeeding and the specific outcome. In addition, there are inherent practical and ethical issues that have precluded prospective randomized interventional trials of different feeding regimens. As such, the majority of published reports are observational cohort studies and systematic reviews/meta-analyses.
To date, the most comprehensive publication that reviews and analyzes the published scientific literature that compares breastfeeding and commercial infant formula feeding as to health outcomes is the report prepared by the Evidence-based Practice Centers of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (AHRQ) of the US Department of Health Human Services titled Breastfeeding and Maternal and Infant Health Outcomes in Developed Countries.13 The following sections summarize and update the AHRQ meta-analyses and provide an expanded analysis regarding health outcomes. Table 2 summarizes the dose-response relationship between the duration of breastfeeding and its protective effect.
Condition . | % Lower Riskb . | Breastfeeding . | Comments . | ORc . | 95% CI . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Otitis media13 | 23 | Any | — | 0.77 | 0.64–0.91 |
Otitis media13 | 50 | ≥3 or 6 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.50 | 0.36–0.70 |
Recurrent otitis media15 | 77 | Exclusive BF ≥6 mod | Compared with BF 4 to <6 mod | 1.95 | 1.06–3.59 |
Upper respiratory tract infection17 | 63 | >6 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.30 | 0.18–0.74 |
Lower respiratory tract infection13 | 72 | ≥4 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.28 | 0.14–0.54 |
Lower respiratory tract infection15 | 77 | Exclusive BF ≥6 mod | Compared with BF 4 to <6 mod | 4.27 | 1.27–14.35 |
Asthma13 | 40 | ≥3 mo | Atopic family history | 0.60 | 0.43–0.82 |
Asthma13 | 26 | ≥3 mo | No atopic family history | 0.74 | 0.6–0.92 |
RSV bronchiolitis16 | 74 | >4 mo | — | 0.26 | 0.074–0.9 |
NEC19 | 77 | NICU stay | Preterm infants Exclusive HM | 0.23 | 0.51–0.94 |
Atopic dermatitis27 | 27 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF negative family history | 0.84 | 0.59–1.19 |
Atopic dermatitis27 | 42 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF positive family history | 0.58 | 0.41–0.92 |
Gastroenteritis13,14 | 64 | Any | — | 0.36 | 0.32–0.40 |
Inflammatory bowel disease32 | 31 | Any | — | 0.69 | 0.51–0.94 |
Obesity13 | 24 | Any | — | 0.76 | 0.67–0.86 |
Celiac disease31 | 52 | >2 mo | Gluten exposure when BF | 0.48 | 0.40–0.89 |
Type 1 diabetes13,42 | 30 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.71 | 0.54–0.93 |
Type 2 diabetes13,43 | 40 | Any | — | 0.61 | 0.44–0.85 |
Leukemia (ALL)13,46 | 20 | >6 mo | — | 0.80 | 0.71–0.91 |
Leukemia (AML)13,45 | 15 | >6 mo | — | 0.85 | 0.73–0.98 |
SIDS13 | 36 | Any >1 mo | — | 0.64 | 0.57–0.81 |
Condition . | % Lower Riskb . | Breastfeeding . | Comments . | ORc . | 95% CI . |
---|---|---|---|---|---|
Otitis media13 | 23 | Any | — | 0.77 | 0.64–0.91 |
Otitis media13 | 50 | ≥3 or 6 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.50 | 0.36–0.70 |
Recurrent otitis media15 | 77 | Exclusive BF ≥6 mod | Compared with BF 4 to <6 mod | 1.95 | 1.06–3.59 |
Upper respiratory tract infection17 | 63 | >6 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.30 | 0.18–0.74 |
Lower respiratory tract infection13 | 72 | ≥4 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.28 | 0.14–0.54 |
Lower respiratory tract infection15 | 77 | Exclusive BF ≥6 mod | Compared with BF 4 to <6 mod | 4.27 | 1.27–14.35 |
Asthma13 | 40 | ≥3 mo | Atopic family history | 0.60 | 0.43–0.82 |
Asthma13 | 26 | ≥3 mo | No atopic family history | 0.74 | 0.6–0.92 |
RSV bronchiolitis16 | 74 | >4 mo | — | 0.26 | 0.074–0.9 |
NEC19 | 77 | NICU stay | Preterm infants Exclusive HM | 0.23 | 0.51–0.94 |
Atopic dermatitis27 | 27 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF negative family history | 0.84 | 0.59–1.19 |
Atopic dermatitis27 | 42 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF positive family history | 0.58 | 0.41–0.92 |
Gastroenteritis13,14 | 64 | Any | — | 0.36 | 0.32–0.40 |
Inflammatory bowel disease32 | 31 | Any | — | 0.69 | 0.51–0.94 |
Obesity13 | 24 | Any | — | 0.76 | 0.67–0.86 |
Celiac disease31 | 52 | >2 mo | Gluten exposure when BF | 0.48 | 0.40–0.89 |
Type 1 diabetes13,42 | 30 | >3 mo | Exclusive BF | 0.71 | 0.54–0.93 |
Type 2 diabetes13,43 | 40 | Any | — | 0.61 | 0.44–0.85 |
Leukemia (ALL)13,46 | 20 | >6 mo | — | 0.80 | 0.71–0.91 |
Leukemia (AML)13,45 | 15 | >6 mo | — | 0.85 | 0.73–0.98 |
SIDS13 | 36 | Any >1 mo | — | 0.64 | 0.57–0.81 |
ALL, acute lymphocytic leukemia; AML, acute myelogenous leukemia; BF, breastfeeding; HM, human milk; RSV, respiratory syncytial virus.
Pooled data.
% lower risk refers to lower risk while BF compared with feeding commercial infant formula or referent group specified.
OR expressed as increase risk for commercial formula feeding.
Referent group is exclusive BF ≥6 months.
Respiratory Tract Infections and Otitis Media
The risk of hospitalization for lower respiratory tract infections in the first year is reduced 72% if infants breastfed exclusively for more than 4 months.13,14 Infants who exclusively breastfed for 4 to 6 months had a fourfold increase in the risk of pneumonia compared with infants who exclusively breastfed for more than 6 months.15 The severity (duration of hospitalization and oxygen requirements) of respiratory syncytial virus bronchiolitis is reduced by 74% in infants who breastfed exclusively for 4 months compared with infants who never or only partially breastfed.16
Any breastfeeding compared with exclusive commercial infant formula feeding will reduce the incidence of otitis media (OM) by 23%.13 Exclusive breastfeeding for more than 3 months reduces the risk of otitis media by 50%. Serious colds and ear and throat infections were reduced by 63% in infants who exclusively breastfed for 6 months.17
Gastrointestinal Tract Infections
Necrotizing Enterocolitis
Meta-analyses of 4 randomized clinical trials performed over the period 1983 to 2005 support the conclusion that feeding preterm infants human milk is associated with a significant reduction (58%) in the incidence of necrotizing enterocolitis (NEC).13 A more recent study of preterm infants fed an exclusive human milk diet compared with those fed human milk supplemented with cow-milk-based infant formula products noted a 77% reduction in NEC.19 One case of NEC could be prevented if 10 infants received an exclusive human milk diet, and 1 case of NEC requiring surgery or resulting in death could be prevented if 8 infants received an exclusive human milk diet.19
Sudden Infant Death Syndrome and Infant Mortality
Meta-analyses with a clear definition of degree of breastfeeding and adjusted for confounders and other known risks for sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) note that breastfeeding is associated with a 36% reduced risk of SIDS.13 Latest data comparing any versus exclusive breastfeeding reveal that for any breastfeeding, the multivariate odds ratio (OR) is 0.55 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.44–0.69). When computed for exclusive breastfeeding, the OR is 0.27 (95% CI, 0.24–0.31).20 A proportion (21%) of the US infant mortality has been attributed, in part, to the increased rate of SIDS in infants who were never breastfed.21 That the positive effect of breastfeeding on SIDS rates is independent of sleep position was confirmed in a large case-control study of supine-sleeping infants.22,23
It has been calculated that more than 900 infant lives per year may be saved in the United States if 90% of mothers exclusively breastfed for 6 months.24 In the 42 developing countries in which 90% of the world’s childhood deaths occur, exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months and weaning after 1 year is the most effective intervention, with the potential of preventing more than 1 million infant deaths per year, equal to preventing 13% of the world’s childhood mortality.25
Allergic Disease
There is a protective effect of exclusive breastfeeding for 3 to 4 months in reducing the incidence of clinical asthma, atopic dermatitis, and eczema by 27% in a low-risk population and up to 42% in infants with positive family history.13,26 There are conflicting studies that examine the timing of adding complementary foods after 4 months and the risk of allergy, including food allergies, atopic dermatitis, and asthma, in either the allergy-prone or nonatopic individual.26 Similarly, there are no convincing data that delaying introduction of potentially allergenic foods after 6 months has any protective effect.27,–30 One problem in analyzing this research is the low prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding at 6 months in the study populations. Thus, research outcomes in studies that examine the development of atopy and the timing of introducing solid foods in partially breastfed infants may not be applicable to exclusively breastfed infants.
Celiac Disease
There is a reduction of 52% in the risk of developing celiac disease in infants who were breastfed at the time of gluten exposure.31 Overall, there is an association between increased duration of breastfeeding and reduced risk of celiac disease when measured as the presence of celiac antibodies. The critical protective factor appears to be not the timing of the gluten exposure but the overlap of breastfeeding at the time of the initial gluten ingestion. Thus, gluten-containing foods should be introduced while the infant is receiving only breast milk and not infant formula or other bovine milk products.
Inflammatory Bowel Disease
Breastfeeding is associated with a 31% reduction in the risk of childhood inflammatory bowel disease.32 The protective effect is hypothesized to result from the interaction of the immunomodulating effect of human milk and the underlying genetic susceptibility of the infant. Different patterns of intestinal colonization in breastfed versus commercial infant formula–fed infants may add to the preventive effect of human milk.33
Obesity
Because rates of obesity are significantly lower in breastfed infants, national campaigns to prevent obesity begin with breastfeeding support.34,35 Although complex factors confound studies of obesity, there is a 15% to 30% reduction in adolescent and adult obesity rates if any breastfeeding occurred in infancy compared with no breastfeeding.13,36 The Framingham Offspring study noted a relationship of breastfeeding and a lower BMI and higher high-density lipoprotein concentration in adults.37 A sibling difference model study noted that the breastfed sibling weighed 14 pounds less than the sibling fed commercial infant formula and was less likely to reach BMI obesity threshold.38 The duration of breastfeeding also is inversely related to the risk of overweight; each month of breastfeeding being associated with a 4% reduction in risk.14
The interpretation of these data is confounded by the lack of a definition in many studies of whether human milk was given by breastfeeding or by bottle. This is of particular importance, because breastfed infants self-regulate intake volume irrespective of maneuvers that increase available milk volume, and the early programming of self-regulation, in turn, affects adult weight gain.39 This concept is further supported by the observations that infants who are fed by bottle, formula, or expressed breast milk will have increased bottle emptying, poorer self-regulation, and excessive weight gain in late infancy (older than 6 months) compared with infants who only nurse from the breast.40,41
Diabetes
Up to a 30% reduction in the incidence of type 1 diabetes mellitus is reported for infants who exclusively breastfed for at least 3 months, thus avoiding exposure to cow milk protein.13,42 It has been postulated that the putative mechanism in the development of type 1 diabetes mellitus is the infant’s exposure to cow milk β-lactoglobulin, which stimulates an immune-mediated process cross-reacting with pancreatic β cells. A reduction of 40% in the incidence of type 2 diabetes mellitus is reported, possibly reflecting the long-term positive effect of breastfeeding on weight control and feeding self-regulation.43
Childhood Leukemia and Lymphoma
There is a reduction in leukemia that is correlated with the duration of breastfeeding.14,44 A reduction of 20% in the risk of acute lymphocytic leukemia and 15% in the risk of acute myeloid leukemia in infants breastfed for 6 months or longer.45,46 Breastfeeding for less than 6 months is protective but of less magnitude (approximately 12% and 10%, respectively). The question of whether the protective effect of breastfeeding is a direct mechanism of human milk on malignancies or secondarily mediated by its reduction of early childhood infections has yet to be answered.
Neurodevelopmental Outcomes
Consistent differences in neurodevelopmental outcome between breastfed and commercial infant formula–fed infants have been reported, but the outcomes are confounded by differences in parental education, intelligence, home environment, and socioeconomic status.13,47 The large, randomized Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial provided evidence that adjusted outcomes of intelligence scores and teacher’s ratings are significantly greater in breastfed infants.48,–50 In addition, higher intelligence scores are noted in infants who exclusively breastfed for 3 months or longer, and higher teacher ratings were observed if exclusive breastfeeding was practiced for 3 months or longer. Significantly positive effects of human milk feeding on long-term neurodevelopment are observed in preterm infants, the population more at risk for these adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes.51,–54
Preterm Infants
There are several significant short- and long-term beneficial effects of feeding preterm infants human milk. Lower rates of sepsis and NEC indicate that human milk contributes to the development of the preterm infant’s immature host defense.19,55,–59 The benefits of feeding human milk to preterm infants are realized not only in the NICU but also in the fewer hospital readmissions for illness in the year after NICU discharge.51,52 Furthermore, the implications for a reduction in incidence of NEC include not only lower mortality rates but also lower long-term growth failure and neurodevelopmental disabilities.60,61 Clinical feeding tolerance is improved, and the attainment of full enteral feeding is hastened by a diet of human milk.51,52,59
Neurodevelopmental outcomes are improved by the feeding of human milk. Long-term studies at 8 years of age through adolescence suggest that intelligence test results and white matter and total brain volumes are greater in subjects who had received human milk as infants in the NICU.53,54 Extremely preterm infants receiving the greatest proportion of human milk in the NICU had significantly greater scores for mental, motor, and behavior ratings at ages 18 months and 30 months.51,52 These data remain significant after adjustment for confounding factors, such as maternal age, education, marital status, race, and infant morbidities. These neurodevelopmental outcomes are associated with predominant and not necessarily exclusive human milk feeding. Human milk feeding in the NICU also is associated with lower rates of severe retinopathy of prematurity.62,63 Long-term studies of preterm infants also suggest that human milk feeding is associated with lower rates of metabolic syndrome, and in adolescents, it is associated with lower blood pressures and low-density lipoprotein concentrations and improved leptin and insulin metabolism.64,65
The potent benefits of human milk are such that all preterm infants should receive human milk (Table 3). Mother’s own milk, fresh or frozen, should be the primary diet, and it should be fortified appropriately for the infant born weighing less than 1.5 kg. If mother’s own milk is unavailable despite significant lactation support, pasteurized donor milk should be used.19,66 Quality control of pasteurized donor milk is important and should be monitored. New data suggest that mother’s own milk can be stored at refrigerator temperature (4°C) in the NICU for as long as 96 hours.67 Data on thawing, warming, and prolonged storage need updating. Practices should involve protocols that prevent misadministration of milk.
1. All preterm infants should receive human milk. |
• Human milk should be fortified, with protein, minerals, and vitamins to ensure optimal nutrient intake for infants weighing <1500 g at birth. |
• Pasteurized donor human milk, appropriately fortified, should be used if mother’s own milk is unavailable or its use is contraindicated. |
2. Methods and training protocols for manual and mechanical milk expression must be available to mothers. |
3. Neonatal intensive care units should possess evidence-based protocols for collection, storage, and labeling of human milk.150 |
4. Neonatal intensive care units should prevent the misadministration of human milk (http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/recommendations/other_mothers_milk.htm). |
5. There are no data to support routinely culturing human milk for bacterial or other organisms.151 |
1. All preterm infants should receive human milk. |
• Human milk should be fortified, with protein, minerals, and vitamins to ensure optimal nutrient intake for infants weighing <1500 g at birth. |
• Pasteurized donor human milk, appropriately fortified, should be used if mother’s own milk is unavailable or its use is contraindicated. |
2. Methods and training protocols for manual and mechanical milk expression must be available to mothers. |
3. Neonatal intensive care units should possess evidence-based protocols for collection, storage, and labeling of human milk.150 |
4. Neonatal intensive care units should prevent the misadministration of human milk (http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/recommendations/other_mothers_milk.htm). |
5. There are no data to support routinely culturing human milk for bacterial or other organisms.151 |
Maternal Outcomes
Both short- and long-term health benefits accrue to mothers who breastfeed. Such mothers have decreased postpartum blood loss and more rapid involution of the uterus. Continued breastfeeding leads to increased child spacing secondary to lactational amenorrhea. Prospective cohort studies have noted an increase in postpartum depression in mothers who do not breastfeed or who wean early.68 A large prospective study on child abuse and neglect perpetuated by mothers found, after correcting for potential confounders, that the rate of abuse/neglect was significantly increased for mothers who did not breastfeed as opposed to those who did (OR: 2.6; 95% CI: 1.7–3.9).69
Studies of the overall effect of breastfeeding on the return of the mothers to their pre-pregnancy weight are inconclusive, given the large numbers of confounding factors on weight loss (diet, activity, baseline BMI, ethnicity).13 In a covariate-adjusted study of more than 14 000 women postpartum, mothers who exclusively breastfed for longer than 6 months weighed 1.38 kg less than those who did not breastfeed.70 In mothers without a history of gestational diabetes, breastfeeding duration was associated with a decreased risk of type 2 diabetes mellitus; for each year of breastfeeding, there was a decreased risk of 4% to 12%.71,72 No beneficial effect for breastfeeding was noted in mothers who were diagnosed with gestational diabetes.
The longitudinal Nurses Health Study noted an inverse relationship between the cumulative lifetime duration of breastfeeding and the development of rheumatoid arthritis.73 If cumulative duration of breastfeeding exceeded 12 months, the relative risk of rheumatoid arthritis was 0.8 (95% CI: 0.8–1.0), and if the cumulative duration of breastfeeding was longer than 24 months, the relative risk of rheumatoid arthritis was 0.5 (95% CI: 0.3–0.8).73 An association between cumulative lactation experience and the incidence of adult cardiovascular disease was reported by the Women’s Health Initiative in a longitudinal study of more than 139 000 postmenopausal women.74 Women with a cumulative lactation history of 12 to 23 months had a significant reduction in hypertension (OR: 0.89; 95% CI: 0.84–0.93), hyperlipidemia (OR: 0.81; 95% CI: 0.76–0.87), cardiovascular disease (OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.85–0.96), and diabetes (OR: 0.74; 95% CI: 0.65–0.84).
Cumulative lactation experience also correlates with a reduction in both breast (primarily premenopausal) and ovarian cancer.13,14,75 Cumulative duration of breastfeeding of longer than 12 months is associated with a 28% decrease in breast cancer (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.65–0.8) and ovarian cancer (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.54–0.97).76 Each year of breastfeeding has been calculated to result in a 4.3% reduction in breast cancer.76,77
Economic Benefits
A detailed pediatric cost analysis based on the AHRQ report concluded that if 90% of US mothers would comply with the recommendation to breastfeed exclusively for 6 months, there would be a savings of $13 billion per year.24 The savings do not include those related to a reduction in parental absenteeism from work or adult deaths from diseases acquired in childhood, such as asthma, type 1 diabetes mellitus, or obesity-related conditions. Strategies that increase the number of mothers who breastfeed exclusively for about 6 months would be of great economic benefit on a national level.
Duration of Exclusive Breastfeeding
The AAP recommends exclusive breastfeeding for about 6 months, with continuation of breastfeeding for 1 year or longer as mutually desired by mother and infant, a recommendation concurred to by the WHO78 and the Institute of Medicine.79
Support for this recommendation of exclusive breastfeeding is found in the differences in health outcomes of infants breastfed exclusively for 4 vs 6 months, for gastrointestinal disease, otitis media, respiratory illnesses, and atopic disease, as well as differences in maternal outcomes of delayed menses and postpartum weight loss.15,18,80
Compared with infants who never breastfed, infants who were exclusively breastfed for 4 months had significantly greater incidence of lower respiratory tract illnesses, otitis media, and diarrheal disease than infants exclusively breastfed for 6 months or longer.15,18 When compared with infants who exclusively breastfed for longer than 6 months, those exclusively breastfed for 4 to 6 months had a fourfold increase in the risk of pneumonia.15 Furthermore, exclusively breastfeeding for 6 months extends the period of lactational amenorrhea and thus improves child spacing, which reduces the risk of birth of a preterm infant.81
The AAP is cognizant that for some infants, because of family and medical history, individual developmental status, and/or social and cultural dynamics, complementary feeding, including gluten-containing grains, begins earlier than 6 months of age.82,83 Because breastfeeding is immunoprotective, when such complementary foods are introduced, it is advised that this be done while the infant is feeding only breastmilk.82 Mothers should be encouraged to continue breastfeeding through the first year and beyond as more and varied complementary foods are introduced.
Contraindications to Breastfeeding
There are a limited number of medical conditions in which breastfeeding is contraindicated, including an infant with the metabolic disorder of classic galactosemia. Alternating breastfeeding with special protein-free or modified formulas can be used in feeding infants with other metabolic diseases (such as phenylketonuria), provided that appropriate blood monitoring is available. Mothers who are positive for human T-cell lymphotrophic virus type I or II84 or untreated brucellosis85 should not breastfeed nor provide expressed milk to their infants Breastfeeding should not occur if the mother has active (infectious) untreated tuberculosis or has active herpes simplex lesions on her breast; however, expressed milk can be used because there is no concern about these infectious organisms passing through the milk. Breastfeeding can be resumed when a mother with tuberculosis is treated for a minimum of 2 weeks and is documented that she is no longer infectious.86 Mothers who develop varicella 5 days before through 2 days after delivery should be separated from their infants, but their expressed milk can be used for feeding.87 In 2009, the CDC recommended that mothers acutely infected with H1N1 influenza should temporarily be isolated from their infants until they are afebrile, but they can provide expressed milk for feeding.88
In the industrialized world, it is not recommended that HIV-positive mothers breastfeed. However, in the developing world, where mortality is increased in non-breastfeeding infants from a combination of malnutrition and infectious diseases, breastfeeding may outweigh the risk of the acquiring HIV infection from human milk. Infants in areas with endemic HIV who are exclusively breastfed for the first 3 months are at a lower risk of acquiring HIV infection than are those who received a mixed diet of human milk and other foods and/or commercial infant formula.89 Recent studies document that combining exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months with 6 months of antiretroviral therapy significantly decreases the postnatal acquisition of HIV-1.90,91
There is no contraindication to breastfeeding for a full-term infant whose mother is seropositive for cytomegalovirus (CMV). There is a possibility that CMV acquired from mother’s milk may be associated with a late-onset sepsis-like syndrome in the extremely low birth weight (birth weight <1500 g) preterm infant. Although not associated with long-term abnormalities, such a syndrome may warrant antiviral therapy.92 The value of routinely feeding human milk from seropositive mothers to preterm infants outweighs the risks of clinical disease, especially because no long-term neurodevelopmental abnormalities have been reported.93 Freezing of milk reduces but does not eliminate CMV.94 Heating, either as Holder pasteurization (heating at 62.5°C for 30 minutes) or high-temperature short pasteurization (72°C for 5–10 seconds) eliminates the viral load from the milk but also affects bioactive factors and nutrients.95 Thus, fresh mother’s own milk is preferable for routinely feeding all preterm infants.
Maternal substance abuse is not a categorical contraindication to breastfeeding. Adequately nourished narcotic-dependent mothers can be encouraged to breastfeed if they are enrolled in a supervised methadone maintenance program and have negative screening for HIV and illicit drugs.96 Street drugs such as PCP (phencyclidine), cocaine, and cannabis can be detected in human milk, and their use by breastfeeding mothers is of concern, particularly with regard to the infant’s long-term neurobehavioral development and thus are contraindicated.97 Alcohol is not a galactogogue; it may blunt prolactin response to suckling and negatively affects infant motor development.98,99 Thus, ingestion of alcoholic beverages should be minimized and limited to an occasional intake but no more than 0.5 g alcohol per kg body weight, which for a 60 kg mother is approximately 2 oz liquor, 8 oz wine, or 2 beers.100 Nursing should take place 2 hours or longer after the alcohol intake to minimize its concentration in the ingested milk.101 Maternal smoking is not an absolute contraindication to breastfeeding but should be strongly discouraged, because it is associated with an increased incidence in infant respiratory allergy102 and SIDS.103 Smoking should not occur in the presence of the infant so as to minimize the negative effect of secondary passive smoke inhalation.104 Smoking is also a risk factor for low milk supply and poor weight gain.105,106
Maternal Diet
Well-nourished lactating mothers have an increased daily energy need of 450 to 500 kcal/day that can be met by a modest increase in a normally balanced varied diet.107,–109 Although dietary reference intakes for breastfeeding mothers are similar to or greater than those during pregnancy, there is no routine recommendation for maternal supplements during lactation.108,109,110 Many clinicians recommend the continued use of prenatal vitamin supplements during lactation.109
The mother’s diet should include an average daily intake of 200 to 300 mg of the ω-3 long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids (docosahexaenoic acid [DHA]) to guarantee a sufficient concentration of preformed DHA in the milk.111,112 Consumption of 1 to 2 portions of fish (eg, herring, canned light tuna, salmon) per week will meet this need. The concern regarding the possible risk from intake of excessive mercury or other contaminants is offset by the neurobehavioral benefits of an adequate DHA intake and can be minimized by avoiding the intake of predatory fish (eg, pike, marlin, mackerel, tile fish, swordfish).113 Poorly nourished mothers or those on selective vegan diets may require a supplement of DHA as well as multivitamins.
Maternal Medications
Recommendations regarding breastfeeding in situations in which the mother is undergoing either diagnostic procedures or pharmacologic therapy must balance the benefits to the infant and the mother against the potential risk of drug exposure to the infant. There are only a limited number of agents that are contraindicated, and an appropriate substitute usually can be found. The most comprehensive, up-to-date source of information regarding the safety of maternal medications when the mother is breastfeeding is LactMed, an Internet-accessed source published by the National Library of Medicine/National Institutes of Health.114 A forthcoming AAP policy statement on the transfer of drugs and other chemicals into human milk will provide additional recommendations, with particular focus on psychotropic drugs, herbal products, galactagogues, narcotics, and pain medications.115 In general, breastfeeding is not recommended when mothers are receiving medication from the following classes of drugs: amphetamines, chemotherapy agents, ergotamines, and statins.
There are a wide variety of maternally administered psychotropic agents for which there are inadequate pharmacologic data with regard to human milk and/or nursing infant’s blood concentrations. In addition, data regarding the long-term neurobehavioral effects from exposure to these agents during the critical developmental period of early infancy are lacking. A recent comprehensive review noted that of the 96 psychotropic drugs available, pharmacologic and clinical information was only available for 62 (65%) of the drugs.116 In only 19 was there adequate information to allow for defining a safety protocol and thus qualifying to be compatible for use by lactating mothers. Among the agents considered to be least problematic were the tricyclic antidepressants amitriptyline and clomipramine and the selective serotonin-reuptake inhibitors paroxetine and sertraline.
Detailed guidelines regarding the necessity for and duration of temporary cessation of breastfeeding after maternal exposure to diagnostic radioactive compounds are provided by the US Nuclear Regulatory Commission and in medical reviews.117,–119 Special precaution should be followed in the situation of breastfeeding infants with glucose-6-phosphate-dehydrogenase deficiency. Fava beans, nitrofurantoin, primaquine, and phenazopyridine should be avoided by the mother to minimize the risk of hemolysis in the infant.120
Hospital Routines
The Sections on Breastfeeding and Perinatal Pediatrics have published the Sample Hospital Breastfeeding Policy that is available from the AAP Safe and Healthy Beginnings Web site.3,5 This sample hospital policy is based on the detailed recommendations of the previous AAP policy statement “Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk”1 as well as the principles of the 1991 WHO/UNICEF publication “Tens Steps to Successful Breastfeeding” (Table 4)121 and provides a template for developing a uniform hospital policy for support of breastfeeding.122 In particular, emphasis is placed on the need to revise or discontinue disruptive hospital policies that interfere with early skin-to-skin contact, that provide water, glucose water, or commercial infant formula without a medical indication, that restrict the amount of time the infant can be with the mother, that limit feeding duration, or that provide unlimited pacifier use.
1. Have a written breastfeeding policy that is routinely communicated to all health care staff. |
2. Train all health care staff in the skills necessary to implement this policy. |
3. Inform all pregnant women about the benefits and management of breastfeeding. |
4. Help mothers initiate breastfeeding within the first hour of birth. |
5. Show mothers how to breastfeed and how to maintain lactation even if they are separated from their infants. |
6. Give newborn infants no food or drink other than breast milk, unless medically indicated. |
7. Practice rooming-in (allow mothers and infants to remain together) 24 h a day. |
8. Encourage breastfeeding on demand. |
9. Give no artificial nipples or pacifiers to breastfeeding infants.a |
10. Foster the establishment of breastfeeding support groups and refer mothers to them on discharge from hospital. |
1. Have a written breastfeeding policy that is routinely communicated to all health care staff. |
2. Train all health care staff in the skills necessary to implement this policy. |
3. Inform all pregnant women about the benefits and management of breastfeeding. |
4. Help mothers initiate breastfeeding within the first hour of birth. |
5. Show mothers how to breastfeed and how to maintain lactation even if they are separated from their infants. |
6. Give newborn infants no food or drink other than breast milk, unless medically indicated. |
7. Practice rooming-in (allow mothers and infants to remain together) 24 h a day. |
8. Encourage breastfeeding on demand. |
9. Give no artificial nipples or pacifiers to breastfeeding infants.a |
10. Foster the establishment of breastfeeding support groups and refer mothers to them on discharge from hospital. |
The AAP does not support a categorical ban on pacifiers because of their role in SIDS risk reduction and their analgesic benefit during painful procedures when breastfeeding cannot provide the analgesia. Pacifier use in the hospital in the neonatal period should be limited to specific medical indications such as pain reduction and calming in a drug-exposed infant, for example. Mothers of healthy term breastfed infants should be instructed to delay pacifier use until breastfeeding is well-established, usually about 3 to 4 wk after birth.
In 2009, the AAP endorsed the Ten Steps program (see Table 4). Adherence to these 10 steps has been demonstrated to increase rates of breastfeeding initiation, duration, and exclusivity.122,123 Implementation of the following 5 postpartum hospital practices has been demonstrated to increase breastfeeding duration, irrespective of socioeconomic status: breastfeeding in the first hour after birth, exclusive breastfeeding, rooming-in, avoidance of pacifiers, and receipt of telephone number for support after discharge from the hospital.124
The CDC National Survey of Maternity Practices in Infant Nutrition and Care has assessed the lactation practices in more than 80% of US hospitals and noted that the mean score for implementation of the Ten Steps was only 65%.34,125 Fifty-eight percent of hospitals erroneously advised mothers to limit suckling at the breast to a specified length of time, and 41% of the hospitals gave pacifiers to more than some of their newborns—both practices that have been documented to lower breastfeeding rates and duration.126 The survey noted that in 30% of all birth centers, more than half of all newborns received supplementation commercial infant formula, a practice associated with shorter duration of breastfeeding and less exclusivity.34,125 As indicated in the benefits section, this early supplementation may affect morbidity outcomes in this population. The survey also reported that 66% of hospitals reported that they distributed to breastfeeding mothers discharge packs that contained commercial infant formula, a practice that has been documented to negatively affect exclusivity and duration of breastfeeding.127 Few birth centers have model hospital policies (14%) and support breastfeeding mothers after hospital discharge (27%). Only 37% of centers practice more than 5 of the 10 Steps and only 3.5% practice 9 to 10 Steps.34
There is, thus, a need for a major conceptual change in the organization of the hospital services for the mother and infant dyad (Table 5). This requires that medical and nursing routines and practices adjust to the principle that breastfeeding should begin within the first hour after birth (even for Cesarean deliveries) and that infants must be continuously accessible to the mother by rooming-in arrangements that facilitate around-the-clock, on-demand feeding for the healthy infant. Formal staff training should not only focus on updating knowledge and techniques for breastfeeding support but also should acknowledge the need to change attitudes and eradicate unsubstantiated beliefs about the supposed equivalency of breastfeeding and commercial infant formula feeding. Emphasis should be placed on the numerous benefits of exclusive breastfeeding. The importance of addressing the issue of the impact of hospital practices and policies on breastfeeding outcomes is highlighted by the decision of The Joint Commission to adopt the rate of exclusive breast milk feeding as a Perinatal Care Core Measure.127 As such, the rate of exclusive breastfeeding during the hospital stay has been confirmed as a critical variable when measuring the quality of care provided by a medical facility.
1. Exclusive breastfeeding for about 6 mo |
• Breastfeeding preferred; alternatively expressed mother’s milk, or donor milk |
• To continue for at least the first year and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child |
• Complementary foods rich in iron and other micronutrients should be introduced at about 6 mo of age |
2. Peripartum policies and practices that optimize breastfeeding initiation and maintenance should be compatible with the AAP and Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Model Hospital Policy and include the following: |
• Direct skin-to-skin contact with mothers immediately after delivery until the first feeding is accomplished and encouraged throughout the postpartum period |
• Delay in routine procedures (weighing, measuring, bathing, blood tests, vaccines, and eye prophylaxis) until after the first feeding is completed |
• Delay in administration of intramuscular vitamin K until after the first feeding is completed but within 6 h of birth |
• Ensure 8 to 12 feedings at the breast every 24 h |
• Ensure formal evaluation and documentation of breastfeeding by trained caregivers (including position, latch, milk transfer, examination) at least for each nursing shift |
• Give no supplements (water, glucose water, commercial infant formula, or other fluids) to breastfeeding newborn infants unless medically indicated using standard evidence-based guidelines for the management of hyperbilirubinemia and hypoglycemia |
• Avoid routine pacifier use in the postpartum period |
• Begin daily oral vitamin D drops (400 IU) at hospital discharge |
3. All breastfeeding newborn infants should be seen by a pediatrician at 3 to 5 d of age, which is within 48 to 72 h after discharge from the hospital |
• Evaluate hydration (elimination patterns) |
• Evaluate body wt gain (body wt loss no more than 7% from birth and no further wt loss by day 5: assess feeding and consider more frequent follow-up) |
• Discuss maternal/infant issues |
• Observe feeding |
4. Mother and infant should sleep in proximity to each other to facilitate breastfeeding |
5. Pacifier should be offered, while placing infant in back-to-sleep-position, no earlier than 3 to 4 wk of age and after breastfeeding has been established |
1. Exclusive breastfeeding for about 6 mo |
• Breastfeeding preferred; alternatively expressed mother’s milk, or donor milk |
• To continue for at least the first year and beyond for as long as mutually desired by mother and child |
• Complementary foods rich in iron and other micronutrients should be introduced at about 6 mo of age |
2. Peripartum policies and practices that optimize breastfeeding initiation and maintenance should be compatible with the AAP and Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Model Hospital Policy and include the following: |
• Direct skin-to-skin contact with mothers immediately after delivery until the first feeding is accomplished and encouraged throughout the postpartum period |
• Delay in routine procedures (weighing, measuring, bathing, blood tests, vaccines, and eye prophylaxis) until after the first feeding is completed |
• Delay in administration of intramuscular vitamin K until after the first feeding is completed but within 6 h of birth |
• Ensure 8 to 12 feedings at the breast every 24 h |
• Ensure formal evaluation and documentation of breastfeeding by trained caregivers (including position, latch, milk transfer, examination) at least for each nursing shift |
• Give no supplements (water, glucose water, commercial infant formula, or other fluids) to breastfeeding newborn infants unless medically indicated using standard evidence-based guidelines for the management of hyperbilirubinemia and hypoglycemia |
• Avoid routine pacifier use in the postpartum period |
• Begin daily oral vitamin D drops (400 IU) at hospital discharge |
3. All breastfeeding newborn infants should be seen by a pediatrician at 3 to 5 d of age, which is within 48 to 72 h after discharge from the hospital |
• Evaluate hydration (elimination patterns) |
• Evaluate body wt gain (body wt loss no more than 7% from birth and no further wt loss by day 5: assess feeding and consider more frequent follow-up) |
• Discuss maternal/infant issues |
• Observe feeding |
4. Mother and infant should sleep in proximity to each other to facilitate breastfeeding |
5. Pacifier should be offered, while placing infant in back-to-sleep-position, no earlier than 3 to 4 wk of age and after breastfeeding has been established |
Pacifier Use
Given the documentation that early use of pacifiers may be associated with less successful breastfeeding, pacifier use in the neonatal period should be limited to specific medical situations.128 These include uses for pain relief, as a calming agent, or as part of structured program for enhancing oral motor function. Because pacifier use has been associated with a reduction in SIDS incidence, mothers of healthy term infants should be instructed to use pacifiers at infant nap or sleep time after breastfeeding is well established, at approximately 3 to 4 weeks of age.129,–131
Vitamins and Mineral Supplements
Intramuscular vitamin K1 (phytonadione) at a dose of 0.5 to 1.0 mg should routinely be administered to all infants on the first day to reduce the risk of hemorrhagic disease of the newborn.132 A delay of administration until after the first feeding at the breast but not later than 6 hours of age is recommended. A single oral dose of vitamin K should not be used, because the oral dose is variably absorbed and does not provide adequate concentrations or stores for the breastfed infant.132
Vitamin D deficiency/insufficiency and rickets has increased in all infants as a result of decreased sunlight exposure secondary to changes in lifestyle, dress habits, and use of topical sunscreen preparations. To maintain an adequate serum vitamin D concentration, all breastfed infants routinely should receive an oral supplement of vitamin D, 400 U per day, beginning at hospital discharge.133
Supplementary fluoride should not be provided during the first 6 months. From age 6 months to 3 years, fluoride supplementation should be limited to infants residing in communities where the fluoride concentration in the water is <0.3 ppm.134 Complementary food rich in iron and zinc should be introduced at about 6 months of age. Supplementation of oral iron drops before 6 months may be needed to support iron stores.
Premature infants should receive both a multivitamin preparation and an oral iron supplement until they are ingesting a completely mixed diet and their growth and hematologic status are normalized.
Growth
The growth pattern of healthy term breastfed infants differs from the existing CDC “reference” growth curves, which are primarily based on data from few breastfeeding infants. The WHO multicenter curves are based on combined longitudinal data from healthy breastfed infants from birth to 24 months and cross-sectional data from 2 to 5 years of the same children from 6 diverse geographical areas (Brazil, Ghana, India, Norway, Oman, and the United States).135 As such, the WHO curves are “standards” and are the normative model for growth and development irrespective of infant ethnicity or geography reflecting the optimal growth of the breastfed infant.136 Use of the WHO curves for the first 2 years allows for more accurate monitoring of weight and height for age and, in comparison with use of the CDC reference curves, results in more accurate (lower) rates of undernutrition and short stature and (higher) rates of overweight. Furthermore, birth to 6-month growth charts are available where the curves are magnified to permit monitoring of weight trajectories. As such, the WHO curves serve as the best guide for assessing lactation performance because they minimize mislabeling clinical situations as inadequate breastfeeding and identify more accurately and promptly overweight and obese infants. As of September 2010, the CDC, with the concurrence of the AAP, recommended the use of the WHO curves for all children younger than 24 months.137,138
Role of the Pediatrician
Pediatricians have a critical role in their individual practices, communities, and society at large to serve as advocates and supporters of successful breastfeeding (Table 6).139 Despite this critical role, studies have demonstrated lack of preparation and knowledge and declining attitudes regarding the feasibility of breastfeeding.140 The AAP Web site141 provides a wealth of breastfeeding-related material and resources to assist and support pediatricians in their critical role as advocates of infant well-being. This includes the Safe and Healthy Beginnings toolkit,5 which includes resources for physician’s office for promotion of breastfeeding in a busy pediatric practice setting, a pocket guide for coding to facilitate appropriate payment, suggested guidelines for telephone triage of maternal breastfeeding concerns, and information regarding employer support for breastfeeding in the workplace. Evidence-based protocols from organizations such as the Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine provide detailed clinical guidance for management of specific issues, including the recommendations for frequent and unrestricted time for breastfeeding so as to minimize hyperbilirubinemia and hypoglycemia.4,142,143 The critical role that pediatricians play is highlighted by the recommended health supervision visit at 3 to 5 days of age, which is within 48 to 72 hours after discharge from the hospital, as well as pediatricians support of practices that avoid non–medically indicated supplementation with commercial infant formula.144
1. Promote breastfeeding as the norm for infant feeding. |
2. Become knowledgeable in the principles and management of lactation and breastfeeding. |
3. Develop skills necessary for assessing the adequacy of breastfeeding. |
4. Support training and education for medical students, residents and postgraduate physicians in breastfeeding and lactation. |
5. Promote hospital policies that are compatible with the AAP and Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Model Hospital Policy and the WHO/UNICEF “Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding.” |
6. Collaborate with the obstetric community to develop optimal breastfeeding support programs. |
7. Coordinate with community-based health care professionals and certified breastfeeding counselors to ensure uniform and comprehensive breastfeeding support. |
1. Promote breastfeeding as the norm for infant feeding. |
2. Become knowledgeable in the principles and management of lactation and breastfeeding. |
3. Develop skills necessary for assessing the adequacy of breastfeeding. |
4. Support training and education for medical students, residents and postgraduate physicians in breastfeeding and lactation. |
5. Promote hospital policies that are compatible with the AAP and Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine Model Hospital Policy and the WHO/UNICEF “Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding.” |
6. Collaborate with the obstetric community to develop optimal breastfeeding support programs. |
7. Coordinate with community-based health care professionals and certified breastfeeding counselors to ensure uniform and comprehensive breastfeeding support. |
Pediatricians also should serve as breastfeeding advocates and educators and not solely delegate this role to staff or nonmedical/lay volunteers. Communicating with families that breastfeeding is a medical priority that is enthusiastically recommended by their personal pediatrician will build support for mothers in the early weeks postpartum. To assist in the education of future physicians, the AAP recommends using the evidence-based Breastfeeding Residency Curriculum,4 which has been demonstrated to improve knowledge, confidence, practice patterns, and breastfeeding rates. The pediatrician’s own office-based practice should serve as a model for how to support breastfeeding in the workplace. The pediatrician should also take the lead in encouraging the hospitals with which he or she is affiliated to provide proper support and facilities for their employees who choose to continue to breastfeed.
Business Case for Breastfeeding
A mother/baby-friendly worksite provides benefits to employers, including a reduction in company health care costs, lower employee absenteeism, reduction in employee turnover, and increased employee morale and productivity.145,146 The return on investment has been calculated that for every $1 invested in creating and supporting a lactation support program (including a designated pump site that guarantees privacy, availability of refrigeration and a hand-washing facility, and appropriate mother break time) there is a $2 to $3 dollar return.147 The Maternal and Child Health Bureau of the US Department of Health and Human Services, with support from the Office of Women’s Health, has created a program, “The Business Case for Breastfeeding,” that provides details of economic benefits to the employer and toolkits for the creation of such programs.148 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act passed by Congress in March 2010 mandates that employers provide “reasonable break time” for nursing mothers and private non-bathroom areas to express breast milk during their workday.149 The establishment of these initiatives as the standard workplace environment will support mothers in their goal of supplying only breast milk to their infants beyond the immediate postpartum period.
Conclusions
Research and practice in the 5 years since publication of the last AAP policy statement have reinforced the conclusion that breastfeeding and the use of human milk confer unique nutritional and nonnutritional benefits to the infant and the mother and, in turn, optimize infant, child, and adult health as well as child growth and development. Recently, published evidence-based studies have confirmed and quantitated the risks of not breastfeeding. Thus, infant feeding should not be considered as a lifestyle choice but rather as a basic health issue. As such, the pediatrician’s role in advocating and supporting proper breastfeeding practices is essential and vital for the achievement of this preferred public health goal.35
Lead Authors
Arthur I. Eidelman, MD
Richard J. Schanler, MD
Section on Breastfeeding Executive Committee, 2011–2012
Margreete Johnston, MD
Susan Landers, MD
Larry Noble, MD
Kinga Szucs, MD
Laura Viehmann, MD
Past Contributing Executive Committee Members
Lori Feldman-Winter, MD
Ruth Lawrence, MD
Staff
Sunnah Kim, MS
Ngozi Onyema, MPH
This document is copyrighted and is property of the American Academy of Pediatrics and its Board of Directors. All authors have filed conflict of interest statements with the American Academy of Pediatrics. Any conflicts have been resolved through a process approved by the Board of Directors. The American Academy of Pediatrics has neither solicited nor accepted any commercial involvement in the development of the content of this publication.
All policy statements from the American Academy of Pediatrics automatically expire 5 years after publication unless reaffirmed, revised, or retired at or before that time.
Comments
Reply to comments on "Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk"
To the Editor: The Section on Breastfeeding of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) appreciates the comments submitted regarding the most recent policy statement, "Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk," published in the March 2012 edition of Pediatrics. The AAP joins with other professional groups in the assessment that the preponderance of evidence confirms the great benefits of breastfeeding. The AHRQ review (1) provides recent evidence that formula feeding and early weaning from breastfeeding are associated with health risks. We recommend all health care practitioners who take care of mothers and infants know the health outcomes associated with breastfeeding as an important step in being able to support a mother's decision to breastfeed.
We address the following Letters:
To Drs Sendelbach and Sanchez, regarding varicella exposure and breastfeeding, the Policy follows the recommendation of the AAP Red Book, page 718 of the 28th Edition: "Airborne and contact precautions are recommended for neonates born to mothers with varicella..." Thus, our statement, "mothers who develop varicella 5 days before through 2 days after delivery should be separated from their infants, but their expressed milk can be used for feeding" is consistent. The suggestion of using a single intramuscular dose of Varicella-Zoster Immune Globulin along with airborne and contact precautions while being cared for together and in a negatively ventilated room is intriguing, and with further evidence may become a standard recommendation in the future.
Similarly, we have chosen to be consistent with the CDC it its recommendations for H1N1 exposure: that mothers acutely infected with H1N1 influenza should temporarily be isolated from their infants until they are afebrile, but they can provide expressed milk for feeding. The experience you cite, in press, will be useful in future formulations of guidelines for H1N1 in the breastfeeding mother. In both of these situations, we recommend continued receipt of mothers own milk, and, thus, hospitals need to ensure adequate support by protecting the mother's milk supply through early initiation and frequent effective breastmilk expression.
To Dr. McGuire and Drs. Sendelbach and Sanchez, regarding the recommendation that clinicians should use pasteurized donor human milk if no mothers' own milk is available. Mothers own milk, fresh or frozen, is the preferred diet for all preterm infants. For infants with a birth weight less than 1500 grams, human milk should contain a human milk fortifier. If mothers own milk is unavailable for this population of infants, despite significant lactation support or is medically contraindicated, then fortified pasteurized donor milk is the preferred diet. Prior Statements commented that we should consider pasteurized donor milk. Data on the acute protective effects of human milk as well as long-term benefits to neurodevelopmental outcome are now reported frequently (Vohr (2), Lucas (3), Sisk (4), Sullivan (5), Cristofalo (6), Ghandehari (7). The putative mechanisms underlying the role of human milk on protection from necrotizing enterocolitis cannot be ignored. In fact, all enteral treatment strategies shown to reduce NEC to some degree were 'borrowed' from our knowledge of human milk constituents: IgA, lactoferrin, polyunsaturated fatty acids, acetylhydrolase, oligosaccharides, erythropoietin, glutamine, epidermal growth factor, and probiotics. Indeed, very recent data evaluating an appropriately fortified exclusive human milk diet demonstrated marked reductions in NEC and surgery for NEC (5). In the separate arm of that study, extremely preterm infants not receiving their own mothers' milk had less NEC and NEC surgery if they were fed the exclusively human milk diet compared to preterm formula (6).
Thus, these studies encourage us to recommend human milk diets but they do not imply that no further research needs to be done. In fact, the Section hopes this Statement stimulates more research to understand the mechanisms of the protective effects, to ensure the quality control and to potentially improve the pasteurization process, to understand the role of cow milk products compared with human milk-derived products, to utilize the exclusive human milk technology to concentrate bioactive factors (as there is variance among women), to extend investigations to larger preterm infants, and most importantly, to ensure that donor milk is only used an adjunct to mothers' own milk and encourage all efforts to assist mothers in maintaining their lactation. Cost benefit analyses that demonstrate a favorable balance to the cost of purchasing the milk, should encourage third party payers to agree that there is a cost benefit when human milk is used. Furthermore, as human milk has medical benefits beyond its nutritional value, this should serve as a further incentive for governmental and private medical insurance to provide complete financial coverage for its use.
To Dr. Dorea, thank you for your added comments. Regarding breastfeeding and environmental toxins, we acknowledge the use of human milk as a vehicle for testing for environmental toxins is often exploited and may be helpful in monitoring population exposure, however we also agree that the presence of these toxins would not outweigh the risk of not breastfeeding and would therefore not alter our recommendations for breastfeeding based on exposures. We recommend with continued breastfeeding the maternal diet should limit possible risks from intake of excessive mercury and other contaminants, such as those from eating certain fish.
Regarding the association between vaccine related problems and breastfeeding, the studies cited are from developing countries, and not relevant to the populations targeted by this policy. We acknowledge breastfeeding as a method of pain relief, not only for vaccination but also for heel sticks and other painful procedures. The policy also addresses the immunological benefits of breastfeeding particularly with regard to immune modulation and the case for exclusive breastfeeding.
Finally, the comments about smoking and breastfeeding indicate that our message may have been misinterpreted. We recommend breastfeeding even if a mother chooses to smoke tobacco, and also recommend that she quit smoking and not smoke around her infant. Given that smoking interferes with the protective effect of respiratory illness, it is assumed that breastfeeding mitigates the increased risk of respiratory illness. Furthermore, the assumption that breastfeeding mothers who smoke must also have smoked during pregnancy is an inaccurate assumption. Mothers may abstain during pregnancy but resume smoking after delivery despite choosing to breastfeed. It should also be noted that infants of smoking mothers may consume less milk and have slow weight gain. In summary, we recommend breastfeeding even for mothers who choose to smoke, but pediatricians should encourage smoking cessation.
To Ms Risch, regarding the protection against atopic dermatitis (AD), we agree that there are many conflicting publications on this association. Nevertheless, the AHRQ review1 is the most contemporary meta-analysis done in developed countries, and it points to an association between exclusive breastfeeding and reduced risk of AD in families with a positive history of atopy. Furthermore, when modifiable vs. non-modifiable risk for AD is taken into consideration, the majority of the risk is non-modifiable, but where the risk may be attenuated exclusive breastfeeding for 4 months has the largest effect (8).
References
1. Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, Chew P, Magula N, DeVine D, Trikalinos T, Lau J, Tufts-New England Medical Center Evidence-based Practice Center. Breastfeeding and maternal and infant health outcomes in developed countries. Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Publication 2007; 153: 1-186. 2. Vohr BR, Poindexter BB, Dusick AM, McKinley LT, Higgins RD, Langer JC, Poole WK. Persistent beneficial effects of breast milk ingested in the neonatal intensive care unit on outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants at 30 months of age. Pediatrics 2007; 120: e953-e959. 3. Lucas A, Cole TJ. Breast milk and neonatal necrotizing enterocolitis. Lancet 1990; 336: 1519-1523. 4. Sisk PM, Lovelady CA, Dillard RG, Gruber KJ, O'Shea TM. Early human milk feeding is associated with a lower risk of necrotizing enterocolitis in very low birth weight infants. J Perinatol 2007; 27: 428-433. 5. Sullivan S, Schanler RJ, Kim JH, Patel AL, Traw?ger R, Kiechl- Kohlendorfer U, Chan GM, Blanco CL, Abrams S, Cotten MC, Laroia N, Ehrenkranz RA, Dudell G, Cristofalo EA, Meier P, Lee ML, Rechtman DJ, Lucas A. An exclusively human milk-based diet is associated with a lower rate of necrotizing enterocolitis than a diet of human milk and bovine milk-based products. J Pediatr 2010; 156: 562-567. 6. Cristofalo EA, Schanler RJ, Blanco CL, Sullivan S, Traw?ger R, Kiechl- Kohlendorfer U, Abrams S, Dudell G, Rechtman DJ, Lee ML. Exclusive human milk vs preterm formula: randomized trial in extremely preterm infants. EPASS 2011; 1410.122: 7. Ghandehari H, Lee ML, Rechtman DJ, H2MF Study Group. An exclusively human milk-based diet in extremely premature infants reduces the probability of remaining on total parenteral nutrition: a reanalysis of the data. BMC Research Notes 2012; In press: 8. Dunlop AL, Reichrtova E, Palcovicova L, Ciznar P, Adamcakova-Dodd A, Smith SJ, McNabb SJ, Pediatr Allergy Immunol 2006; 17: 103-111.
Arthur Eidelman MD, FAAP Richard J Schanler MD, FAAP Lori Feldman-Winter, MD, FAAP
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Varicella, Influenza: not necessary to separate mother and infant
April 18, 2012
To the Editor: We read with interest the updated Policy Statement on "Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk" that was published recently in Pediatrics. (1) It is an important, comprehensive, and timely publication. However, we were surprised at some recommendations that were made that actually would detract from the overall perceived goals of the publication, namely establishment of early breastfeeding that will lead to successful lactation throughout the first year of age. Specifically: 1. "Contraindications to Breastfeeding": a. Varicella: We believe that the authors' assertion that "mothers who develop varicella 5 days before through 2 days after delivery should be separated from their infants" is inappropriate. These infants certainly are at high risk of having acquired varicella transplacentally, and if not, could become infected postnatally. Yet, there are very effective measures that can prevent or ameliorate serious illness without instituting such an extreme measure. These infants should receive a single intramuscular dose of Varicella-Zoster Immune Globulin (VariZIGTM) that is available by an expanded access protocol. If VariZIGTM is not available, immune globulin intravenous (IGIV) is an alternative with potential but unproven efficacy. While in the hospital, airborne and contact precautions are maintained for these infants and their mothers; they are cared for together and in a negatively ventilated room until no longer infectious or at risk of developing varicella in order to prevent nosocomial transmission. This approach promotes optimal breastfeeding and immunoprotection via colostrum and breast milk. Nowhere in the referenced Red Book is there any recommendation to separate the mother and infant.
Because of universal immunization, varicella in pregnancy and at delivery is now uncommon. Our hospital delivers about 12,000 infants annually and in the past 7 years, we have cared for 2 infants who were exposed to maternal varicella in the at-risk time period. Each of these infants received VariZIGTM, neither was separated from the mother, and both had excellent outcomes. One infant developed varicella that was likely acquired transplacentally, but his case was mild and attenuated, and he did well without requirement for hospitalization or treatment. Certainly antiviral treatment with acyclovir also has been shown to be efficacious in these circumstances. b. H1N1 influenza: Similarly, the recommendation from the CDC to temporarily isolate infants from mothers with H1N1 influenza until they are afebrile is based on no evidence. We also have kept these mothers and infants in the same room and allowed breastfeeding, with close attention to hand hygiene and wearing of face mask by mother. None of the 42 infants managed in this manner developed influenza in the first month of age (in press, American Journal of Perinatology).
2. The recommendation to provide pasteurized donor human milk if mother's own milk is unavailable or its use contraindicated requires further study to determine if the benefits of donor milk are the same as those achieved with maternal milk. The Committee's lack of addressing and endorsing this huge knowledge gap is disappointing, and appropriately designed, randomized trials are needed. Sincerely,
Dorothy Sendelbach, MD, IBCLC, FAAP Medical Director, Newborn Nursery, Parkland Memorial Hospital Associate Professor of Pediatrics
Pablo J. Sanchez, MD, FAAP Professor of Pediatrics Divisions of Neonatal-Perinatal Medicine and Pediatric Infectious Diseases University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center Dallas, TX
References: 1. American Academy of Pediatrics SoB. Policy Statement Breastfeeding and the Use of Human Milk. Pediatrics. 2012;129(3):e827-e41. 2. Pickering LK BC, Kimberlin DW, Long SS, editor. Red Book: 2009 Report of the Committee on Infectious Diseases. 28th ed: American Academy of Pediatrics; 2009.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Policy statements on breastfeeding and human milk: additional comments.
The American Academy of Pediatrics publishes periodical breastfeeding policy statements; the latest1 updated previous recommendations and added new topics. These statements have long been a reference for clinical pediatricians and public health professionals worldwide. Accustomed to the breadth of research in these statements and knowing their importance, I felt the lack of two topics of current interest to pediatricians and public health workers - pollutants in breast milk, and interactions between of vaccines and breastfeeding. Pollutants in breast milk
Environmental pollutants and hazardous substances have become part of modern life as a result of widespread use coupled with inadequately controlled (or unenforced) environmental policies. Because of their ubiquity the reach all forms of life, entering and contaminating aquatic and terrestrial food chains; at the top of the latter we find breastfed babies. Only under exceptional circumstances (such as after accidents) does the occurrence of environmental chemicals in breast milk result in a recommendation to avoid breastfeeding. Indeed, most studies of background exposure suggest that breastfeeding can counter subtle adverse effects associated with in utero maternal exposure to neurotoxic2 or endocrine- disruptor substances.3
Progress in analytical techniques has boosted studies dealing with milk composition of potentially harmful environmental contaminants. As a result studies have shown the presence of (organic and inorganic) environmental pollutants in maternal blood and breast milk, raising concerns for pregnant and breastfeeding mothers. However, statements issued to health professionals and mothers have not always considered the results that may ensue. Geraghty et al.4 reported the negative impact of poor reporting on breast milk and environmental pollutants. American women responded that they would immediately wean if told that phthalates would contaminate their nursing infants. In this putative situation, the majority of mothers were in favor of discontinuing breastfeeding sooner than intended.
There are legitimate concerns that maternal body burdens of contaminants (inorganic metals, persistent pesticides, or chemical solvents) may affect child health through breast milk. However, understanding how contamination of a nursing infant occurs with potentially harmful substances must be preceded by an understanding of maternal exposure to such substances. Under ordinary circumstances, maternal exposure to environmental pollutants has most likely occurred during pregnancy when fetuses are more susceptible to biological/toxic effects. Depriving nursing infants of human milk or interrupting breastfeeding will provide no guarantee that in utero effects of such substances can be counteracted by feeding cow's milk-based formulas. On the contrary, environmental pollutants also occur in cow's milk.5 While concerned mothers can choose diets that modulate the transfer of substances to the fetus and nursing infants that option is not available to those who choose formulas.
Vaccines and breastfeeding interactions
Research attention has only recently turned to breastfeeding and vaccine issues associated with stress provoked by pain (brought on by needle inoculation), transient fever or more lasting side effects. During vaccination, the relatively mild pain of the needle in the baby's flesh can be alleviated with medication, but studies have shown that breastfeeding can and, in many circumstances, should be the first response. The soothing and analgesic effects of breastfeeding have been attributed to components in breast milk, or skin contact, or both.6 Additional to the discomfort and stress caused by pain, the systemic and immunologic stimuli of vaccines can provoke fever and irritability resulting in disinclination to feed or even anorexia. It has been observed that catabolic (fever provoking) responses to certain vaccines may increase nutrient losses,7 which might be relevant to marginally nourished populations. Recently, Fisker et al.8 reported that the DTP vaccine can negatively affect vitamin A status of nursing infants in Guinea-Bissau. Indeed, the metabolic rate has been found to increase 7.2% for each degree Fahrenheit.9 Although breastfeeding can counteract transient decreased energy intakes,6 it should be emphasized that the anergy resulting from diseases preventable by vaccines has a much higher metabolic cost.9
Beyond counteracting vaccine-caused disturbances to appetite and nutrient metabolism, breastfeeding has an important role thanks to its positive influence on vaccine response.10 In work summarized elsewhere,6 breastfeeding is essential to prime neonatal immunologic, gastrointestinal and central nervous systems; when compared to formulas (both conventional and low protein), breastfeeding has a positive effect on immunomodulation by increasing the infant's immune response to vaccines.
Nursing infants are still being immunized with Thimerosal-containing vaccines (TCV) outside industrialized countries of the EU, the USA and Canada; these vaccines are recommended by the WHO and are considered safe. However, several studies (in South Korea, Poland, and Brazil) suggest a modest but consistent interaction between breastfeeding and subtle neurologic outcomes linked to TCV-ethylmercury exposure.11-13
In a few cases, breastfeeding is contraindicated because maternal vaccine may bring risks; as in the case of maternal yellow fever vaccination.6 Oral vaccines with live and nonliving antigens (bacterial, poliovirus, and rotavirus vaccines) to breastfed babies in developing countries have shown diminished immunogenicity.14 Shortcomings of decreased vaccine efficacy in such circumstances should be met with immunization strategies that protect and support breastfeeding. In these countries or regions, pediatricians and health authorities should evaluate and recommend specific strategies taking into account the vital role of breastfeeding.
References 1. AAP. SECTION ON BREASTFEEDING. Breastfeeding and the use of human
milk. Pediatrics 2012;129(3):e827-e841. 2. D?rea JG. Maternal smoking and infant feeding: breastfeeding is better and safer. Matern Child Health J 2007;11(3):287-291. 3. D?rea JG. Maternal exposure to endocrine-active substances and breastfeeding. Am J Perinatol 2006;23(5):305-312. 4. Geraghty SR, Khoury JC, Morrow AL, Lanphear BP Reporting individual test results of environmental chemicals in breastmilk: potential for premature weaning. Breastfeed Med 2008;3(4):207-213. 5. D?rea JG, Donangelo CM. Early (in uterus and infant) exposure to mercury and lead. Clin Nutr 2006;25(3):369-376. 6. D?rea JG. Breastfeeding is an essential complement to vaccination. Acta Paediatr 2009;98(8):1244-1250. 7. Young VR, Scrimshaw NS. Genetic and biological variability in human nutrient requirements. Am J Clin Nutr 1979;32(2):486-500. 8. Fisker AB, Lisse IM, Aaby P, Erhardt JG, Rodrigues A, Bibby BM, Benn CS. Effect of vitamin A supplementation with BCG vaccine at birth on vitamin A status at 6 wk and 4 mo of age. Am J Clin Nutr 2007;86(4):1032- 1039. 9. Briscoe J. The quantitative effect of infection on the use of food by young children in poor countries. Am J Clin Nutr 1979;32(3):648-676. 10. Hanson LA, Silfverdal SA. Vaccination immunology. Scand J Infect Dis 2008;40(9):696-701. 11. Lee BE, Ha EH. Response to commentary "Co-exposure and confounders during neurodevelopment: We need them in the bigger picture of secondhand smoke exposure during pregnancy". Environ Res 2012;112:235. 12. Jedrychowski W. Reply to the correspondence letter by M.D. Majewska: Krakow's children and cognitive function: can the study by Jedrychowski et al. show us the bigger picture? Eur J Pediatr 2012;171:407. 13. D?rea JG, Marques RC, Isejima C. Neurodevelopment of Amazonian infants: antenatal and postnatal exposure to methyl- and ethyl-mercury. J Biom Biotecnol 2012; in press. 14. Levine MM. Immunogenicity and efficacy of oral vaccines in developing countries: lessons from a live cholera vaccine. BMC Biol 2010;8:129.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Donor human milk for preterm infants
The evidence appraisal in this revised AAP policy statement endorses the practice of supporting mothers to express breast milk for their preterm infants using evidence-based interventions. The challenge is to ensure that these are implemented consistently and broadly, and especially to vulnerable and socially-disadvantaged women who are less likely to provide expressed breast milk. However, the statement recommending that preterm infants should receive "Pasteurized donor human milk, appropriately fortified" if mother's own expressed breast milk is unavailable is not supported fully by the current evidence (1). Whether donor human milk is the optimal alternative when maternal milk is not available requires consideration of feasibility, costs, acceptability, and the effect on other important clinical outcomes, principally growth and development (1). Although good quality evidence applicable to the modern context of neonatal nutritional care is emerging (2), further large, pragmatic randomised controlled trials are needed to provide more reliable and precise estimates of effect size and to explore cost-effectiveness. I am concerned that, without qualification, the advice in this AAP policy statement may have the unintended consequence of discouraging clinicians and service-users from developing and participating in randomised controlled trials to address the remaining uncertainties.
1. Quigley MA, Henderson G, Anthony MY, McGuire W. Formula milk versus donor breast milk for feeding preterm or low birth weight infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007:4.
2. Sullivan S, Schanler RJ, Kim JH, et al. An exclusively human milk- based diet is associated with a lower rate of necrotizing enterocolitis than a diet of human milk and bovine milk-based products. J Pediatr 2010;156:562- 7.
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Breastfeeding and Atopic Dermatitis
I recently read this Policy Statement on breastfeeding and I find it very disappointing. The 1997 (updated 2005) statement was a very well researched, thorough, document, that appeared to take all research into account.
Concerning and breastfeeding and atopic dermatitis, the Policy Statement reads: 'There is a protective effect of exclusive breastfeeding for 3 to 4 months in reducing the incidence of clinical asthma, atopic dermatitis, and eczema by 27% in a low-risk population and up to 42% in infants with positive family history."
There have been at least 5 studies in the last few years that have not found breastfeeding protective for atopic dermatitis, some of which find an increase with breastfeeding:
1. Does breastfeeding protect against the development of eczema? (S.M. Langan, M. Fewtrel) British Journal of Dermatology Volume 165, Issue 6, pages 1157-1158, December 2011
2. Breastfeeding and Infant Eczema in the First Year of Life in the KOALA Birth Cohort Study: A Risk Period-Specific Analysis (Snijders, Thijs), Pediatrics January 2007, 119:1 e137-e141
3. Increased risk of eczema but reduced risk of early wheezy disorder from exclusive breast-feeding in high-risk infants. (Giwercman C, Halkjaer LB) J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2010 Apr;125(4):866-71.
4. Protective and risk factors for allergic diseases in high-risk children at the ages of two and five years. (Sandini U, Kukkonen AK) Int Arch Allergy Immunol. 2011;156(3):339-48. 2011 June 29.
5. Breastfeeding and atopic eczema in Japanese infants: The Osaka Maternal and Child Health Study. (Miyake Y, Tanaka K), Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2009 May;20(3):234-41.
The 2102 AAP Policy Statement cites a 2007 ARHQ report (Ip, Chung et al) on breastfeeding, and a 2008 (Greer et al) analysis to support its claim that breastfeeding aids in prevention of eczema.
The 2007 AHRQ report concludes: 'Available evidence from one well- performed systematic review/meta-analysis on full term infants in developed countries suggests that exclusive breastfeeding for at least 3 months was associated with a reduction in the risk of atopic dermatitis in those subjects with a family history of atopy.' (1)
The 2008 analysis (Greer et. all. 2008) on infant feeding and allergic disease (which cites no studies after 2005)--made these conclusions: "In summary, for infants at high risk of developing atopy, there is evidence that exclusive breastfeeding for at least 4 months or breastfeeding with supplements of hydrolyzed infant formulas decreases the risk of atopic dermatitis compared with breastfeeding with supplements of standard cow milk-based formulas. On the basis of currently available evidence, this is less likely to apply to infants who are not at risk of developing atopy, and exclusive breastfeeding beyond 3 to 4 months does not seem to lead to any additional benefit in the incidence of atopic eczema." (2)
I would like to know where the 27% and 42% numbers come from.
The rest of this policy statement is not much better. In table two, dose responses for reductions in obesity, diabetes, cancer and asthma are given, when recent research is mixed at best as to whether breastmilk is preventative.
I feel that this Policy Statement is a poor example of an analysis of available research and information. I hope that those at the AAP will look at this report with a critical eye and rework it, taking all available research into account.
references:
(1) Ip S, Chung M, Raman G, et al., Tufts-New England Medical Center Evidence-based Practice Center. Breastfeeding and maternal and infant health outcomes in developed countries.
(2) Greer FR, Sicherer SH, Burks AW, American Academy of Pediatrics Committee on Nutrition, American Academy of Pediatrics Section on Allergy and Immunology . Effects of early nutritional interventions on the development of atopic disease in infants and children: the role of maternal dietary restriction, breastfeeding, timing of introduction of complementary foods, and hydrolyzed formulas. Pediatrics. 2008;121(1):183-191
Conflict of Interest:
None declared
Breastfeeding and Maternal Smoking
I wish to address the statement regarding maternal smoking and breastfeeding. In your article it states, "Maternal smoking is not an absolute contraindication to breastfeeding but should be strongly discouraged, because it is associated with an increased incidence in infant respiratory allergy." After this false information you have a reference citation of 102. I scrolled down to the references to find this information and see it was taken from Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2009;20(1):30-34. However, the content of this used reference must have been misunderstood. It states, "Exposure to maternal smoking in the first year of life interferes in breast-feeding protective effect against the onset of respiratory allergy from birth to 5 yr." This being true, it states nothing of the fact that it "increases incidence" of infant respiratory allergies but that it lessens the protective effect against it. A mother whom is smoking while nursing, most likely was a mother whom was smoking while pregnant which means baby has already been exposed to nicotene. Encouraging a smoking mother to not breastfeed can cause the newborn to go through nicotene withdrawl after birth. Also, the protective effects in the mother's milk, far outweighs the small amount of nicotene that passes through the breast milk. The infant is going to be exposed to smoking in any case due to maternal use of cigarettes, therefore the benefits of breast milk to that infant would actually prove more important than to an infant in a non-smoking household. Please reconsider the wording in your article. Many physicians are already severely uninformed of the benefits of continued breastfeeding and giving this false information to them only compounds the problem. Thank you for your time and understanding. Sincerely, Jennifer J. Phillips Reference: Mohrbacher, N. "Breastfeeding Answers Made Simple" Amarillo, TX, 2010 pg.536-540
Conflict of Interest:
None declared