Jump to content

Menu

breastmilk - modern snake oil?


fdrinca
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm in a local "crunchy" mamas group on Facebook. A few years ago, it was very much cloth diaper/Waldorf/organic foods. Lately, it's gotten positively obsessed with essential oils - there are a few MLM sellers in the group.

 

What really drives me crazy is the similarly insistent stance that breastmilk cures EVERYTHING, including:

- mama coming down with a virus - try oils or a few tablespoons of BM

- weird rash on baby's skin - BM

- pink eye - BM

 

OK, fine. Maaaaaybe BM will cure it. I know BM cured my nipple irritation. But these suggestions have me really scratching my head:

- baby with yeast infection - BM (won't the sugar and moisture make the infection worse?)

- newly circ'ed baby - "make sure to use lots of Neosporin and spray with BM every diaper."

 

I tick all of the boxes on the "extreme BF'er" checklist, but it never would occur to me to prescribe breast milk in these ways. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sing it sister. I am all for breastfeeding but it's not a cure all or magic Windex or whatever.

 

And some of the EOs posts on FB leave me wondering if some people are quite right in the head.

 

FWIW, my crunchy card is pretty well punched and my primary care doctor is an ND. But woo is woo.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have had success with breastmilk and both ear infections and conjunctivitis even though I was skeptical so I wouldn't rule anything out. But I have also had crazy successful results with EOs and I was pretty skeptical there too. I'm still shocked at some results I didn't expect and was just trying to try. Not going to say more since so many on here are so negative towards EOs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Essential oils got nuthin ' on breastmilk. Breastmilk can be medicinal. There is some research showing it can kill some cancer cells.

I've used/use some EO, and some are quite helpful, but I honestly find the current blitz of selling obnoxious. EOs have their place, but lately I call bullshit. The sweeping health claims are snake oil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I will generally put BM on anything; it can't hurt and very often helps. I have zero experience with newly circ'ed babies, but I expect that BM would probably help, and I think it likely wouldn't hurt. Not sure about the yeast infection. . . Maybe. There's just a lot we don't fully understand, regarding breastmilk and it being a living food and having some properties that really are kind of amazing. I always think of it as a first line defense -- try this and see if it works, first. I don't think it's entirely snake oil.

 

Not sure about EO. I'm curious, but some of them are kind of expensive, so my experience is thus far limited to scenting my vinegar for cleaning or putting a couple of drops in with the cloth diapers. (How many crunchy things can I mention in one post? LOL!)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm in a local "crunchy" mamas group on Facebook. A few years ago, it was very much cloth diaper/Waldorf/organic foods. Lately, it's gotten positively obsessed with essential oils - there are a few MLM sellers in the group.

 

What really drives me crazy is the similarly insistent stance that breastmilk cures EVERYTHING, including:

- mama coming down with a virus - try oils or a few tablespoons of BM

- weird rash on baby's skin - BM

- pink eye - BM

 

OK, fine. Maaaaaybe BM will cure it. I know BM cured my nipple irritation. But these suggestions have me really scratching my head:

- baby with yeast infection - BM (won't the sugar and moisture make the infection worse?)

- newly circ'ed baby - "make sure to use lots of Neosporin and spray with BM every diaper."

 

I tick all of the boxes on the "extreme BF'er" checklist, but it never would occur to me to prescribe breast milk in these ways. 

 

That right there would send me running and screaming.  I hate MLMs with a passion, even if the products are good.

 

The rest would have sent me running and screaming with severe twitching involved.

 

I tried to go more crunchy and raw Vegan and all that for a while.  But the truth is, I am a doctor going, almost full vaccinating, birth control using, TV watching,  homeschool mom.  Oh, and I color my hair.

 

The end.

 

Dawn

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to ditto the "it's often helpful on eye and ear infections, probably worth a try on a diaper rash, and it's a 'clear fluid' perfect for dehydration in infants, but really only practical if you have it on hand and doesn't cure everything" sentiment.

 

It does have antibiotic and antifungal properties, but it's not a cure-all for every ailment there is. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I used breastmilk for ear infections and rashes, but only my own and only on the baby/toddler who was currently nursing at the time.  I don't think it's a new thing to suggest using breastmilk.  My first was born in 2000 and it was very much a thing to use breastmilk to cure stuff and many older women (as in my mother's age or older) talked about how they used breastmilk for clearing up infections and rashes when they were nursing decades before.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm probably going to get chastised for saying this, but it is uber popular in both extremes of homeschoolers (far right and far left) to hop on the essential oil/non-vax/homebirth/non-circ/cloth diapering/breastmilk for lots of other things than just nutrition for the baby bandwagon.  Of these, I think the cloth diapering and breastmilk as the new wonder food may be the least problematic.  Cloth diapering is not marketed as a substitute for proven effective vaccinations against dangerous communicable diseases.  Other than being nauseated at the thought that the overly zealous woman who put breast milk in her food and served it to guests (yes, she did that), it isn't going to hurt anyone (unless she served it fresh and she herself were ill).  

 

I don't know how many outbreaks or sad outcomes for babies and children on the other parts of the bandwagon for the supporters to wake up and at least acknowledge it is a fad they're following and not medical science (remember oat bran from 1990's anyone?), but I hope it is soon.  All this from a pro-nutrition, vitamin loving, breast fed supporter, cloth diapering when I could momma.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I know nothing about essential oils besides my Facebook feed is full of people trying to sell them. In what way can they be harmful?

Harmful when people ingest them. I don't mind EO used externally (oil warmers, applied to the skin...) but it's the people who eat/drink it that worry me, especially since most of the time you don't really know what's in them.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, to clarify, it is the MLM angle that most annoys me about EOs. I know folks use them and love them, but there's a difference between being a user and being a pusher.

 

Our local fb home school group is a large community, and every now and then someone will ask for a referral for a physician or certain specialty, or sometimes (like we do here) ask if such n such symptoms warrant a doctor visit. Without fail, one or more people will come on board with cure-all EO remedies. That they can sell you. It is obnoxious. Use them if you choose, I won't judge you, but don't peddle them like that. It's akin to adding everyone in your church directory to your Amway mailing list.

 

(Ok off rant now.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We used bm for pink eye and ears, nothing else that I can think of and not even those all the time, generally illness was pretty rare. If it had continued we would have went to the dr. but I don't remember that for either of those.

 

I'm about sick of seeing EO info, they are being touted as healing everything, from Autism, to ADHD, anything you could think of, they cure. They are selling false hope. People think if they just diffuse the magical oils it changes the personalities and behaviors of their kids and then fail to do anything real and substantial to help their kids with very real problems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Harmful when people ingest them. I don't mind EO used externally (oil warmers, applied to the skin...) but it's the people who eat/drink it that worry me, especially since most of the time you don't really know what's in them.

They can also cause reactions when used externally but around eyes, cuts and lips. Perhaps the biggest harm is when people use them on very sick kids as a substitute for needed medical intervention.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breast milk is food. A mammal's milk is food for the particular mammal it is meant for, though we drink other mammal babies' food (Well I don't. I hate the taste of milk.) It is extremely beneficial for babies but is not a topical medicine. Even if it seems to clear up a self-limiting condition, it really didn't.

 

 

Don't even get me started on essential oils. They smell nice sometimes, if diluted. That's about it. No, not "about it". That is it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So interesting that so many have had success with pink eye and ear infections! We haven't had these in our house (thankfully!), but it's good to know that it's a line of defense, especially since these types of things crop up Friday afternoons.

 

I start to give this reaction the stink-eye after a few posts in which the child had a staph infection (milk not effective, surprise surprise), or when it was recommended for a cure for adults. I acknowledge that it has medicinal properties, but just as I'd not recommend Ibuprofen for every ailment, I don't think BM should be the knee-jerk reaction for every illness. 

 

As for EOs...if they were free and/or not such a $$ machine, I might think they were benign. Given they are such an industry, I view them with skepticism.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I do recall using breastmilk successfully for a baby's pink eye.

 

Yeast, I don't think so (thrush anyone??); maybe it depends on the person.  My guess is that, generally, breastmilk for odd uses is only as good as the mother's individual immune system, which may or may not be all that good.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My father remembers breast milk being used on any eye infection when he was a child. He grew up in "the old country" and has many stories of old wives tales that he laughs at as nonsense. The breast milk and eye infections is not one of them. He is a retired pediatrician. I do believe there is actual science behind it but I'm not going to look it up now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

http://scienceofmom.com/2011/11/08/can-breast-milk-cure-my-child’s-eye-infection/has an accessible rundown of a few studies. It looks like breastmilk won't hurt, that viral conjunctivitis clears up on its own regardless of treatment and that some kinds of bacteria are sensitive to breastmilk and some are not. I might try it if I was breast feeding an infant with pink eye, but I still think it's icky to recruit a lactating woman to donate breastmilk for an 11 yr old's conjunctivitis as I've seen on my local crunchy mama forum.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When DS was a baby in daycare, his entire baby room got pink eye.  I squirted him one night while nursing, and it cleared up by morning.  Kept doing it, as the rest of the room continued to have the issue for weeks - they were just spreading it around!  DS never got it again, and the daycare workers mentioned to me one day that he was the only one - and wondered why.  So I shared my little LLL wisdom, and they laughed.  2 days later, all the kiddos were mysteriously cured.  I am convinced to this day that they used DS's expressed milk on the lot of 'em!  He went through much more in those two days than usual.  LOL

 

About a year later, I was in the hall passing by the room and heard one of the daycare workers tell a new mom who breastfed to use her milk to clear up her daughter's pink eye.  Same woman who laughed at me the year before.

 

Sometimes old wives tales are worth listening to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can tell, there is a lot of anecdotal evidence for bm and ear infections and/or conjunctivitis, but it hasn't been researched. Without good studies, we don't know if any treatment helps the recovery or is just coincidence. Both conditions usually resolve on their own too, which makes it harder to know.

 

Something can have anti-bacterial, anti-viral, or anti-fungal properties and still be very limited in what it can help. I think the crunchy world of childbirth and breast-feeding is rife with unsubstantiated claims, and I say that as a proud water-birthing, breast-feeding, crunchy type myself. I attended a class given by a doula/essential oil person who insisted to the class that two glasses of red raspberry leaf tea contained all the calcium needed by pregnant women! It is almost impossible to find out how much calcium is actually in a glass, but one source says about 6 mg. The RDA is about 1000. Read about it online though and you hear how it is "full of calcium" "rich in calcium" etc. I digress.

 

I tried bm on one of my kids for conjunctivitis when I was still lactating. I swore it helped because the next day the infection was better. When my kids were older and didn't get bm, it was also usually better by the next day too. So personally I would say it might help, but we don't know and won't until some good research is done.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The plural of anecdote is not data.

And if you do a quick google search, you can dig up peer-reviewed studies easily :)

 

It's not snake oil. People get a little over-zealous about its abilities, but it really does have some amazing properties. It contains living white cells and immune factors, and has anti-bacterial, -fungal, and -viral properties. I do draw the line at getting it from other people or ingesting it myself though. It's not going to regrow an amputated appendage, but to treat mild skin problems or stuffy nose or minor eye infections? Sure.

 

It's really not comparable to EOs or MLMs. And not JUST the super-crunchy are doing this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparison of the Effect of Human Milk and Topical Hydrocortisone 1% on Diaper Dermatitis - Pediatric Dermatology. Nov/Dec2013, Vol. 30 Issue 6, p725-729. 5p.

"Abstract: Diaper dermatitis is one of the most common skin problems
in infants and children, affecting between 7% and 35% of infants. This
randomized clinical trial compared the efficacy of hydrocortisone 1%
ointment with that of human breast milk in treating acute diaper dermatitis
in infants ages 0 to 24 months. Infants with diaper rash were treated with
either hydrocortisone 1% ointment (n = 70) or human breast milk (n = 71)
for 7 days. Improvement in the rash from baseline was seen in both
treatment groups on days 3 and 7; there was no significant difference in
total rash scores on days 3 and 7. Treatment with human breast milk was
as effective as hydrocortisone 1% ointment alone. Human breast milk is an
effective and safe treatment for diaper dermatitis in infants."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Topical breast milk may promote healing of  ulceration in infantile haemangiomas - Clinical & Experimental Dermatology. Dec2012, Vol. 37 Issue 8, p915-916. 2p. 2 Color Photographs.
doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2230.2012.04397.x
"Ulceration of infantile haemangioma (IH) occurs in 5–21%
of cases,1 with potential sequelae including pain, bleeding,
infection and scarring. Therapeutic options include pulsed
dye laser, surgical excision, antimicrobial agents, interferon,
corticosteroids, topical becaplermin, vincristine,
embolization, imiquimod, bleomycin and propranolol.2,3
We report two cases of IH in which ulceration persisted
despite propranolol and antimicrobials, but convincing
improvement was achieved after topical application of the
mothers breast milk."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Comparing the Effect of Topical Application of Human Milk and Dry Cord Care on Umbilical Cord Separation Time in Healthy Newborn Infants. - Iranian Journal of Pediatrics. Jun2012, Vol. 22 Issue 2, p158-162. 5p. 2 Charts.

"Objective: Comparing the effect of topical human milk application and dry cord care on cord separation time. Methods: This research was a randomized clinical trial study on 130 singleton and mature newborns. Newborns were placed randomly in groups of topical application of human milk and dry cord care. The umbilical separation time was compared in the two groups. Data was analyzed by SPSS software. Independent Samples t-Test, χ2. Fisher were used in this study. Findings: Median time of cord separation in human milk application group (150.95+28.68 hours) was significantly shorter than dry cord care group (180.93±37.42 hours) (P<0.001). Conclusion: Topical application of human milk on the remaining part of the cord reduces the cord separation time and it can be used as an easy, cheap and non invasive way for cord care. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Antibacterial effect of human milk for common causes of paediatric conjunctivitis. - British Journal of Ophthalmology. Mar2013, Vol. 97 Issue 3, p377-379. 3p.

"The article presents a study which examines the use of human milk and its antibacterial effect against the common causes of paediatric conjunctivitis. The study uses milk samples, polymyxin B sulfate/trimethoprim, and standard microbiological methods to determine the antibacterial effect of human milk. Results show that human milk is not effective against the common causes of conjuctivitis in children."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Positive Effect of HPA Lanolin versus Expressed Breastmilk on Painful and Damaged Nipples during Lactation. - Skin Pharmacology & Physiology. 2011, Vol. 24 Issue 1, p27-35. 9p.

"

Abstract: Painful and/or damaged nipples associated with breastfeeding are common and represent a challenge for both the persons experiencing nipple pain and/or trauma and for those providing treatment. However, evidence-based data has been insufficient to demonstrably minimize these common reasons for failure to initiate or continue successful breastfeeding. The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of specific-grade highly purified anhydrous (HPA) lanolin versus expressed breastmilk (EBM) for the treatment of painful and damaged nipples associated with breastfeeding in a prospective controlled clinical trial evaluating 84 lactating mothers. Nipple trauma and healing rates were rated by the Nipple Trauma Score. Nipple pain intensity was assessed on a visual analog scale. Outcome parameters were in favor of the HPA lanolin group, reaching statistical significance for healing rates, nipple trauma and nipple pain. In our study, we found HPA lanolin more effective than EBM, inducing faster healing of nipple trauma (absolute risk reduction of 0.43) and reducing nipple pain (absolute risk reduction of 0.61 on day 3). We concluded that HPA lanolin, combined with breastfeeding education, was more effective than EBM, combined with breastfeeding education, in reducing nipple pain and promoting healing of nipple trauma. Copyright © 2010 S. Karger AG, Basel [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it is a good treatment for minor skin rashes and pink eye and so forth in babies. And we know it has some benefits for babies to ingest that are overall small, but also pretty wide.

 

As for other things... I've heard of people who were giving it to cancer patients and other people with various diseases. I don't think it will usually hurt. But there is a worry when you don't know where the BM is coming from. Like, when it's not yours, even when it's a "friend's" you don't really know what that person ate and drank. And, even if it could be helpful... like, it does sort of make sense that getting something with that much fats geared specifically for the human body to grow might maybe be helpful for people who are really struggling to get enough nutrition to fight a condition... there's no way it will ever make a human trial or really be tested. And how would you standardize it anyway enough to do so? So it's unlikely we'll ever know from a scientific standpoint.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just a comment--Some conjunctivitis clears up on its own. How do people know breastmilk cleared it up?

 

FWIW, I nursed all my babies and believe BisB.

 

When I used it, the effect was dramatic. Within hours the infection was waaaaay better. I could typically turn around an infection in a day or less.

 

Aside from the times I used bm, I have never ever been able to clear conjunctivitis without prescription meds. I have never seen a rash clear as quickly as with bm.

 

So, my experience is anecdotal, but in our case, bm provided dramatic, quick results. It seemed obvious to us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Breastmilk isn't a miracle cure-all, but I think it's a stretch to compare breastmilk to snake oil. 

 

It is hyperbole, although there are some troubling parallels, namely that I've observed some cases in which the patient needed medical care but was "prescribed" a breastmilk cure via FB posts. 

 

I think it would be a cause for concern if every Dr Hive query here offered "just rub on/take breastmilk!" as a cure. 

 

Also, personally, the thought of putting milk in an eyeball makes me squeamish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Again, most eye conditions for which breast milk is supposedly a cure, are self-limiting. That means they will go away on their own. Breast milk is unlikely to hurt, but it's not a cure.

 

This post addresses many of the studies.

 

 

https://pediatricinsider.wordpress.com/2014/07/14/breast-milk-for-eye-health/

 

"To summarize: most conditions that cause gunky eyes in babies (blocked ducts and the common cold) resolve on their own. You can squirt mother’s milk in there, or probably coconut water or contact lens soaking solution—any of these will “workâ€, because it would have gotten better anyway. For actual bacterial pink eye, what evidence there is shows that mother’s milk is unlikely to be effective for the bacteria that cause this infection. And certainly, in a newborn, genuine pink eyes need to be evaluated by a physician—don’t fool around with home treatments with mother’s milk or anything else."

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As others have said, breast milk does have many anti-germ properties and is a "live" substance like blood. It has protective benefits to many things. However, it does not and will not fix everything.

 

Just like breastfeeding will not guarantee you an illness free or allergy free infant/child. I'm amazed when I find moms completely shocked when their infant comes down with a cold or ear infection. They really thought that breastfeeding would mean their baby would never become ill. The same with allergies. A mom I spoke with was convinced that her child did not/could not have allergies because she had breastfed him. 

 

When my eldest was 14 months old he got rota virus and ended up in the hospital for a few days for fluids. The doctor at the hospital gushed at how glad he was that I was breastfeeding my toddler and how it was so much better than pedialyte it is. When I, exhausted, said that my breast milk hadn't been enough to keep him from being seriously dehydrated and needing IV fluids, he smiled and told me that even the best medicines sometimes need help from other medicines and treatment options. He included, "Breast milk is wonderful stuff but if it prevented all illness and complications infant mortality rates would have been lower than they were before modern medicine." 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...