Being highly suspicious of this dubious-sounding “fact” (for which no sources are ever given), I did a little… well, I hesitate to call it “research,” really: the statement can be debunked with the most cursory of google searches. Just as a little challenge, try googling the phrase “average duration of breastfeeding” (or “mean duration of breastfeeding” does fine too) plus the name of basically any country you care to think of: India, Nigeria, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Egypt, Thailand, you name it. This search will direct you to actual papers written on infant feeding practices in developing countries. What you get is a load of figures like 21 months (Niger), 27.5 months (Nepal), 18-20 months (rural Thailand), 8.7 months (urban China), 18 months (Cameroon), 22 months (Kenya), 20 months (Nigeria), 28 months (Rwanda) and 19 months (Uganda)—that was a random selection, by the way. Seriously, I will mail a box of Godiva chocos to anyone who can find just one country where the average age is even close to four. The longest duration I was able to find was in Bangladesh (31 months) but even that’s a way off. Or, if you are feeling lazy, you could just refer to this table here.
The table makes interesting reading for a number of reasons. Did you imagine that mums in sub-Saharan Africa would be nursing the longest? So did I. We’d be wrong, apparently. Also, check the figures for “exclusive” breastfeeding; looks like mums in a lot of poor countries introduce solids pretty early. But these are subjects for other posts.
The table makes interesting reading for a number of reasons. Did you imagine that mums in sub-Saharan Africa would be nursing the longest? So did I. We’d be wrong, apparently. Also, check the figures for “exclusive” breastfeeding; looks like mums in a lot of poor countries introduce solids pretty early. But these are subjects for other posts.
I’m not sure where the “four years” thing came from, but I’m guessing that what happened at some point in the great game of Chinese whispers that is the internet, is that someone took a look at the Kathy Dettwyler paper (a paper which itself based on some pretty questionable logic, as Mainstream Parenting pointed out—although in fact Dettwyler herself describes the average-weaning-age-is-four-years thing as “neither accurate nor meaningful”) which states that the natural duration of breastfeeding is between 2.5 and seven years and basically stuck a pin halfway in between those two numbers. Presumably somebody else saw this figure being quoted in the same paragraph as the thing about the WHO recommending breastfeeding for two years, and sort of blurred the two statements together in her mind.And so on.
Bullshitometer verdict
So no, the average age of nursing across the world is not four; I’d hesitate to name a figure, but given that only about half the world’s kids between 20 and 23 months are still on the boob, it can’t be all that high. I’m not bringing this point up because I’m trying to tell mothers of four-year-old nurselings not to nurse them, as I guess that is their business. But I am a fact geek, and I do think it sets a poor precedent when we repeat things that aren’t true and don’t bother to check our sources. And then there are the mothers like that poster on a forum I regularly go to, who is tandem nursing a toddler and a baby despite being obviously fed up with it, and is basically trying to get through the experience by repeating to herself over and over again that “the average global age of weaning is four”; if the myth is being used to put pressure on women who want to wean older babies/toddlers, that’s not cool.
Finally, the very fact that people have unquestioningly swallowed such an improbable figure says something rather disturbing about our view of the world of 2011—like we actually think that 80% (or whatever) of the world’s population is still barefoot and living in the mud hut. But I’ll leave it to Hans Roslin to expand a little on this idea in Debunking Myths about the Third World—the video is great fun by the way and is worth watching for the graphics and presentation alone. Enjoy!
Love it!! Can you debunk some more breastfeeding "facts"? I remember with my first little one, I was told:
ReplyDelete1. breastfeeding burns 500 calories an hour
2. smearing breastmilk on baby acne clears it right up!
3. your baby will not have eczema if you breastfeed
4. if you breastfeed and your baby has eczema, smearing breastmilk on it will clear it right up!
5. your baby will not get ear infections if you breastfeed
6. if your baby gets an ear infection and you're breastfeeding, just drizzle some breastmilk in the ear; clears it right up!
7. poop of breastfed babies does not stink
Yeah, I've got lots more ;)
Breastfeeding burns 300-500 calories per day, not per hour, fact.
DeleteBreastfeeding contains live cells with anitbacterial and healing properties, fact.
Breastfeeding makes ear infections less likely, the babies ear anatomy can override this rule, fact.
Breastfeeding babies poop in relation to formula fed babies poop does not smell the same. One has a right to believe one stinks more than the other....
My second child had her 1st ear infection at 6 weeks. She was never given formula or bottles, only breast fed. She had severe reflux, and the breast milk would get in her eustation tubes.
DeleteAh, but ok BK has the facts, yo! Totally get that you thought you had a point, honey, but here's a fact: breast milk is not a miracle potion. It does not prevent eczema, obesity, idiocy, diabeetus, or autism. FACT :)
DeleteThe 300-500 cal/day didn't make sense for me. I looked at the calories (in formula) my infant was supposed to be eating, and that would only hold true for very young infants. And I think I also threw in some conversion maths (I think I assumed that my body was 80% efficient in converting calories to breast milk, which I felt was pretty generous). So you're looking at way more once the kid starts getting bigger-- especially if you EBF.
DeleteThat being said, it wasn't as if I lost any weight in the process but I do remember that I was eating a whole lot.
BK has the correct information. Aleah, I'm sorry if you and your baby did not benefit from breastfeeding, but you are in the minority. Also, you have ironically misspelled the word diabetes directly after using the word idiocy. Honey. :)
DeleteRhS… you're as stuck up as a flag pole aren't you.
Deletethe reason why you and your baby did not benefit from breastfeeding was because you did not breastfeed the baby attention. You lied and told people that you breast fed at the first couple of weeks when in reality you did not.
DeleteI'm really sick a hearing excuses why women did not nurse their baby .The reason why usually is, they say they could not produce milk, or they had to go back to work,or no matter what they tried the baby was still hungry. Women just don't try hard enough because they don't understand why breastfeeding is better there is not enough breast feeding educators in the United States. There really needs to be a lot more education in the US and also how to wean. I know one thing is for sure my baby is super smart she only has one bowlmovement a week and no it does not smell
DeleteI'm really sick a hearing excuses why women did not nurse their baby .The reason why usually is, they say they could not produce milk, or they had to go back to work,or no matter what they tried the baby was still hungry. Women just don't try hard enough because they don't understand why breastfeeding is better there is not enough breast feeding educators in the United States. There really needs to be a lot more education in the US and also how to wean. I know one thing is for sure my baby is super smart she only has one bowlmovement a week and no it does not smell
Deletethe reason why you and your baby did not benefit from breastfeeding was because you did not breastfeed the baby attention. You lied and told people that you breast fed at the first couple of weeks when in reality you did not.
Delete1. breastfeeding burns 500 calories per day
Delete2. smearing breastmilk on baby acne helps to clear it up, but it's not an instant thing
3. your baby will be far less likely to have eczema & other obvious signs of allergies if you breastfeed, but like vaccines, nothing is 100%
4. if you breastfeed and your baby has eczema, smearing breastmilk on it might help. Most breastfeeding moms seem to like coconut oil better for this though.
5. your baby will get fewer ear infections if you breastfeed
6. if your baby gets an ear infection and you're breastfeeding, just drizzle some breastmilk in the ear; clears it right up (did for us - as in was told the drum would likely rupture & was healed in 3 days)
7. poop of breastfed babies does not stink - smells like buttered popcorn with a hint of vinegar. If your breastfed baby's poop does smell badly, it likely is due to an intolerance in mom's diet or improper gut flora which can be corrected with probiotics most times.
Breastmilk is not magic. It's not. It's actually super ordinary. The human mother makes a fairly standard milk whether she lives in luxury or poverty...no matter her ethnicity or weight. And human babies have a body expecting to receive human milk at birth. So their system is set up to be ready for that. Colostrum even is designed to patch up all the small fissures that open in baby's gut when they start to feed & use a digestive tract that is completely brand new. The symbiosis is really wonderful the way that is designed.
While most formula fed kids will be fine, statistically they are at greater risks of infections of all sorts. They do have more ear infections as well. Health wise they are at greater risk short term as well as long term for things like juvenile diabetes & other issues. That does not mean that breastfed babies are never ill & have no diabetes & if you interpret what people say so extremely then life must be very confusing to you. There is nothing in this life you can do, nor avoid doing, that will override your own genetics. There is nothing you can do that eliminates the significance of the toxic load we all are exposed to. There are only choices we can make (at least the ones we know of) that increase or decrease our odds. I don't know what will happen with my kid's health long term. No one does for sure. What I do know is that I *try* my best to set them up to be the healthiest they can be & hope that there isn't some genetic time bomb I am unaware of. My own niece had juvenile cancer - stage 4 & amazingly survived it. We are blessed. But no one saw that coming. However, in my own research, I found a significant difference in the rates of her kind of cancer & breastfeeding as an infant. I also found solid evidence that lack of breastfeeding leads to a shrinking of the thymus gland. By 4 months a formula fed infant has a thymus less than half the size of an exclusively breastfed infant, by 8 months even worse. Since the thymus is key in making & training t-cells - the same cells that fight illness and are responsible for destroying abnormal precancerous cells, this link seems obvious. You can bet after almost loosing my niece I made sure to breastfeed my own. NOT because I am a better mom than others, but because I was aware that it *could* help. My kids could still get it. They could. And if they do, I won't ever wonder if I *could* have done one thing more to try to make sure they didn't. I've made darn sure of that. It *is* the only think I *can* control....what *I* do. The outcome is anyone's guess. :/
And as far as wondering why more women don't nurse. I don't wonder. I worked at 6 weeks & struggled soooo much to do it - in the end I wondered how so many do when people are sooooo unsupportive, rude, spend all their time trying to make it out like you are trying to be some martyr. Frankly I am amazed so many try as hard as they do.
This comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteNicely stated, Joel Butts. Thank you. I always appreciate comments of this nature when reading a post such as the one above. In fact, I'm far likelier to dig through the comments when I disagree with or am offended by an article in hopes of finding what I perceive as a reasonable and logical response.
DeleteSpot on! Hooray for some non-judgemental common-sense!
DeleteFantastic comment, 'Joel'. Thank you for taking the time :)
DeleteIt is Katherine Dettwyler, not Dewlett. Otherwise I like this post. This has been irritating me for ages!
ReplyDeleteEven in "traditional cultures," exluding developed areas, the normal age of weaning is closer to 2 1/2 to 3. I once read a tongue-in-cheek quip in a book on mothering by an anthropologist: "The only people who breastfeed for five years are the !Kung and female anthropologists."
Oops, typo (or whatever it was) duly corrected! I was too busy checking the links all worked correctly. I love the quote about female anthropologists!
ReplyDeleteGood work!! I love to see facts not myth. I also don't think there is anything wrong with breastfeeding as long as mother and child are both happy, but I like accuracy.
ReplyDeleteYikes.....OK, I am a huge supporter of breastfeeding, but if the "average" is 4 years, and knowing how many do not breastfeed anywhere near that long, that means that there are hundreds of kids in elementary and even middle school that are still breastfeeding! Ew!
ReplyDeleteIf all this is fact, why does the WHO recommend breastfeeding for at least 2 years? Granted that is not 4 years, but doing it for at least 2 years must be the norm in a big part of the world for the WHO to have enough evidence to suggest this.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteHi BK,
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I don't know what the WHO recommendations are based on... I should imagine that they looked at child survival rates for children in developing country environments and decided that these were better if children were nursed for around two years or more, rather than weaned at an earlier age. In places without clean water or pasteurized milk, I should thing two years of nursing would indeed increase child survival rates. I don't think there is any particular reason why the average weaning age would have to be four for the WHO to make this decision. :)
What forum did you find this woman? You are describing me to a "T".
ReplyDeleteYou can't see me, but I'm shaking my head with my fingers pressed on my nose between my eyes all dramatic like, do note i had to remove my glasses to do so, as i read this blog and the comments.
ReplyDeleteDitto at your post Jessica.
ReplyDeleteBK, I am with you. The WHO recommends breastfeeding two years or longer.
ReplyDeleteBFwithoutBS, it did not take much research to find where the WHO recommendation are based on.
:The Data Bank is maintained and managed in keeping with internationally accepted definitions and indicators. It pools information mainly from national and regional surveys, and studies dealing specifically with the prevalence and duration of breastfeeding and complementary feeding. The Global Data Bank on Infant and Young Child Feeding is continually updated as new studies and surveys become available.
Data for inclusion are based on indicators from household surveys and for some countries from facility based surveys.
Further more, you need to do your research on un-Pasteurized milk before you make assumptions about it.
Aleah, if there was such a think as a miracle potion, then breast milk would be the closest thing we have to that. You need to check your fact before you open your mouth...
ReplyDeleteBreast feeding does lower your chances of Obesity
Breastfed Infants are less likely to have an ear infection. That does not mean that a breast fed child will never have an ear infection, but the numbers are a lot lower.
It is a fact that in general breast fed babies are healthier. There is no disputing that.
If you want to breast feed or not is your choice, but don't distort the truth.
Source on ANY of this? There is certainly NO PROVEN CAUSAL LINK between breastfeeding and obesity. A correlation has been observed. But gosh, I bet if you put on your critical thinking cap, you could come up with your very own confounding factors for those findings. Same with this vague and unsubstantiated claim of "healthier."
DeleteThere are too many factors that contribute to obesity to PROVE a causal link. I'm afraid that a correlation is the best we're gonna get on this one.
DeleteThe causal link between obesity and breastfeeding is likely a situation of "A does not cause B; C causes both A and B".
DeleteI imagine a notable portion of bf mothers who choose to breastfeed to so because they want to choose the best, healthiest option for their child based on the best available evidence. Those same mums are also likely to continue to make nutritional choices or their children based on that line of thinking. It does not mean that all breastfeeding mothers will be motivated by the same reasons and will apply good nutritional values later on, it does not mean that formula feeding mothers will encourage bad eating habits, and it does not mean that breastfeeding will prevent obesity. It just means that a large enough number of bf mothers are attuned to issues of health and nutrition to show an impact on figures.
(/my best guess, anyway.)
The PROBIT study (which is the closest thing we have, so far, to a randomized control study of breastfeeding vs formula) did not find that breastfeeding compared to formula feeding lowered the chance of obesity at age 6, although of course it's entirely possible that something might come up as the groups grow older.
DeleteOnly thing that would be close to over weight would be toddlers or babies. Some formula fed babies are over fed. That's closest. I'm formula fed and my siblings not one is over weight so makes no sense. My brother is actually underweight but healthy for him
Deletecorrection.
ReplyDeleteBreast feeding lower your babies chance of obesity not yours. However breast feeding does suck the calories away for the mom. That is also a fact.
Thanks for the facts!! What drives me crazy about bf debates is how rude and vicious comments can get! Lets just calm down and be nice, people.
ReplyDeleteI think this is a great post that sheds light onto how the western world tends to co-opt the experiences of the impoverished developing world and romantize it as normal and natural and inherently better. Just because women in the developing world tend to breastfeed until the age of two or three doesn't mean it is the right thing to do for women and children everywhere or that "we" ought to try to follow that as a model. To use that argument as a basis for long term breastfeeding is to ignore swaths of particulars about their lives and the diversity of the developing: do women want to breastfeed? Do they want to breastfeed for so long? Do they have access to clean water? Does poverty affect their decision to breastfeeding? Does affluence affect their decision to breastfeed? Do they have access to refrigeration? Do they have access to a strong labor market that would pull them away from breastfeeding? I realize WHO bases their studies and surveys on more than just the developing world, but many of their studies on breastfeeding come from there.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous July 28, 2012 2:11 PM, the issue being discussed was what studies does WHO base its recommendation on to breastfeed for two years. What you listed as what the base their recommendation on "The Data Bank" in no way cites the studies they use to come up with this guideline. If BFwithoutBS had said oh, the base it on information from "The Data Bank" I doubt that would have been helpful.
They do have a section on infant and young child feeding which looks amazingly detailed: http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/en/index.html
Additionally there is an article called "Infant and Young Child Feeding" where the main argument for breastfeeding until the age of two is that many children are malnourished and breast milk affords an readily accessible sanitary complement to food. So less of an issue if you are not worried that your child is malnourished or in danger of becoming malnourished due to lack of food. Interestingly they still don't cite to studies even showing how they came up with the figures below.
"Breast milk is also an important source of energy and nutrients in children 6 to 23 months of age. It can provide one half or more of a child's energy needs between 6 and 12 months of age, and one third of energy needs between 12 and 24 months. Breast milk is also a critical source of energy and nutrients during illness and reduces mortality among children who are malnourished."
http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs342/en/
The reason they say breast feeding helps shed pounds is bc it induces oxytocin which makes the uterus shrink back down quicker via small contractions. And the numbers would be a lot higher if people didn't think it was so gross to bf in public and most mothers quit around 6 months bc that when teeth start coming in. It's all a matter of tolerance... Both with pain and with negative judgements.
ReplyDeleteFor anyone interested in more on this topic here's a link to a Katherine Dettwyler piece.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.iamnotthebabysitter.com/wordwide-average-age-of-weaning/
Interesting post. That was the mum on the Time cover, right?
ReplyDeleteI would guess that women who live in cultures where they are encouraged to stay at home, including farming/gardening near the home, would breastfeed for longer than women in other cultures. That would lead me to guess that certain parts of Asia and North Africa would have the longest avg. nursing period. Women in sub-Saharan Africa quite commonly have jobs or businesses or work in family fields located a long walk away from their homes.
ReplyDeleteI read somewhere (sorry, no source) that Mongolian women tend to wean when a new baby is born, so average length of nursing is two years for all children EXCEPT the last-borns, who tend to nurse for additional years, even up to age 7. I think the "average" (is it mean or median?) duration of breastfeeding probably obscures a lot of different patterns in different places, such as this one (even if this one is not accurate). National average is a really crude measure and it's not specially useful when comparing countries with very different health care systems, nutrition problems, rates of manual labor, etc.
Also, defining "weaned" is not so simple. What about a kid who nurses only when sick? Or one who nurses for comfort at least once a week, but doesn't actually drink much while on the breast? Or a kid who nurses most days, but gets 90% of his/her calories from other food?
Chef Carvey, no, that is not the reason they say breastfeeding helps women lose weight. After the baby and placenta are out, most of the extra weight left on the woman is 1. water, due mainly to additional blood volume and 2. fat stored in anticipation of lactation.
The reason that breastfeeding CAN cause women to lose pregnancy weight gain is that milk production draws down that store of fat. HOWEVER this is not universal. In my own case I was ravenous for a week or two after giving birth and, while I was not weighing myself, my hip measurement increased. When I was weaning my daughter I lost about 10 pounds and went back to fitting into my pre-pregnancy clothing. It seems that in my case my body wanted a constant "reserve fund" of 10lb of extra fat available for making milk. I'm sure I'm not the only woman to have experienced this phenomenon. I make a great anecdotal example, since I always ate what I felt like, so there were no confounding factors besides lactation.
- RW
http://online.liebertpub.com/doi/pdfplus/10.1089/bfm.2012.0048
ReplyDelete"These results support the hypothesis that duration of lactation may be associated with a healthier metabolic profile and healthier anthropometric measurements, especially lipid levels and waist-to-hip ratio, even years after weaning."
Breastfeeding for 10 months resulted in better cholesterol levels and skinnier waists even years after weaning.
Write more, thats all I have to say. Literally, it seems as
ReplyDeletethough you relied on the video to make your point. You clearly know what
youre talking about, why throw away your intelligence on just posting
videos to your blog when you could be giving us something informative to read?
Feel free to surf to my web blog under
It's an amazing paragraph in support of all the web visitors; they will take benefit from it I am sure.
ReplyDeleteMy webpage: 21591
I am really grateful to the owner of this website who
ReplyDeletehas shared this enormous article at at this time.
Feel free to surf to my website: 62642
It's is virtually impossible for breastfeeding to go beyond the age of 3 in most places around the world.
ReplyDeleteIn the vast majority of humans, the enzyme that allows the body to break down lactose (the sugar in breastmilk) stops being produced around the age of 2, but usually by the time they are 3 years old. Attempting to continue breastfeeding after that age causes toddlers to become ill, learn to associate breastfeeding with being sick, and self wean.
Most European descendents and two tribes in Africa have genetic mutations that cause the enzyme to continue to be produced for life. That's why dairy is a major part of the European diet, and you see the dairy cattle farmers among certain African tribes. Everyone else (Asians, other Africans, Australian Aborigines, etc) consider dairy products to be a treat, to be eaten in small amounts, otherwise they get sick.
American Indians and African Americans tend to have high rates of European genetics after hundreds of years of interbreeding (I won't call it intermarriage, because an awful lot of it was rape of slaves and tribal women) but have what people would consider to be a "high rate of lactose intolerance" compared to those of purely European heritage.
I've known plenty of kids nursed past age 3 & never known any to get sick off mom's milk. Not one. I would love some link to show this is true. especially the assertion that lactase stops being made around age 2. I have literally never read it in my life & I have read & read & read up on breastfeeding. Anyone can become lactose intolerant, which is what you are describing by simply removing lactose from the diet. I think you are confusing what happens after weaning with what happens during active nursing. There is no reason for the body to magically stop making an enzyme it is currently utilizing. And since breastmilk continues to be a great source of appropriate fats & nutrients, it would be against evolution to set up a time when that potential food source (especially during times of drought or famine) to self limit & become an agent for causing illness. That makes zero sense in how humans are designed.
Deletemost of the human population is lactose intolerant my age 7/8 or so, only approx 35% are lactose tolerant due to a genetic mutation that results in the persistent production of lactase enzyme into adulthood. The norm for humans and indeed most mammals is to become lactose intolerant soon after the weaning stage of infancy, note AFTER weaning, though weaning begins with the introduction of solids around 6 months of age in humans and is complete when they are no longer feed any brestmilk or formula,( by around 4 a significant decrease in lactase production is seen). unless you have the recessive genes resulting in intolerance from birth, everyone can have dairy without worry until between 6-8 when most of use become close enough to intolerant to start having some nasty gastric symptoms when we over indulge. Why is this you ask, because it is only recently in human history that we domesticated other mammals and have started ingesting their milk. Mammals (humans included) normal do not have milk as part of their diet after weaning in infancy and therefore the gene that signals lactase production essentially shuts down. Some people have a mutated gene that allows their body to persistently produce lactase into adulthood, but this is not the norm.
Deletehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lactase_persistence
http://www.nature.com/news/archaeology-the-milk-revolution-1.13471
I do not believe that women should be looked at badly or judged for extended breastfeeding. There are millions of stupid things westerners do that we culturally try to impose on other cultures. The decision to breastfeed a toddler is completely up to the family, and we should not be assuming the worst of a mother when she does so in public. There are millions of men molesting their children behind closed doors, worry about that not the woman who wants to have a close relationship with their child and give them the best odds for the future. I Would like to hear another argument against extended breastfeeding other than : ew! He can ask for it!, He can walk! ... that's just wrong! I would like to assume we are all smart women here. Denfend your position with real arguments. What are the actual Cons, and find the proof.. beyong google search. The same thing that is happening with breastfeeding is happening to birth, the naturality of it is being taken away.
ReplyDeleteI do not believe that women should be looked at badly or judged for extended breastfeeding. There are millions of stupid things westerners do that we culturally try to impose on other cultures. The decision to breastfeed a toddler is completely up to the family, and we should not be assuming the worst of a mother when she does so in public. There are millions of men molesting their children behind closed doors, worry about that not the woman who wants to have a close relationship with their child and give them the best odds for the future. I Would like to hear another argument against extended breastfeeding other than : ew! He can ask for it!, He can walk! ... that's just wrong! I would like to assume we are all smart women here. Denfend your position with real arguments. What are the actual Cons, and find the proof.. beyong google search. The same thing that is happening with breastfeeding is happening to birth, the naturality of it is being taken away.
ReplyDeleteI am still breastfeeding my 3 1/2 year old.I don't care about anything people say.all I know is that she does not get sick much, she is very smart ( she can read at a 6th grade level in two languages and is a baby genious).she is almost done breasfeeding but I will let her decide when to stop.
ReplyDeleteI don't care if people say mean things to me...people that know me are ok with it now since they know how amazing my child is in so many ways. So smart, healthy and very independent too.
I think breasfeeding has something to do with all she can do but since she is my only child I cannot prove it.
Say what you want to say.it does not bother me :)
My only child nursed until the age of 8. I called it nursing after about the age of 1-2 yrs., due to his primary nourishment coming from food. I was completely fine with doing the child-led weaning. He would spend the night at his grandparents, cousins, and peers - and not nurse. I agree with you about doing what seems best for you and your child. My son will be 26 this month. I still recall his response to my mother's question about when was he going to stop nursing. Despite his "never" answer, of course he did stop. He continues to have an exceptionally strong immune system, received his undergraduate degree in 2.5 yrs., and is confident, secure, and independent. It is a very individual choice. I think a 2nd child would have made us both do it for much less time. I did go back to school and then worked full-time since he was 1.5 yrs. Breastfeeding, nursing, the family bed, carrying him in a "rebozo," and the support of family/friends (our "village") - worked for us. Compassion, acceptance, and non-judgement of what works for others is paramount. We each try to do our best with the moments we have.
DeleteYou know breastmilk has nothing to do with being smart. Has been proven. You would be surprised has many smart who where formula fed.
DeleteWhat about in Mongolia?
ReplyDeleteHmmmm… this study here found a duration of only 15.4 months for the children in the study, but it was a small study of only 86 children. It may well be longer for Mongolia as a whole. I doubt it's as long as four years, though.
ReplyDeleteFor what it's worth, my child is almost three now, and we are still nursing…. just about. Not every day, but still. I love nursing and totally support extended nursing; I'm just questioning the urban legend about the worldwide weaning age of four. :)
http://moh.mn/moh%20db/healthreports.nsf/32fe9f3e7452a6f3c8256d1b0013e24e/1a3b6104707fac5dc8256eb4000d7ba1?OpenDocument
I lived in Cameroun in the early 80s and in different regions among different groups, the consensus at the time was 16 months according to the mums. It also was a country with labour laws that required a break every 4 hours for women to nurse.
ReplyDeleteThe statistic of 4.2 years comes from here: http://www.whale.to/a/dettwyler.html
ReplyDeleteAnd is referenced from authoritative guides such as here:
http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=jhQ2zHnKEKwC&lpg=PA196&pg=PA332#v=onepage&q=average&f=false
You can see that this is not the world average, but a voluntary survey of a group of children who were breast fed over 3 years.
When children are permitted to follow nature's design and wean when they are emotionally ready to, completely devoid of societal shaming and cultural judgment, in my experience it goes beyond four years just as Ms Dettwyler suggested. I have done my own case studies with my kids. My oldest self-weaned at 5.5 and my second hasn't yet at 4.3 yrs. Whether her research was "scientific" enough for you or not does not negate the fact when children are allowed to choose, they will tell you the answer of what their norm is and what their needs are. There has been a lack in many replies here of woman who have the experience to shed light on the subject! As for children getting ill by a lack of lactase enzyme being produced at 3 years of age as Jean above reported, lactase is produced so long as lactose is present, so no, children (including mine) don't get sick nursing beyond 3! And further, are less likely to be ill due to immunoglobulins being transferred from mom still --this happens as long as nursing continues.
ReplyDeleteIf you really want to know how long before children naturally wean, LET THEM wean naturally. We can argue stats til we are blue in the face. Experience will show you the answer. Men, you can observe in children who are permitted to lead their own weaning.
We do need to take into account subsequent pregnancies interfering with milk supply and children who quit earlier than they might have emotionally wanted to had a pregnancy not occurred during their nursing experience, so taking abrupt disruptions and nursing strikes out of the equation, we can get a sense of where the truth lies in reality by living the experience and letting our kids show us.
Totally agree. I think what gets totally los tin translation is that this age is set as what a child would wean at - not what cultural norms set as weaning ages, which seem to be the overall stronger influence in most cultures today. I do not think everyone *should* nurse to X age. I am not even of the mindset that everyone should nurse. I am only interested in normal human behavior & what is to be expected/anticipated within that - which is what Ms Dettwylers research is based on. Not on what we *do* currently - but what a child would do if given the option to self limit on nursing. I have nursed 2 past age 3 & both self weaned & I am not sure if subsequent pregnancies were the reason or not, as they nursed through the pregnancy...but the fact is, they decided when to stop & that is fine with me. It wasn't that I actually want to keep going, but they did & I could find no compelling reason that weaning was needed or would be beneficial, so I just allowed it. It makes me sad when people say that it will harm kids to remember. I asked my 8 yr old recently, as I was nursing baby what he remembered about nursing & he said, I remember how safe it was momma. Now if that is what he remembers, pretty sure he isn't damaged. My 5 yr old asked to taste the milk, so I pumped & he gagged. I asked what was wrong & he said, this isn't my milk anymore, this milk is for sissy & I don't like it. In a conversation with other moms, one said her son answered the question what her milk tasted like as "love". I just don't know why we glorify cow's milk & sippy cups & act like cuddling human children & giving them human milk is weird. Our level of detachment & the shaming of those who don't *want* that is what is weird. We say we want people to focus on their families & when they do, we accuse them of being over involved or coddling. It's so bizarre really.
DeleteMy baby is 10 months old and slowly eating less than he used to. We had these glorious sessions when he was younger where he would nurse for literally hours. God how I miss it! I can't even understand why anyone who has the opportunity would not want the amazing little thing on the boob (not for them even, just for the awesome experience that it is). I am so sad really. I see other people's newborns (especially those that have difficulty feeding their baby)...and one Mom let me feed their baby and I just...I never wanted to let go of it. I don't know if it's my crazy hormones or what, but once I got it on the boob I almost cried at the intensity of the beauty of the experience and, it's so much work making a child, I would just so love...got to go
ReplyDeleteSo your Google searching skills debunk the World Health Organization? For real? That's what you're going with. Mmmkay. There's so many things wrong with this article and the thought process behind it, I'm not even going to get started but I will say this is a highly misguided effort on your part to once again, undermine the breastfeeding experience past age 1.
ReplyDeleteHave you checked the average a weaning age in Mongolia? I'll send you my address for those Godiva's when you're ready. ;)
ReplyDeleteHave you checked the average a weaning age in Mongolia? I'll send you my address for those Godiva's when you're ready. ;)
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2720507/
ReplyDeletehttp://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2720507/
ReplyDeleteI'm not a statistician, so wouldn't know a) how to access relevant data or b) how to analyse it, but the first question that springs to my mind when reading your original post is ...
ReplyDeleteTo what extent does elevated rates of infant mortality (ie under 5) in developing world countries supress the average. For example, around 10% of children in Angola die before the age of one, 4% by age 5. None of these have the chance to be breastfed till 2, let alone 5. So, if these are all included in the figures (are they? I don't know) the 'average' will be lower, and so confound our understanding of the true picture of age of breastfeeding cessation. These are also areas with high birth rates, so dragging the average down further.
Your post is excellent, and a good discussion point, and it may well be accurate in the point it makes, I don't know. But I think there is room for more nuance in this to really understand what the real global picture is.
Sorry if this point has been picked up elsewhere in the comments, there were too many for me to go through in detail.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteSorry but you are kind of wrong lol. If children wean between 2-7 you would do this
ReplyDelete2+3+4+5+6+7=27 there's 6 numbers so to get the average weaning age you take 27÷6 which will give you 4.5. That's how you get an average number.
Where is the table referenced in this article? I'm not seeing it! I'm doing a presentation on extended breastfeeding and would love to see the table to get more info.
ReplyDeleteYeah, me too, not the presentation part, but I wanted to see the table. My daughter is 28 months and I'm pretty ready to wean. I'm holding off as her last two teeth are coming in and I know breastfeeding helps with that but in the new year I'd like to start the weaning process but I was feeling really guilty about it because of this "average age of 4" thing. I can probably stick it out until age 3 but I despair at the thought of another year or more of it beyond that. I'm just so darn sick of my huge boobs and I miss my old clothes, lol.
DeleteI was diagnosed as HEPATITIS B carrier in 2013 with fibrosis of the
ReplyDeleteliver already present. I started on antiviral medications which
reduced the viral load initially. After a couple of years the virus
became resistant. I started on HEPATITIS B Herbal treatment from
ULTIMATE LIFE CLINIC (www.ultimatelifeclinic.com) in March, 2020. Their
treatment totally reversed the virus. I did another blood test after
the 6 months long treatment and tested negative to the virus. Amazing
treatment! This treatment is a breakthrough for all HBV carriers.