We all know that breastfeeding has health benefits for mother and child. Studies have shown that breastfed babies get sick less often, with less severity. We know they suffer from fewer ear and respiratory infections and allergies, due to antibodies present in human milk. We know that breastfeeding reduces a woman's overall risk of several types of cancer, including breast cancer. Mother's who nurse experience less post-partum depression. A recently published study by the AAP states that breastfeeding between the ages of 1 and 4 months reduces the risk of SIDS by up to 70%, even after socioeconomic and other factors were accounted for. Even in the United States, 900 deaths could be prevented each year by breastfeeding.
But have you considered the economic bottom line? If more people nursed their children, what would that mean for the world in terms of dollars and cents?
Lets start with healthcare costs. According to a report by the USDA, which can be found in it's entirety by clicking here:
A minimum of $3.6 billion would be saved if breastfeeding were increased from current levels (64 percent in-hospital, 29 percent at 6 months) to those recommended by the U.S. Surgeon General (75 and 50 percent). This figure is likely an underestimation of the total savings because it represents cost savings from the treatment of only three childhood illnesses: otitis media, gastroenteritis, and necrotizing enterocolitis.
That is 3.6 BILLION dollars. Not million, BILLION. And that is just in the United States, imagine if this was analyzed on a global level!
Let's continue with healthcare costs associated with mothers. A study by Yale University researchers showed that women who breastfed for two years or longer reduced their risk of breast cancer by 50 percent. Similar protective effects were found from uterine and ovarian cancers, according to this link. Breast cancer is such a prevalent disease that the cost savings of reducing it's incidence by THAT MUCH is astounding.
So what do we do with information? The CDC shows a fairly abysmal rate of exclusive breastfeeding to 6 months of age, as recommended by both the WHO and AAP. The 2011 Breastfeeding Report Card reveals that nationally just 14.8 percent of babies are exclusively on breastmilk for 6 months. 44% are still being breastfed at all by the 6 month mark.
How can we increase this, as a society? Obviously for parents to make a truly informed decision on what to feed their baby, they need all the facts. Beyond that, I doubt pushing moms who prefer to formula feed is going to help nearly as much as providing support and correct information to moms trying to achieve a breastfeeding relationship. I am certain that it would be more cost-effective for insurance companies to cover breast pumps and lactation consultants than having to pay more towards treating childhood illness. Doctors, even pediatricians are notorious for knowing very little about breastfeeding and how to carry it out. All too often, the confidence of the nursing mother is undermined by a physician who recommends or even scares a woman into supplementing with formula at the first hiccup in the nursing relationship. Many have not taken one class in medical school on the mechanics of breastfeeding, and most use growth charts designed for formula fed infants, when it is known that the growth pattern of the breastfed child is quite different.
No wonder they call breastmilk "liquid gold". It's the only substance on the planet with such an amazingly healthy bottom line!
No comments:
Post a Comment