Breastfeeding a baby is complicated enough. Researching the benefits of breastfeeding is just a plain mess of conflicting studies.
I bookmarked this article on Time.com called “What Breast-Feeding Can’t Do” after skimming the title and the first paragraph figuring I would read it when I could take a couple minutes to read it closely. Here is the line that originally caught my attention:
It [breastfeeding] doesn’t offer infants much defense against asthma or allergies.
Since we are bunkering down for the final few weeks before TacoSupreme is born, I figured that this would be a good read. After all, you often hear that breastfeeding is the best for the baby in every way possible. Sometimes you’ll hear that formula feeding is pretty much the same or at leasts close enough. But, I’ve never heard of breastfeeding being worse in any way for the baby.
So, I reread the article. Carefully. The results of this particularly study involving quite a few kids indicates that there is no statistically significant difference between the kids that were breastfed versus those that were not when looking at asthma and allergies.
Reread the quotation from a couple paragraphs back. It is pretty much wrong. Breastfeeding does provide defense against asthma and allergies. The study indicates that it might not provide more than formula feeding. The way the Time.com article reads it makes it sound like breastfeeding is actually worse the formula feeding for protecting against asthma and allergies.
But, I guess I should expect some awkward phrasings from an article that spells breastfeeding as “breast-feeding.” Is that a valid spelling anywhere? I know I have misspellings all over the place around here, but I don’t expect Time.com to come offering me a writing job anytime soon.