Sensitive Midwifery - Issue 44 - October 2019

Breast assurance Milky ways Dads make a di ff erence A study investigated parents’ perceptions of what constitutes support for breastfeeding, in particular paternal support. Mothers concluded that ‘dads do make a di ff erence’ by anticipating and fulfilling associated maternal needs, encouraging mothers to do their best, as well as showing paternal determination and commitment. Fathers reported ‘wanting to be involved’, but also wanting more information and help with learning their role. Sharing the experience of childbirth and supporting each other with infant feeding was perceived as the best outcome for the majority of new parents. Something to bear in mind as you advise parents! Tohotoa, J, et al, ‘Dads made a di ff erence: an exploratory study of paternal support for breastfeeding in Perth, Western Australia’, International Breastfeeding Journal , 2009, 4:15. Available: https://doi. org/10.1186/1746-4358-4-15 MOM’s the best For preterm and extremely preterm infants, mother’s own milk (MOM) is the best food, followed by pasteurised donor breast milk (DBM) when MOM is unavailable. Now, a recent study has shown that MOM could be used to personalise the microbiota of DBM by incubating donor milk with 10% of MOM for four hours, thereby re-establishing the potentially beneficial naturally occurring microbes. Cacho, N, et al, ‘Personalization of the Microbiota of Donor Human Milk with Mother’s Own Milk’, Frontiers in Microbiology , 2017, 8. Available: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5541031/ The cost of not breastfeeding A new study has calculated that inadequate breastfeeding costs the global economy almost $1 billion each day ($341 billion a year) in lost productivity and health care, and also leads to the early deaths of nearly 600 000 children and just under 100 000 women each year. Canada-based health economist Dylan Walters, who led the study of more than 100 countries, said, ‘The world must act to mobilize financial resources necessary and political commitment to achieve the World Health Assembly Global Nutrition Target of exclusive breastfeeding prevalence of 50% by 2025 because it is a human right, it saves lives, and improves the prosperity of economies.’ Using data from Walters’ six-year study, an online tool known as the ‘Cost of Not Breastfeeding’ has been developed, allowing users to explore data on the impacts of not breastfeeding in 34 countries. Find it at www.aliveandthrive.org . Beh Lih Yi, ‘More breastfeeding could save the world $1 billion every day’, 12 July 2019. Available: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-global- health-breastfeed-idUSKCN1U70ZV Breastfeeding has a consistently lower carbon footprint It’s well-known that breast milk substitutes (BMS) are associated with negative influences on breastfeeding and subsequent health concerns but, as with all processed foods, production and consumption of BMS comes with an environmental cost. A recent study evaluated the carbon footprint (CFP) of production and consumption of BMS in comparison to breastfeeding. Unsurprisingly, breastfeeding showed a lower CFP in all countries studied. Dairy farming contributes most to the CFP of breast milk substitutes, and sterilisation of bottles contributes most to consumption phase emissions. Karlsson, JO, et al, ‘The carbon footprint of breastmilk substitutes in comparison with breastfeeding’, Journal of cleaner production , 2019, 222, 436–445 49 eSensitive Midwifery Magazine Issue 44