By: Krystle Crossman
When you have a baby you are always told that [email protected] is the best way to go for your child. You are told that they will have a higher IQ and get sick less often than those who are bottle fed. These benefits may be overstated however according to new research.
[email protected] is definitely better for your baby when it comes to nutrients. They get more natural nutrients from you than they do from a bottle of formula. Sociologists David Ramey and Cynthia Colena said that some of the health benefits that everyone pushes come from data that was skewed. The study with the data that was flawed came from a study of 8,000 American children. They looked at comparisons between siblings. They did not however take into account different family dynamics and what the mothers were eating while they were [email protected] their child.
The sociologists did another study that took 1,800 children and they looked at comparisons between siblings who had one sibling bottle fed and one [email protected] They then studied the outcomes that are said to be the result of [email protected] such as reading skills, body mass index, math skills, and hyperactivity. They said that since they restricted the comparison to the siblings in one family as opposed to children from different families they were able to get a clearer picture of the true benefits.
They found that the long-term benefits were the same with both feeding methods. The study did not look at the short-term benefits which many experts say set the tone for the child’s well-being down the line. They feel that the study still cannot conclude whether the benefits are overstated or not.