I have to admit, when I learned I had to take Seton Hill University’s Seminar in Thinking and Writing, I was nervous. My forte is business communications: writing clear and concise memos and reports, letters that are short and to the point, and procedural manuals that utilize very little critical thinking. The type of writing expected in an English composition course requires introspection and deep analytical thought, which is much different than with what I am familiar. Although this course proved to be as difficult as I initially thought, I feel my writing skills have improved noticeably.
The most challenging process was overcoming the critical thinking aspect. As an unruly teenager, I had no problem questioning authority, teachers, and my parents. As I became a mature adult, I realized that by preaching my unconventional beliefs, I sometimes isolated myself from people. To fit in with my community, to be accepted by my family, and to set examples for my children, I subdued this way of thinking and tried to function like the rest of society. I began to view things not in “black and white” or wrong or right, but in objective, boring gray.
So years after trying to suppress my probing nature, I found myself needing to regain critical thinking skills and recapture a voice I had long ignored. The objectives of this course forced me to get back in touch with my analytical attitude so I could see cultural issues for what they really were. By discussing these issues with my classmates, I realized everyone has a different perspective and it was all right if we did not all agree on the issues, as long as we were respectful of one another’s opinions.
Another area I struggled with was organization, which is usually one of my strong points. In composition writing, it was hard for me to organize all my thoughts into one central, fluid idea because I have so many differing thoughts about the subject. It would often inhibit me from getting my paper started. The “free writing” technique and the practice of outlining were probably most valuable in my writing process.
Free writing helped me to get started on this paper, something I wish I had tried in previous papers. I did not try to correct my grammar halfway through a sentence or even keep similar thoughts in the same paragraph. I just wrote whatever came to mind in whatever order it surfaced. Not until I had several notebook pages did I attempt to enter it into my word processing program and I did not make any revisions until all my thoughts were typed out. Prior to trying this technique, I would just sit and stare at a blank word processing page waiting for something to come to me. I also felt pressure to produce a squeaky clean, beautifully formatted and finished paper from scratch in one sitting. By free writing first, this stress was eliminated.
Outlining the main ideas helped my papers to become better organized. I could see the visual succession of my thoughts in a coherent order. It became the template for my first draft and it was easier to incorporate all the tidbits of information that composed my papers. Microsoft Word’s comment feature was also very helpful by allowing me to keep track of my sources, set up citations, and temporarily store pieces of writing for later use.
After figuring out how to get a better start on my writing, the revision process became much easier. I learned that sometimes it is best to walk away from a paper for an hour or even a few days and come back to it later. I have been able to catch mistakes this way and it keeps my ideas from getting stale.
My favorite piece of writing was the research paper because I was able to choose a topic that I am passionate about and I enjoyed the actual research process. My topic had an abundance of information available so I had to be very selective in choosing my sources, trying to use those that would provide the most impact. The oral presentation was my least favorite activity but probably the most rewarding. Speaking while on the job is not normally an issue for me but being evaluated solely on my speaking performance as well as my chosen persuasive argument was nerve-wracking. I am sure the experience provided good practice.
As much as I dreaded taking this class, I realize now that while critical writing is not my strongest point, I enjoyed the challenge. This type of writing does not come easy to me but I put forth all my effort. I did not complete this class without flaw, as I would have liked, but I learned and reworked skills that I can apply and improve upon in the future.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Western Cultural Traditions Assignment - Nudity in Art Through the Ages
Lefebvre, Jules Joseph. Odalisque. 1874. Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago. 1 May 2007. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Odalisque.jpgThe Nude Figure in Western Art:
Renaissance to Present Day
LA 201.75: Western Cultural Traditions II
May 10, 2007
As far back as the fifth century BCE, the undraped human figure has appeared in countless pieces of art. While depictions of nude figures may seem to serve only aesthetic purposes, these pieces have actually provided significant benefits to society. For example, nude portraits have imparted historians and anthropologists with graphic chronicles of the lives and cultures of the past. Since it gained popularity in the Renaissance period, however, nudity in the arts has long been a recurrent topic of controversy in Western cultures.
According to the Grove Art Online research web site, the nude figure in Western art appears to have originated in Greece, sometime around the fifth century BCE. Because Christianity began to wield a greater influence over society and culture beginning in about the third century ADE, the nude figure as an artist’s muse did not spread throughout the West until the about the 15th century, and even then, some European countries were hesitant to accept it[1].
Artist Unknown. Photo by Laura Scudder. Aphrodite, Pan, and Eros. National Archeological Museum in Athens, Greece. 10 May 2007. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Aphrodite_Pan_and_Eros.jpg
On Oxford Reference Online, Harold Osborne and Hugh Brigstocke state that the practice of drawing a live model did not become common practice until the Renaissance period. The oldest surviving evidence of live model use was found in drawings by Antonio di Puccio Pisano, better known as Pisanello, a 15th century painter and medallist. Because of the drawings hazy appearance, it was thought that Pisanello sketched female figures from behind a veil or curtain to appease the morals of the Catholic Church.
Men were more often used as models, even when the artist was rendering a female figure. While this also served decency purposes, the predominantly male artist community believed “that the male form was nobler and the female one lacking in proportion” (Osborne and Brigstocke)[2]. As one could imagine, using a male as a reference point for a female figure resulted in some very masculine-looking women.
By the end of the 15th century, professional male art models were posing in studios and in educational “’life class[es]’” (Osborne and Brigstocke). The use of female models in Europe did not become popular until well after the 18th century, but it has been documented that Roman artists were using female models as early as 1650.
Eugène Ferdinand Victor Delacroix. Mademoiselle Rose. 1824. The Louvre, Paris. 9, May 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Eug%C3%A8ne_Ferdinand_Victor_Delacroix_024.jpg
Religion had such a heavy influence on art that it is almost incredible that nude models were used at all during this time. Fra Bartolomeo, an Italian Renaissance painter, became so conflicted by his nude work, that he “burnt his drawings after hearing an impassioned sermon…, but changed his mind after seeing Michelangelo’s works in Rome” (Osborne and Brigstocke).
Michelangelo di Lodovico Buonarroti Simoni, simply known as Michelangelo, was best known for his awe-inspiring paintings and lifelike sculptures. Many of his muscular figures appeared nude or scantily clothed. One such piece was Michelangelo’s statue of Christ at the church of Santa Maria sopra Minerva, titled Cristo della Miverva, which was completed in 1521. According to the New Advent Catholic Encyclopedia, the statue was to represent the resurrected Savior. The priest who commissioned the piece felt that Christ would not have been clothed, having just resurrected himself. The statue was carved and erected, sans clothing. Sometime in the Baroque era, the piece was fitted with a bronze loin cloth for the sake of virtue[3].
Michelangelo. Christ the Redeemer. 1521. Santa Maria Church. 9 May 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Michelangelo-Christ_the_Redeemer.jpg
Some of Michelangelo’s most famous works, the frescoes in the Sistine Chapel, were also a subject of infamous argument. The Last Judgment, a huge mural covering an entire wall within the chapel, caused such a stir that another artist was later commissioned to cover portions of it. As told by the Vatican Museum, a high ranking member or the church was quoted as saying “’it was most dishonest in such an honoured place to have painted so many nude figures who so dishonestly show their shame and that it was not a work for a Chapel of the Pope but for stoves and taverns’ (G. Vasari, LeVite)” (Vatican.va). The decision was made by the Council of Trent in 1564, the same year as Michelangelo’s death, to have Daniele da Volterra paint “breeches” onto the nude figures[4].
Michelangleo. The Last Judgement. 1541. The Sistine Chapel. 9 May 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Last_judgement.jpg Another of Michelangelo’s statues, David, was fitted with a removable fig leaf after being presented to Queen Victoria in 1857. The Victoria and Albert South Kensington Museum, current exhibitioners of both David and the two foot fig leaf, tells of the contention the nude statue has caused:
“A letter sent to the Museum in 1903 by a Mr Dobson complained about the
statuary displayed: 'One can hardly designate these figures as "art"!: if it is,
it is a very objectionable form of art.'
In relation to Mr Dobson’s complaint, the then director Caspar Purdon Clarke noted:
'The antique casts gallery has been very much used by private lady teachers for
the instruction of young girl students and none of them has ever complained even
indirectly' (museum papers, 1903)[1]” (Victoria & Albert Museum web site).
During the modest Victorian Era, public figures endeavored on “fig-leafing” campaigns, whereby unclothed statues and paintings received an appropriately placed fig leaf. According to Wikipedia.org, some statues of male figures even had the penis removed to accommodate the fig leaf[2]. Numerous pieces of priceless art were irreparably damaged by this.
There happens to be another school of thought by a group who is discontented by nude art forms, particularly the female nude. Some feminists have taken offense to the fact that the term “nude” has developed a feminine connotation. In Lynda Nead’s book, The Female Nude, she discusses how people think they can label anything art as long as it contains a naked female, even if it borders on pornography[3].
Lidia Guibert Ferrara and Frances Borzello, in an article published by British news press The Guardian, discuss how the addition of certain historical icons in art work can change the connotation from sexual to respectable. In the article titled, “Nude Awakening”, Ferrara and Borzello suggest that by adding a cupid or changing the figure’s pose to a “goddess”-like position, the nude art form has become acceptable. An example they used was Manet’s Olympia exhibit in Paris. Instead of the traditionally drawn, passive, reclining nude female, Manet unveiled a modern woman who appeared to be actively staring back at the viewer. The audience was appalled[4].
Manet, Edouard. Olympia. 1863. Musee d’Orsay, Paris. 10 May 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_%28painting%29
This brings us to the real issue of nudity and art: the line between art and pornography can be quite vague. To complicate things even further, there appears to be a genre in between: “erotic art”. Erotic art is defined as “art with sexual content and… art that celebrates sexuality” (Grove Art Online). Erotic art is nothing new. Cave paintings depicting sexual rituals were found in southern France that date back to the Paleolithic era. Classical Greek and Roman mythological gods and goddesses were frequently portrayed nude and participating in sexual acts to represent fertility. In the Western world under the rule of Christianity, sexuality in art has undergone repression, thus making eroticism in art all the more interesting[5].
Manet, Edouard. Olympia. 1863. Musee d’Orsay, Paris. 10 May 2007 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olympia_%28painting%29
This brings us to the real issue of nudity and art: the line between art and pornography can be quite vague. To complicate things even further, there appears to be a genre in between: “erotic art”. Erotic art is defined as “art with sexual content and… art that celebrates sexuality” (Grove Art Online). Erotic art is nothing new. Cave paintings depicting sexual rituals were found in southern France that date back to the Paleolithic era. Classical Greek and Roman mythological gods and goddesses were frequently portrayed nude and participating in sexual acts to represent fertility. In the Western world under the rule of Christianity, sexuality in art has undergone repression, thus making eroticism in art all the more interesting[5].
Klimt, Gustave. Danae. 1908. Leopold Museum, Vienna. 7 May 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Gustav_Klimt_010.jpg
Gustav Klimt was perhaps one of the best examples of an erotic artist. A painter of the female nude, his pieces contained subliminal phallic symbols and frequent scenes of masturbation. Born in Austria in the late 1800s, Klimt was often criticized as being immoral. Economist magazine, in a story about Klimt, described him as being “the finest ever draughts[man] of the human body” (77-78)[6]. However, they suggest that the Viennese bourgeoisie considered Klimt’s work as “an excuse to show erotic nudes in the name of art”(77). Perhaps their opinion has some truth to it, but considering a Klimt original just sold at auction for over $130 million, he must have pleased someone.
Another thought: is there a difference between “nude” and “naked”? Art historian Kenneth Clark, in his book The Nude: Study in Ideal Form, answers that question: “To be naked is to be deprived of our clothes, and the word implies some of embarrassment most of us feel in that condition. The word ‘nude’, on the other hand, carries, in educated usage, no uncomfortable overtone[7]” (Clark, 34).
As Arthur C. Danto states in the magazine The Nation, “nude goes with beauty and naked goes with shame” (Danto, 101)[8]. Borrowing an example from the Bible, Danto explains that prior to the fall from Eden, Adam and Eve were shamelessly nude. He describes their existence with a child-like innocence. After Eve takes the apple from the Tree of Knowledge and shares it with Adam, “then the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked” (Genesis 3:7)[9]. Danto explains, “it is when male and female were transformed from nudity to nakedness that sex became associated with darkness” (Danto, 101). Could this then be a reference to pornography?
Dürer, Albrecht Adam and Eve. 1507. Museo del Prado, Madrid, Spain. 9 May 2007. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Durer_Adam_and_Eve.jpg
Actually, pornography, as defined by The New Oxford American Dictionary, is “printed or visual material containing the explicit description or display of sexual organs or activity, intended to stimulate erotic rather than aesthetic or emotional feelings.” [10] So simply including a nude figure in an art piece does not constitute pornography, it is the “intention”.
Obviously, nudity in art has offended many people over the last several hundred years. But aside from causing conflict, the unclothed human figure in the fine arts has served its purpose. Since prehistoric times, the depictions of humans, clothed or not, have served as valuable records of history. In Anne Abichou’s article “art and the body,” she points out that “cultural attitudes and a society's understanding of sexuality can often be seen through the depictions of the human figure.[11]” For a cultural anthropologist or historian, a nude sketch from a little known era could provide a much sought after clue to the past.
Take, for example, the following painting by Tiziano Vecellio. During the 16th century, female figures in art were normally plump, lacked muscle tone, and had modest-sized breasts (by today’s standards). The breast size may be attributed to the fact that many artists used young boys to pose for paintings. Now, consider today’s standards: anorexic-thin waifs with super-augmented breasts. There is certainly a distinction between the ideal female figure of the present and the woman of the 16th century.
Vecellio, Tiziano. Venus Anadyomene 1525. National Gallery of Scotland, Edinburgh. 08 May 2007.
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Anadyomene.jpg
http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Anadyomene.jpg
The bare human figure provided scientific function as well. During the Renaissance, anatomical study became imperative to the medical field. Illustrations of human anatomy functioned as vital reference materials for the early medical community. However, many of the subjects for these drawings were cadavers and little controversy surrounded their nudity.
Over the ages in Western art, there have been attempts to try to classify nudity and nakedness, art and pornography. Different eras, having different religious influences, are responsible for creating these labels. While there may be a fine line between art and porn, a single person has no right to judge self-expression. Sexuality, a topic of taboo, is still a part of art, history, and every human being who has ever walked this earth.
WORKS CITED LIST
[1] “David’s Fig Leaf”. Victoria and Albert Museum. 8 May 2007.
[2] “Fig Leaf” Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 9 May 2007.
[3] “Women and Art History: Feminist Critiques: The Nude.” Grove Art Online. 29 December 2003. Oxford University Press. Murrysville Community Library (IP). 9 May 2007.
[4] Lidia Guibert Ferrara and Frances Borzello. “Nude Awakening.” The Guardian. 2 November 2002. 9 May 2007. <>
[5] “Erotic Art.” Grove Art Online. Oxford University Press. Murrysville Community Library (IP). 10 May 2007.
[6] “A Fine Line.” Economist. Feb 2005.: 77-78.
[7] Clark, Kenneth. The Nude: Study in Ideal Form. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1984.
[8] Danto, Arthur C. “Art.” The Nation. Jan. 1994: 100+
[9] New American Standard Bible. USA: Oxford University Press, 2005.
[10] "pornography n." The New Oxford American Dictionary, second edition. Ed. Erin McKean. Oxford University Press, 2005. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Murrysville Community Library (IP). 10 May 2007
[11] Anne Abichou "art and the body" The Oxford Companion to the Body. Ed. Colin Blakemore and Sheila Jennett. Oxford University Press, 2001. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Murrysville Community Library (IP). 8 May 2007
Critical Thinking and Writing Assignment - Breastfeeding IS Best
The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Medical Association, American Dietetic Association, and the World Health Organization all recommend breastfeeding newborns through their first year of life or longer because of the health benefits available to both mother and child. However, in a study conducted by the Center for Disease Control of more than 27,000 participants across the United States, only 20% of mothers nurse their children for 12 months (CDC web). While any amount of breastfeeding is better than none at all, many women in the United States switch to formula at three months, generally not long after the time when working women return to their jobs from maternity leave. With so many benefits of breastfeeding to both mother and child, the number of children who are breastfed until the age of one should be significantly higher.
BREASTMILK BEST FOR BABY
Breastfeeding not only provides the best nutrients for a growing baby, but it has other long term benefits such as providing immunities, protecting against health problems, and in recent studies, cultivating higher IQs. Breastfed babies are healthier overall and the longer they are breastfed, the more benefits they receive. According to the La Leche League web site, infants who are breastfed for four months are protected from frequent middle ear infections for three years, bouts of diarrhea for seven or more years, and Haemophilus influenza, type b for ten years. Imagine what those numbers would be if the infant were breastfed longer.
Breast milk protects against other infections as well. Because of the transfer of the mother’s antibodies through breast milk, babies are protected from viruses, sometimes even when the mother is carrying it. Rebecca Williams writes for the FDA Consumer Magazine and states that breast milk can protect from illnesses such as “pneumonia, botulism, bronchitis, staphylococcal infections, influenza, ear infections, and German measles” (Williams). Studies also suggest that breast milk protects against bacterial meningitis, urinary tract infections, and respiratory infections.
The most important aspect of infant nutrition is the ability of the newborn’s digestive system to be able to take in the good and excrete the bad. In M.S. Eiger’s The Complete Book of Breastfeeding, he states that infant formula contains so much protein that it cannot be fully absorbed while breast milk proteins are generally completely absorbed by the baby (Eiger 23). The proteins found in breast milk help to develop the baby’s immature digestive track and keeps infection out – proteins that are not replicated in formula (What is Colostrum? LLL Web Site). Another intestinal benefit was reported by the Journal of American Medical Association. In a study of breastfeeding and infections, it was determined that breastfed infants had less gastro-intestinal infections than formula fed babies in the first year of life (Kramer et al, 413-420).
Because of the position and motion required to suckle on a human nipple versus a silicone one, “breastfed babies are less prone to orthodontic problems than those raised on a bottle” (Eisenberg 4). The child’s teeth will more likely come in straighter as well as help with proper speech development. Bottle rot, a condition occurring when a child is left with a bottle in his or her mouth while sleeping, is unheard of in exclusively breastfed children not only because most breastfed babies received fewer bottles, but also because breast milk contains bacteria inhibitors that protect the enamel of the child’s tooth.
Amy Spangler, author of Breastfeeding: A Parent’s Guide, says that human milk lowers the risk of developing allergies, asthma, colic, diaper rash, reflux, and eczema. It also reduces the chance of developing chronic bowel diseases, diabetes, leukemia, and lymphoma. Breastfed babies are less likely to die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome or other illness related mortalities.
Other possible benefits include lower cholesterol as an adult, less chance of becoming obese, and now studies are finding a link between breastfed babies and cognitive development. Published in the Journal of American Medical Association, a study compared breastfed children who in their adulthood scored higher on IQ tests than those who were not breastfed. “Duration of breastfeeding was associated with significantly higher scores on the Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale IQs” (Mortensen 287). In a test using the Bayley’s Mental Developmental index, breastfed participants scored on average eight to ten points higher than formula fed children. Many people question whether this because of the chemical makeup of breast milk, the bonding experience of nursing, the likelihood that a mother who chooses to nurse also spends more time with her children, or because children who are breastfed generally come from better socio-economic backgrounds and have more educational resources available to them.
Regardless, the bonding experience provided by breastfeeding plays an important role in infant development as well. Breastfeeding cannot be carried out without some sort of skin-on-skin contact. In an article presented by Fit Pregnancy magazine, Kimberly Pfaff tells readers that “kangaroo care,” or skin-on-skin contact, is advantageous to premature babies. “Proven benefits to the baby include a more stable heartbeat, breathing and body temperature regulation and longer periods of sleep” (Pfaff 76). Kangaroo care, as well as breastfeeding, soothes newly born babies, babies with colic, and children receiving shots.
Probably the best reason to breastfeed pre-term and full-term babies alike is the fact that breast milk is designed for each stage of baby’s life. The authors of What to Expect the First Year bring to light some highly significant information: “Unlike formula, the composition of breast milk changes constantly to meet a baby’s ever-changing needs: it’s different in the morning than it is in the late afternoon; different at one month than it is at seven; different for a premature baby than for a term baby” (Eisenberg 3). It is simply the perfect nutrition for a human baby.
BREASTMILK BEST FOR MOTHER
Breastfeeding also provides health incentives to the mother. These include lowering the risks of developing diabetes, breast and ovarian cancer, osteoporosis, postpartum hemorrhaging, and menstrual anemia. In a study reported by the Journal of American Medical Association, it was found that “longer duration of breastfeeding was associated with reduced incidence of type 2 diabetes in… young and middle-aged women” by helping stabilize glucose levels (Stuebe 2601-2610). Breastfeeding also lowers maternal and child blood pressure because of the release of oxytocin.
Producing breast milk helps the mother return to her pre-pregnancy size faster. Early nursing stimulates uterine contractions which helps the uterus to shrink faster. Most pregnant women gain, on average, 25 to 55 pounds. A few days after delivering her baby, a mother will have lost almost half of the weight she had gained during her entire pregnancy. But there will still be unwanted pounds to lose. “Milk production requires 500-1000 calories a day” (Spangler 17). In my own experience, I have lost almost 30 pounds in three months since my baby was born and I eat twice what I was eating when I was pregnant.
If instant weight loss isn’t enough, breastfeeding is convenient, inexpensive, and easier at night. There is no preparation, it costs less to feed a nursing mother than buy formula for a bottle-fed baby, and night time feedings are quick and without fuss. Dads can appreciate that, too.
INFANT FORMULA NOT SECOND BEST
Formula falls short on providing the same advantages and cow’s milk should not be introduced into a baby’s diet until the age of one or later. Commonsense would dictate that a newborn calf should drink the milk of the mother cow, a newborn kitten the milk of the mother cat, and so on. Therefore, why would a newborn human drink anything other than the milk of his or her mother? The female breasts are designed specifically for the purpose of nursing a baby. Though formula makers do recognize that breastfeeding is best for babies, these companies lead consumers to believe that an iron-fortified formula is the next best choice (Similac, 14). The World Health Organization, an authority on international public health, thinks otherwise: “The second choice is the mother's own milk expressed and given to the infant in some way [bottle or cup]. The third choice is the milk of another human mother. The fourth and last choice is artificial baby milk” (Granju). Formula may be the next best choice after breast milk, but only by default.
Infant formulas are composed of cow’s milk or soy – neither of which are designed for a newborn human. They do not provide the same nutrition as breast milk and there have been recent concerns about infant formula causing long term health problems. Studies are in the works that are exploring a possible link between the use of cow’s milk formula and type I diabetes, obesity, and Parkinson’s disease.
Soy formula has not been studied long enough to know whether it is truly safe for use in infants, yet according to Better Nutrition magazine, “almost 25 percent of formula-fed American babies get soy formula” (“Soy and Baby” 14). Julia Barrett reports in an article featured in Environmental Health Perspectives, that The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has recently performed studies that have shown that soy formula has the ability to make changes in the cells of the intestines, “with unknown effects for infants fed soy formula” (Barrett, A302). There are also ongoing studies to determine if administering high levels of phytoestrogens (found in soy) prior to the onset of puberty could lead to cancer. With so many questions about the safety of soy formula, it is astounding that almost 20 million babies consume it each year (Barrett, A302).
While some formulas attempt to mimic breast milk in its design by adding DHA docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA), two essential fatty acids that are supposedly responsible for aiding brain development, formulas simply cannot emulate breast milk’s complexity. The FDA explains that formula is not a perfect match for breast milk “because the exact chemical makeup of breast milk is still unknown” (Williams and Stehlin). Breast milk contains properties that formula manufacturers may never be able to imitate. Not to mention, each mother’s breast milk composition varies from day to day to meet the changing needs of her baby - formula can’t yet do that.
Formula lacks the antibodies found in breast milk, which could be why so many formula fed babies experience repeated ear infections. “When compared with exclusively breastfed infants, infants who were exclusively formula-fed had a 70% increase in their risk of developing an ear infection” (Otitis Media).
Another serious concern is the possibility of formula contamination. According to the Breastfeeding Sourcebook, “enterobacter sakazakii is a frequent contaminant in powdered formula and can cause sepsis and meningitis in newborns” (Colson, 14).[JMW1]
Aside from the health concerns that formula poses, formula has other downsides. It takes much longer to prepare a bottle of formula for a potentially screaming, hungry baby than it takes to simply provide a breast. Most formula must be mixed in advance and is often wasted when the baby doesn’t finish an entire bottle.
Formula feeding costs on average about $1500 per year with premixed and hypoallergenic formulas costing substantially more. Add lost wages, increased health care costs, and gas for repeated doctor’s visits due to an increased need to care for childhood illnesses, allergies, and infections, and the cost to formula feed becomes much higher. Breastfeeding is surely a more economical and healthy source of nutrition for a baby.
WHY BREASTFEEDING CAN BE DIFFICULT
If breastfeeding is superior to formula then why do so many mothers switch to formula before baby’s first birthday? The bottom line: if it was easy, every mother would do it. It is not that mothers do not care enough about their child or are not willing to make a simple sacrifice; breastfeeding does have its difficulties. These I have learned from my own experience.
Sleep, sensation, and separation are the major concerns. In the first few weeks, a breastfed baby may need to eat every one to three hours around the clock. As a mother of three children, I clearly remember feeling like I spent my entire day, and night, nursing, changing diapers, trying to catch up on sleep, and nursing again, and again, and again. Formula fed babies are able to go longer between feedings because “cow’s milk is more difficult to digest than breast milk, and the large rubbery curds stay in the baby’s stomach longer” which make baby feel full for up to several hours (Eisenberg 6). I suspect that the less frequent feedings contribute to a slower metabolism and are one of the causes of obesity in formula fed children.
Even though nighttime bottle preparation takes more effort than nighttime nursing, less time is spent feeding a formula fed baby. A nursing mother may have to awaken, at least partially, three or four times a night while a bottle feeding mother may wake up once or twice. Still, it is much less disruptive to put a child to breast than it is to prepare and warm a bottle of formula, especially when the baby wakes up screaming because he or she wants to eat right now!
Accompanying the quick weight loss in nursing mothers (because of the extra calories burned in producing milk), is fatigue. Frequent nursing is consuming, especially just days after delivery. Proper nutrition, hydration, and rest are very important for a breastfeeding mom.
While it is pretty painless to pump and store milk so a nursing mother can have time away from her baby, it is painful to go too long without emptying her breasts every few hours. Engorgement, a condition that occurs normally when a mother’s milk first comes in and when a mother is not able to empty her breasts regularly, is very painful and can lead to other problems. A woman’s milk “let down” reflex is determined by how frequently her baby nurses. This reflex often happens involuntarily. If milk becomes backed up, engorgement can occur which could lead to a clogged milk duct. These painful lumps can then become infected causing an infection called Mastitis. From first hand, recent experience, I can tell you that Mastitis produces severe, flu-like symptoms: high fever, chills, sweats, achiness, dizziness, and fatigue as well as painful, red, swollen lumps. A doctor once told me it is one of the fastest spreading infections in the female body. Fortunately, with proper care, these are easy to avoid.
When milk is not backed up, it is flowing, or leaking, or spraying. The wetness is annoying, especially at night, and too much milk can cause the baby to choke and swallow too much air. These are generally early issues that become less of a problem as breastfeeding progresses and as milk production slows down.
Some mothers may experience nipple pain from a baby’s latch. Because of improper latch-on positioning or, less often, because the baby may have a dome-shaped mouth, a nursing mother can develop sores, cracks, and initial latch-on nipple pain (Huggins 21). In the case of improper latch, the baby can easily be repositioned. If the problem is caused by the shape of the baby’s mouth, there is little that can be done, however, the nipples generally toughen up in about two weeks and the pain becomes gradually decreased.
Probably the most common reason for women to cease breastfeeding before 12 months is her return to work. Breastfeeding in public is not illegal, but very few states provide laws to protect it. Employers are required to provide a clean, comfortable, private space for woman to express milk in. They also must allow enough break time to do so. I think many women are afraid to ask their employers for these things because breastfeeding is so personal. In order to keep the milk supply in check with the baby’s demand, a working mother may have to pump three or four times during the work day. That doesn’t leave much time to get work done.
CONCLUSION – BREASTFEEDING IS WORTHWHILE
While breastfeeding may have minor inconveniences, it is truly worthwhile. Providing short and long term health benefits, increased cognitive skills, and a better alternative to formula, breast milk should be the only milk substance ingested by children from ages zero to 12 months. If all childbearing women were aware of everything breastfeeding can do for themselves and their children, I believe the number of babies who are breastfed for one year or longer would dramatically increase. Hardly a sacrifice, breastfeeding is natural, beautiful, and a great way to create an everlasting bond with one’s own child.
WORKS CITED
Barrett, Julia R. “Sour News for Soy Formula?” Environmental Health Perspectives. May 2005: A302.
Colson, Jenni Lynn, Ed. Breastfeeding Sourcebook. Detroit: Omnigraphics, Inc., 2002.
Department of Health and Human Services Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Breastfeeding: Data and Statistics: Breastfeeding Practices — Results from the 2005 National Immunization Survey. 2005. 26 November 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/NIS_data/data_2005.htm
Eiger, M.D., M. S. The Complete Book of Breastfeeding. New York: Workman Publishing Company Inc., 1999.
Eisenberg, Arlene, Heidi E. Murkoff, and Sandee E. Hathaway, B.S.N. What to Expect The First Year. New York: Workman Publishing Company, Inc., 1989
Granju, Katie Allison. “What Every Parent Should Know About Infant Formula.” Breastfeeding.com The Reading Room 1998. 28 November 2006 http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/what_should_know_formula.html
Huggins, R.N., M.S., Kathleen. Nursing: The First Two Months. The Harvard Common Press, 2000. [place of publication unknown]
Kramer, Micheal S. et al. “Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT): A Randomized Trial in the Republic of Belarus.” JAMA. Jan. 2001: 413-420.
Mortensen, Erik L. et al. “The Association Between Duration of Breastfeeding and Adult Intelligence.” JAMA. May 2002: 287.
Otitis Media (Middle Ear Infection). 2006. La Leche League International. 30 Nov. 2006. http://www.lalecheleague.org/cbi/Otitis.html
Pfaff, Kimberly. “Tips for Parents of Preemies.” Fit Pregnancy. Jun/Jul 2006: 76.
Similac /Abbott Laboratories. Feeding Reference Guide. USA: Abbott Laboratories, 2006.
Spangler, R.N., M.N., I.B.C.L.C., Amy. Breastfeeding: A Parent’s Guide. USA: Amy Katharine Spangler, R.N., M.N., I.B.C.L.C., 1995 [Self-published]
Stuebe, Alison M. et al. “Duration of Lactation and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes.” JAMA. Nov 2005: 2601-2610.
“Soy and Baby.” Better Nutrition. Mar. 2005: 14.
What is Colostrum?. 2006. La Leche League International. 30 Nov. 2006. http://www.lalecheleague.org/FAQ/colostrum.html
Williams, Rebecca D. “Breast-feeding Best Bet for Babies.” FDA Consumer. Oct. 1995. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/895_toc.html
Williams, Rebecca D. and Isadora Stehlin. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Breast Milk or Formula: Making the Right Choice for Your Baby. September 1998. 28 November 2006. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/reprints/breastfed.html
[JMW1]Preparation, Lack of Antibodies, Expense, gastro-intestinal, does not compare to breast milk, http://kidshealth.org/parent/nutrition_fit/nutrition/breast_bottle_feeding.html
Outcomes of Breastfeeding versus Formula Feeding
http://www.lalecheleague.org/cbi/Biospec.htm
BREASTMILK BEST FOR BABY
Breastfeeding not only provides the best nutrients for a growing baby, but it has other long term benefits such as providing immunities, protecting against health problems, and in recent studies, cultivating higher IQs. Breastfed babies are healthier overall and the longer they are breastfed, the more benefits they receive. According to the La Leche League web site, infants who are breastfed for four months are protected from frequent middle ear infections for three years, bouts of diarrhea for seven or more years, and Haemophilus influenza, type b for ten years. Imagine what those numbers would be if the infant were breastfed longer.
Breast milk protects against other infections as well. Because of the transfer of the mother’s antibodies through breast milk, babies are protected from viruses, sometimes even when the mother is carrying it. Rebecca Williams writes for the FDA Consumer Magazine and states that breast milk can protect from illnesses such as “pneumonia, botulism, bronchitis, staphylococcal infections, influenza, ear infections, and German measles” (Williams). Studies also suggest that breast milk protects against bacterial meningitis, urinary tract infections, and respiratory infections.
The most important aspect of infant nutrition is the ability of the newborn’s digestive system to be able to take in the good and excrete the bad. In M.S. Eiger’s The Complete Book of Breastfeeding, he states that infant formula contains so much protein that it cannot be fully absorbed while breast milk proteins are generally completely absorbed by the baby (Eiger 23). The proteins found in breast milk help to develop the baby’s immature digestive track and keeps infection out – proteins that are not replicated in formula (What is Colostrum? LLL Web Site). Another intestinal benefit was reported by the Journal of American Medical Association. In a study of breastfeeding and infections, it was determined that breastfed infants had less gastro-intestinal infections than formula fed babies in the first year of life (Kramer et al, 413-420).
Because of the position and motion required to suckle on a human nipple versus a silicone one, “breastfed babies are less prone to orthodontic problems than those raised on a bottle” (Eisenberg 4). The child’s teeth will more likely come in straighter as well as help with proper speech development. Bottle rot, a condition occurring when a child is left with a bottle in his or her mouth while sleeping, is unheard of in exclusively breastfed children not only because most breastfed babies received fewer bottles, but also because breast milk contains bacteria inhibitors that protect the enamel of the child’s tooth.
Amy Spangler, author of Breastfeeding: A Parent’s Guide, says that human milk lowers the risk of developing allergies, asthma, colic, diaper rash, reflux, and eczema. It also reduces the chance of developing chronic bowel diseases, diabetes, leukemia, and lymphoma. Breastfed babies are less likely to die from Sudden Infant Death Syndrome or other illness related mortalities.
Other possible benefits include lower cholesterol as an adult, less chance of becoming obese, and now studies are finding a link between breastfed babies and cognitive development. Published in the Journal of American Medical Association, a study compared breastfed children who in their adulthood scored higher on IQ tests than those who were not breastfed. “Duration of breastfeeding was associated with significantly higher scores on the Verbal, Performance, and Full Scale Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale IQs” (Mortensen 287). In a test using the Bayley’s Mental Developmental index, breastfed participants scored on average eight to ten points higher than formula fed children. Many people question whether this because of the chemical makeup of breast milk, the bonding experience of nursing, the likelihood that a mother who chooses to nurse also spends more time with her children, or because children who are breastfed generally come from better socio-economic backgrounds and have more educational resources available to them.
Regardless, the bonding experience provided by breastfeeding plays an important role in infant development as well. Breastfeeding cannot be carried out without some sort of skin-on-skin contact. In an article presented by Fit Pregnancy magazine, Kimberly Pfaff tells readers that “kangaroo care,” or skin-on-skin contact, is advantageous to premature babies. “Proven benefits to the baby include a more stable heartbeat, breathing and body temperature regulation and longer periods of sleep” (Pfaff 76). Kangaroo care, as well as breastfeeding, soothes newly born babies, babies with colic, and children receiving shots.
Probably the best reason to breastfeed pre-term and full-term babies alike is the fact that breast milk is designed for each stage of baby’s life. The authors of What to Expect the First Year bring to light some highly significant information: “Unlike formula, the composition of breast milk changes constantly to meet a baby’s ever-changing needs: it’s different in the morning than it is in the late afternoon; different at one month than it is at seven; different for a premature baby than for a term baby” (Eisenberg 3). It is simply the perfect nutrition for a human baby.
BREASTMILK BEST FOR MOTHER
Breastfeeding also provides health incentives to the mother. These include lowering the risks of developing diabetes, breast and ovarian cancer, osteoporosis, postpartum hemorrhaging, and menstrual anemia. In a study reported by the Journal of American Medical Association, it was found that “longer duration of breastfeeding was associated with reduced incidence of type 2 diabetes in… young and middle-aged women” by helping stabilize glucose levels (Stuebe 2601-2610). Breastfeeding also lowers maternal and child blood pressure because of the release of oxytocin.
Producing breast milk helps the mother return to her pre-pregnancy size faster. Early nursing stimulates uterine contractions which helps the uterus to shrink faster. Most pregnant women gain, on average, 25 to 55 pounds. A few days after delivering her baby, a mother will have lost almost half of the weight she had gained during her entire pregnancy. But there will still be unwanted pounds to lose. “Milk production requires 500-1000 calories a day” (Spangler 17). In my own experience, I have lost almost 30 pounds in three months since my baby was born and I eat twice what I was eating when I was pregnant.
If instant weight loss isn’t enough, breastfeeding is convenient, inexpensive, and easier at night. There is no preparation, it costs less to feed a nursing mother than buy formula for a bottle-fed baby, and night time feedings are quick and without fuss. Dads can appreciate that, too.
INFANT FORMULA NOT SECOND BEST
Formula falls short on providing the same advantages and cow’s milk should not be introduced into a baby’s diet until the age of one or later. Commonsense would dictate that a newborn calf should drink the milk of the mother cow, a newborn kitten the milk of the mother cat, and so on. Therefore, why would a newborn human drink anything other than the milk of his or her mother? The female breasts are designed specifically for the purpose of nursing a baby. Though formula makers do recognize that breastfeeding is best for babies, these companies lead consumers to believe that an iron-fortified formula is the next best choice (Similac, 14). The World Health Organization, an authority on international public health, thinks otherwise: “The second choice is the mother's own milk expressed and given to the infant in some way [bottle or cup]. The third choice is the milk of another human mother. The fourth and last choice is artificial baby milk” (Granju). Formula may be the next best choice after breast milk, but only by default.
Infant formulas are composed of cow’s milk or soy – neither of which are designed for a newborn human. They do not provide the same nutrition as breast milk and there have been recent concerns about infant formula causing long term health problems. Studies are in the works that are exploring a possible link between the use of cow’s milk formula and type I diabetes, obesity, and Parkinson’s disease.
Soy formula has not been studied long enough to know whether it is truly safe for use in infants, yet according to Better Nutrition magazine, “almost 25 percent of formula-fed American babies get soy formula” (“Soy and Baby” 14). Julia Barrett reports in an article featured in Environmental Health Perspectives, that The University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign has recently performed studies that have shown that soy formula has the ability to make changes in the cells of the intestines, “with unknown effects for infants fed soy formula” (Barrett, A302). There are also ongoing studies to determine if administering high levels of phytoestrogens (found in soy) prior to the onset of puberty could lead to cancer. With so many questions about the safety of soy formula, it is astounding that almost 20 million babies consume it each year (Barrett, A302).
While some formulas attempt to mimic breast milk in its design by adding DHA docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and arachidonic acid (ARA), two essential fatty acids that are supposedly responsible for aiding brain development, formulas simply cannot emulate breast milk’s complexity. The FDA explains that formula is not a perfect match for breast milk “because the exact chemical makeup of breast milk is still unknown” (Williams and Stehlin). Breast milk contains properties that formula manufacturers may never be able to imitate. Not to mention, each mother’s breast milk composition varies from day to day to meet the changing needs of her baby - formula can’t yet do that.
Formula lacks the antibodies found in breast milk, which could be why so many formula fed babies experience repeated ear infections. “When compared with exclusively breastfed infants, infants who were exclusively formula-fed had a 70% increase in their risk of developing an ear infection” (Otitis Media).
Another serious concern is the possibility of formula contamination. According to the Breastfeeding Sourcebook, “enterobacter sakazakii is a frequent contaminant in powdered formula and can cause sepsis and meningitis in newborns” (Colson, 14).[JMW1]
Aside from the health concerns that formula poses, formula has other downsides. It takes much longer to prepare a bottle of formula for a potentially screaming, hungry baby than it takes to simply provide a breast. Most formula must be mixed in advance and is often wasted when the baby doesn’t finish an entire bottle.
Formula feeding costs on average about $1500 per year with premixed and hypoallergenic formulas costing substantially more. Add lost wages, increased health care costs, and gas for repeated doctor’s visits due to an increased need to care for childhood illnesses, allergies, and infections, and the cost to formula feed becomes much higher. Breastfeeding is surely a more economical and healthy source of nutrition for a baby.
WHY BREASTFEEDING CAN BE DIFFICULT
If breastfeeding is superior to formula then why do so many mothers switch to formula before baby’s first birthday? The bottom line: if it was easy, every mother would do it. It is not that mothers do not care enough about their child or are not willing to make a simple sacrifice; breastfeeding does have its difficulties. These I have learned from my own experience.
Sleep, sensation, and separation are the major concerns. In the first few weeks, a breastfed baby may need to eat every one to three hours around the clock. As a mother of three children, I clearly remember feeling like I spent my entire day, and night, nursing, changing diapers, trying to catch up on sleep, and nursing again, and again, and again. Formula fed babies are able to go longer between feedings because “cow’s milk is more difficult to digest than breast milk, and the large rubbery curds stay in the baby’s stomach longer” which make baby feel full for up to several hours (Eisenberg 6). I suspect that the less frequent feedings contribute to a slower metabolism and are one of the causes of obesity in formula fed children.
Even though nighttime bottle preparation takes more effort than nighttime nursing, less time is spent feeding a formula fed baby. A nursing mother may have to awaken, at least partially, three or four times a night while a bottle feeding mother may wake up once or twice. Still, it is much less disruptive to put a child to breast than it is to prepare and warm a bottle of formula, especially when the baby wakes up screaming because he or she wants to eat right now!
Accompanying the quick weight loss in nursing mothers (because of the extra calories burned in producing milk), is fatigue. Frequent nursing is consuming, especially just days after delivery. Proper nutrition, hydration, and rest are very important for a breastfeeding mom.
While it is pretty painless to pump and store milk so a nursing mother can have time away from her baby, it is painful to go too long without emptying her breasts every few hours. Engorgement, a condition that occurs normally when a mother’s milk first comes in and when a mother is not able to empty her breasts regularly, is very painful and can lead to other problems. A woman’s milk “let down” reflex is determined by how frequently her baby nurses. This reflex often happens involuntarily. If milk becomes backed up, engorgement can occur which could lead to a clogged milk duct. These painful lumps can then become infected causing an infection called Mastitis. From first hand, recent experience, I can tell you that Mastitis produces severe, flu-like symptoms: high fever, chills, sweats, achiness, dizziness, and fatigue as well as painful, red, swollen lumps. A doctor once told me it is one of the fastest spreading infections in the female body. Fortunately, with proper care, these are easy to avoid.
When milk is not backed up, it is flowing, or leaking, or spraying. The wetness is annoying, especially at night, and too much milk can cause the baby to choke and swallow too much air. These are generally early issues that become less of a problem as breastfeeding progresses and as milk production slows down.
Some mothers may experience nipple pain from a baby’s latch. Because of improper latch-on positioning or, less often, because the baby may have a dome-shaped mouth, a nursing mother can develop sores, cracks, and initial latch-on nipple pain (Huggins 21). In the case of improper latch, the baby can easily be repositioned. If the problem is caused by the shape of the baby’s mouth, there is little that can be done, however, the nipples generally toughen up in about two weeks and the pain becomes gradually decreased.
Probably the most common reason for women to cease breastfeeding before 12 months is her return to work. Breastfeeding in public is not illegal, but very few states provide laws to protect it. Employers are required to provide a clean, comfortable, private space for woman to express milk in. They also must allow enough break time to do so. I think many women are afraid to ask their employers for these things because breastfeeding is so personal. In order to keep the milk supply in check with the baby’s demand, a working mother may have to pump three or four times during the work day. That doesn’t leave much time to get work done.
CONCLUSION – BREASTFEEDING IS WORTHWHILE
While breastfeeding may have minor inconveniences, it is truly worthwhile. Providing short and long term health benefits, increased cognitive skills, and a better alternative to formula, breast milk should be the only milk substance ingested by children from ages zero to 12 months. If all childbearing women were aware of everything breastfeeding can do for themselves and their children, I believe the number of babies who are breastfed for one year or longer would dramatically increase. Hardly a sacrifice, breastfeeding is natural, beautiful, and a great way to create an everlasting bond with one’s own child.
WORKS CITED
Barrett, Julia R. “Sour News for Soy Formula?” Environmental Health Perspectives. May 2005: A302.
Colson, Jenni Lynn, Ed. Breastfeeding Sourcebook. Detroit: Omnigraphics, Inc., 2002.
Department of Health and Human Services Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Breastfeeding: Data and Statistics: Breastfeeding Practices — Results from the 2005 National Immunization Survey. 2005. 26 November 2006. http://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/NIS_data/data_2005.htm
Eiger, M.D., M. S. The Complete Book of Breastfeeding. New York: Workman Publishing Company Inc., 1999.
Eisenberg, Arlene, Heidi E. Murkoff, and Sandee E. Hathaway, B.S.N. What to Expect The First Year. New York: Workman Publishing Company, Inc., 1989
Granju, Katie Allison. “What Every Parent Should Know About Infant Formula.” Breastfeeding.com The Reading Room 1998. 28 November 2006 http://www.breastfeeding.com/reading_room/what_should_know_formula.html
Huggins, R.N., M.S., Kathleen. Nursing: The First Two Months. The Harvard Common Press, 2000. [place of publication unknown]
Kramer, Micheal S. et al. “Promotion of Breastfeeding Intervention Trial (PROBIT): A Randomized Trial in the Republic of Belarus.” JAMA. Jan. 2001: 413-420.
Mortensen, Erik L. et al. “The Association Between Duration of Breastfeeding and Adult Intelligence.” JAMA. May 2002: 287.
Otitis Media (Middle Ear Infection). 2006. La Leche League International. 30 Nov. 2006. http://www.lalecheleague.org/cbi/Otitis.html
Pfaff, Kimberly. “Tips for Parents of Preemies.” Fit Pregnancy. Jun/Jul 2006: 76.
Similac /Abbott Laboratories. Feeding Reference Guide. USA: Abbott Laboratories, 2006.
Spangler, R.N., M.N., I.B.C.L.C., Amy. Breastfeeding: A Parent’s Guide. USA: Amy Katharine Spangler, R.N., M.N., I.B.C.L.C., 1995 [Self-published]
Stuebe, Alison M. et al. “Duration of Lactation and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes.” JAMA. Nov 2005: 2601-2610.
“Soy and Baby.” Better Nutrition. Mar. 2005: 14.
What is Colostrum?. 2006. La Leche League International. 30 Nov. 2006. http://www.lalecheleague.org/FAQ/colostrum.html
Williams, Rebecca D. “Breast-feeding Best Bet for Babies.” FDA Consumer. Oct. 1995. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/895_toc.html
Williams, Rebecca D. and Isadora Stehlin. U.S. Food and Drug Administration. Breast Milk or Formula: Making the Right Choice for Your Baby. September 1998. 28 November 2006. http://www.fda.gov/fdac/reprints/breastfed.html
[JMW1]Preparation, Lack of Antibodies, Expense, gastro-intestinal, does not compare to breast milk, http://kidshealth.org/parent/nutrition_fit/nutrition/breast_bottle_feeding.html
Outcomes of Breastfeeding versus Formula Feeding
http://www.lalecheleague.org/cbi/Biospec.htm
Thursday, July 26, 2007
Student Profile
Jenn W.Adult Studies Program Student
Seton Hill University, Greensburg, PA
Major: Business Administration
Expected Date of Graduation: Dec 2008
Expected Date of Graduation: Dec 2008
Degree: Bachelor's
Would like to continue in MBA program.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
