Meals, Snacks, and Obamacare

Hello everyone. I know, I've been a very irregular blogger of late. In the 5 years since I started this blog, a lifetime in internet time, blogging has become old school. It's too long-form. Facebook, Twitter, Tumblr, Pinterest - they're what's happening. The fewer words, the better. The blog still has its readers, of course. But the FB page is where the action is. Do I think this march toward brevity heralds the decline of literacy and civilization itself? Why yes, I do. Am I guilty of it as well? Absolutely. I post on FB far more often than I post here. Usually just a link with a sentence or two. Blogs are meals. And most people are snackers.

Get your Facebook snack on.

Meanwhile, for you gourmands, here's something more substantial:

The Affordable Health Care Act (aka "Obamacare") is slowly coming to fruition, with many benefits already in effect and others not yet realized. It's a very detailed Act and few people go beyond the sound bites to actually learn what's in it. Today, August 1, 2012, a raft of benefits for women and children came into effect. Two organizations have been doing a good job of getting the word out about specific benefits for women. 

-We Are Ultraviolet has created a lovely graphic (below) which hits the highlights. It's too large to read properly in this space, so click on this link to see the whole thing. Or, you can view it (and share it) on Facebook. Sigh.

-And the wonderful folks over at the National Women's Health Network have created a 

site (actually, a blog!) which has been providing detailed coverage with analysis called Countdown to Coverage, with one post per day in the week leading up to today's rollout. Their name for the Affordable Care Act is Mamacare :)

Do the new regulations provide for free Fertility Awareness instruction? No. The Act only provides  free contraception in the case of FDA approved devices. Now, if you're among the fraction of people who receive FA or NFP education in a medical setting, your healthcare provider can code your visit in such a way that it's covered. That's been the case for years. And as more women gain health insurance through the Affordable Care Act, more women will be able to take advantage of that coverage. But the majority of women who practice Fertility Awareness to avoid pregnancy will continue to gain their instruction privately. (Or, frighteningly, practice without benefit of instruction.) 

The Affordable Care Act will thus probably not result in much greater numbers of women practicing Fertility Awareness. But with mandatory coverage and the elimination of co-pays for things like Pap smears, gestational diabetes screening, breastfeeding equipment and lactation support, and screening for domestic violence as well as counseling, the Affordable Care Act reaches far beyond "free birth control," and will result in vast health benefits for women and their children, especially those who currently face financial barriers to service. And that's something we should all be able to get behind.

 

Are We Confused Yet?

If you're confused about how to take care of yourself (and your children), I don't blame you. The public health community seems to change their opinion every 5 minutes, about everything from mammograms to optimal vitamin D levels. And now, they can't seem to agree about how long mothers should exclusively breastfeed. Mind you, no one is talking about whether or not "breast is best." That hasn't changed. What is up for debate, however, is when solid foods should be introduced.

In 2001, the World Health Organization (WHO) established a guideline, advocating 6 months of exclusive breastfeeding in both industrialized as well as developing nations. This guideline continues to be borne out by research. For example, in early 2010, a study was published in the journal Pediatrics which showed that exclusive breastfeeding to 6 months was healthier than to 4 months, in terms of reducing infectious diseases. But now a group of scientists, publishing in the British Medical Journal, are saying that health issues that were not taken into account at the time of the WHO's guidelines need to be considered, and that in fact exclusive breastfeeding past the age of 4 months is more detrimental than beneficial. Harmful effects include an increased risk of celiac disease, as well as iron deficiency.

I'm guessing that this is going to stir up some controversy.

"So For God's Sake, Please Breastfeed"

That quote comes to us courtesy of one of three (male) researchers at the University of California, whose research on breastmilk has recently led to a fascinating discovery. Up to 21% of breastmilk consists of complex sugars which cannot be digested by babies. Scientists had no idea what these sugars were doing in there. As anyone who as ever assembled a piece of Ikea furniture knows, just because you can't figure out where it goes, doesn't mean it doesn't have a purpose. It turns out that these sugars are not meant for the baby, at least not directly. Rather, they are for helpful bacteria (which I'll shorthand as bifido), which take up residence in the baby's gut, and protect it from harmful bacteria. The sugars both feed the bifido bacteria, and also serve as "decoys" for harmful bacteria and viruses. In short, the indigestible component of breastmilk turns out to be vitally important to the infant's immune system. Hence the hortatory exclamation from the researcher, which, you must admit, is rather uncharacteristic of a scientist.

NY Times article re immune function of indigestible sugars in breastmilk

Now, it's all well and good to urge women to breastfeed, but to mandate it by law, that's another matter. That's apparently what the government in Indonesia is trying to do. Under a law passed in 2009, which is set to go into effect in October of this year, mothers who fail to provide 6 months of exclusive breastmilk for their infants face up to 1 year in prison, or a $15,000 fine (unless medical conditions which preclude breastfeeding are shown to exist). Other people, such as employers who prevent breastfeeding, will also be subject to punishment. I wonder if next year they'll tell people how many children they can have. 

Indonesian breastfeeding law

bifidum longum

Black Women Breastfeeding: A Multi-Generational Story

As in most measures of American healthcare, black women lag behind white women in breastfeeding. The reasons are of course complex, but are rooted in socio-economic disparity, lack of education, and lack of equal access to healthcare. This video explores the issue of breastfeeding in several generations of an African-American family (ok so it's a celebrity family - Carol Jenkins was a long-time TV news anchor and correspondent and her daughter is a writer). The video isn't edited particularly tightly and has the feel of a home movie, but perhaps it will inspire other women to have a conversation with their mothers, or daughters. And dig that chubby little baby!

Glutton Baby

The name is definitely problematic - Bebe Gloton translates to "Glutton Baby." But name aside, what do you think of this new nursing doll? The child straps on a pink flowered halter top with flowers where the nipples should be, and when the doll, which has an electronic sensor in its mouth, is connected to a flower, it makes suckling motions and sounds. It's raising quite a ruckus, as you'll see if you do a google search or look on You Tube. There was an interesting essay about it on the Times Motherlode blog. As is often the case with the New York Times, the comments were at least as thought provoking, if not more so, than the original essay. A common thought, with which I agree 100%, is why on earth do we need this? Children (both boys and girls) naturally imitate their mothers by bringing their dolls and stuffed animals to their chests and pretending to nurse them. Imagination good; earth-polluting technological crap bad. But as one reader pointed out, only children who are breastfed and/or who have younger siblings will engage in this type of imitative play as children who are bottle fed won't have the nursing model to imitate. So I can see there being some utility in that instance. But would children who are bottle fed have parents who would buy them a nursing doll? Of course, most of prurient America is just caught up in the scandal of encouraging a child to pretend to use the breasts she will one day have (and I can guess what they think of a boy playing with this toy). These are the same Americans who would not be happy checking their cervical fluid, or hearing you talk about yours. Heck these are the same Americans who are upset when they see a woman nursing in public. Le scandal!

Warning: the sound track on this video may make your cat completely flip out. At least that's the effect it had on mine.

Crazy That We Need It, But We Do

God I love California. Check out this campaign for breastfeeding acceptance which features lifesize cutouts of breastfeeding women.

Nevermind the Dioxin

Bad news: Yes, you will find dioxin, fire retardant, rocket fuel, and other incredibly nasty chemicals in breast milk.

Good news: Breast is still best.

Not terribly surprising, but reassuring nonetheless to moms who may be worried that the environmental toxins found in breast milk outweigh the benefits. Nope. An analysis of recent studies shows that, despite the pollutants, the benefits of breast milk still trump those of any substitutes. Nurse away, kiddies. Maybe when you grow up you'll find a way to get Persistent Organic Pollutants (POPs) out of the ecosystem.