Does Breastfeeding Result in Smarter Kids? 

I agree, except for one point. We actually know the proper nutrients for growth. Sure we THINK we know.. but the past suggests we are wrong about some of it. Nature on the other hand, has a long track record of knowing nutrition better than humans.

Damm, it looks like I could've been a genius, but my mother bottle fed me 80s shitty formula. So now, I'm just bang on average...😢

It kind of is, though. Not to the extent where if you need to formula feed you should be shamed, but breastmilk DOES prevent a 'bunch of stuff', or at least lowers the risk. Breastmilk continues to provide immunity until the immune system is properly developed, which isn't until around 7yo (which, funnily enough, is the top-end age of when children have been studied to fully self-wean). My 2.5yo has breastfed more frequently this week, and a day after he started doing so, he got his snotty nose - he knew ahead of time that he needed more nutrients! If you let your child self-wean, they still get nutrients from breast milk until that point, which can top up what they may have missed out on in the food they ate. Popular belief is that they don't really get any nutrients from it once they're 1yo, but that's not actually true. If you tandem feed, immunity the toddler is PASSED ON to the baby. So if toddler has licked a lamppost, baby benefits from immunity created by the breast as well as toddler. Breastmilk has more melatonin at night time, more fat towards the end of the feeding session, and in summary is made up of exactly what the specific child needs. Breastfeeding lowers mum's risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease and obesity. It helps reduce baby's risk of SIDS. I'm all for formula feeding if you need to, but I think 'fed is best' AND 'breast is best' are true in equal measure, honestly. Formula is of course still sufficient and gives the essentials for development, but formula companies wouldn't ever be able to make it individualised based on what the child has been in contact with or eaten on any one given day. Formula is a lifeline for many and in many cases it therefore trumps breastmilk, but if you can just as easily do either, the choice is clear!

‘Fed’ is a necessity, breastmilk is best for baby. Breast is best. It's not mom shaming to say that. Feed your child however works best for your situation, but pretending formula (which is a medically acceptable alternative) is as good as breastmilk is just a lie. My 18 month old will currently only eat mac and cheese, but I know broccoli is better.... Babies being fed syrup is being ‘fed’ but in no way is it ‘best’ nor acceptable .

@@rachelgooden9981 broccoli & cheese or broccoli Mac casserole!

Sounds like all of them aren't the brightest

They are just suckers of capitalism

Data is the plural. Datum is singular. "Do they?" "Does he?"

Unfortunately that's not necessarily better. Depending on the workplace and level of seniority a 12 month period of leave could have significant career impacts. It contributes to the infamous "baby gap" which is that women with children start to fall behind their male and childless female peers in pay and seniority. Formula feeding can help the father shoulder more of the caring responsibility, and take more of the leave, and therefore the mother spends less time on leave.

@@Croz89 You dropped a "in the USA"; If your exact same work position is waiting for you when you get back the fallout is less, plus mothers in my country are paid slightly more, get a few more days of paid leave and get to retire slightly earlier than their childless peers. You *can* control for this... if you want.

@@AnjaPraprotnik No, not just in the USA, pretty much everywhere. If you have a skilled job and you take a long career break for whatever reason, even if you come back to the exact same job, you are going to be significantly behind your colleagues both in experience and tenure. That means they are more likely to receive promotions and pay rises than you are, often because they're just simply better at their jobs thanks to that extra year of experience. Sure, you could force through legislation to compensate for this, but that will piss a lot of people off.

They've at least touched on the broader topic around it and I think on puberty blockers more specifically. I'll do a quick search on their channel page and edit/ reply.

He won't. He does pop culture science review. He Can't risk polarizing the channel; Money > integrity

I agree that this topic was a long time coming! In my experience, medical practitioners are extremely preachy about breastfeeding, but it's not any better than bottle feeding, except for rare cases. It all makes no sense!

Most trials in medicine are negative trials. This is important because we do a lot of nonsense because of tradition, lobbying, pharmaceutical industry and bad doctors. This constitutes harm. Science progresses at a snails pace and good rigorous science takes patience, and time, and margins are small. If you're coming here looking for huge discoveries youre going to be solely disappointed and quit, or fake trial results for fame. (god knows we already have enough of the latter)

But if the water is contaminated, the mother is still ingesting the contaminant and feeding it to the baby if they’re breastfeeding. The ultimate thing to tackle there is clean water.

@@redrumnoir7552 Sometimes, yes, but not every contaminant is expressed in breast milk. Having it pass through one mature immune system first at least reduces the risk to the baby somewhat.

Have you actually looked into it though? This is a bold statement to make if you haven't. Breastmilk continues to provide immunity until the immune system is properly developed, which isn't until around 7yo (which, funnily enough, is the top-end age of when children have been studied to fully self-wean). My 2.5yo has breastfed more frequently this week, and a day after he started doing so, he got his snotty nose - he knew ahead of time that he needed more nutrients! If you let your child self-wean, they still get nutrients from breast milk until that point, which can top up what they may have missed out on in the food they ate. Popular belief is that they don't really get any nutrients from it once they're 1yo, but that's not actually true. If you tandem feed, immunity the toddler is PASSED ON to the baby. So if toddler has licked a lamppost, baby benefits from immunity created by the breast as well as toddler. Breastmilk has more melatonin at night time, more fat towards the end of the feeding session, and in summary is made up of exactly what the specific child needs. Breastfeeding lowers mum's risk of breast cancer, ovarian cancer, osteoporosis, cardiovascular disease and obesity. It helps reduce baby's risk of SIDS. I'm all for formula feeding if you need to, but I think 'fed is best' AND 'breast is best' are true in equal measure, honestly. Saying formula in developed countries is 'basically no different' is frankly slightly alarming, but of course it's still sufficient!

@@febberz I don't think in a relatively hygienic environment in the developed world that the immunity benefits (for which there isn't particularly strong evidence) are significant. Self weaning also demands much more of the mother which isn't practical for those who want to return to the workforce, it's not realistic for the vast majority. The biggest problem I have is breastfeeding advocates preying on the natural paranoia of new mothers to make them afraid if they don't breastfeed their child even if it means significant personal sacrifice, it will have significant and permanent negative outcomes. And in the developed world, I think that's completely unfounded.

​@@Croz89why do you say there isn't strong evidence to show that breastmilk increases immunity (in that it has the antibodies needed to fight illnesses as they occur)?

I'd really question the 'just as healthy' part of that, as it's generally known that breastfed kids on average have better immunity. It's fine to formula feed for all those other reasons you gave in and of themselves, not because it has 'essentially the same health benefits' as breastfeeding

‘Fed’ is not best. Breast is best. Formula is acceptable. Syrup being fed to babies is being ‘fed’ but it’s not best. Nor is it acceptable.

Fed is a necessity, breastmilk is best for baby. It's not mom shaming to say that. Feed your child however works best for your situation, but pretending formula is as good as breastmilk is just a lie. My 18 month old will currently only eat mac and cheese, but I know broccoli is better....

@@rachelgooden9981 ...but babies don't need syrup. or water, or yogurt, or any of the other foods we eat. They need breastmilk or formula. They aren't "fed" if they eat that other stuff, they're dead. And you are absolutely shaming women who can't breastfeed. None of the research presented here showed that formula was worse than breastfeeding, if you've got some good data to back up your claims, then by all means! Share with the rest of the world! But I've actually taken statistics classes, I've actually read research, so correlation just ain't gonna cut it for me.

@@febberz Generally known =/= medically proven. Any benefit to immunity from breastfeeding does not actually last past when the child is breastfeeding, and the level of protection a child gets is, as of now, completely unknown. If you have some really good empirical data, I'd love to see it, but from what I've seen this is more of "we think this is true" rather than "here is the data that points to this being true" kind of thing.