Abstract
The breastfeeding community has struggled with the question of early use of medroxyprogesterone (Depo-Provera®, Pfizer, New York, NY) and the suppression of lactation. Simple principles of lactation would suggest the use of medroxyprogesterone is detrimental when it is the physiologic decrease in progesterone with the passage of the placenta that initiates lactation. Brownell et al. 1 in this issue of the journal review the relevant peer-reviewed literature. The position of the World Health Organization is also described. The question remains to be solved in the clinical laboratory and the peer-reviewed literature. The issue is not settled in the minds and hearts of the nonbelievers (of breastfeeding's merits).
Las dos Cosas or non-exclusive breastfeeding among Latina women has challenged clinicians and lactation consultants for generations. Las dos Cosas translated means “both things.” Latina women have been convinced by the smooth advertising of the formula companies that formula has special benefits not found in breastmilk. They therefore reason that some of both will provide the “presumed” benefits of artificial milk as well as those of breastmilk. They even think a little breastmilk is enough to garner the benefits.
Bartick and Reyes 2 report in this issue their interviews of 17 Latina mothers in late pregnancy. They asked about the mothers' beliefs about breastfeeding, colostrum, and infant formula. The authors note that the women did not understand the risks of formula. None was aware of the medical recommendations regarding breastfeeding. As a group, Latina women residing in the United States value chubby babies and aim to be sure their infants are “full.” The authors suggest that these same women would be receptive to education. As clinicians struggle to improve breastfeeding duration in the Latino populations, education would appear to be important. As obesity prevention becomes a national priority it is clear that education is necessary in this population who have among the highest rates of childhood obesity.
The editors have tried to encourage reader response to the theory and science on these pages. We have encouraged Letters to the Editor with meager response. We are pleased to share the letter from Ted Greiner, 3 who is now on the faculty of Hanyang University in Seoul, Korea, regarding the Women, Infants and Children Special Supplemental Nutrition Program and the “free lunch.” He writes in response to the article by Jensen and Labbok 4 published in a previous issue. Both are great reading and thought-provoking insights into a national dilemma in the United States that also affects similar programs elsewhere.
This issue of the journal also proudly presents science from laboratories in Brazil, Indonesia, Israel, and Italy. The Founders Lecture given by Adriano Cattaneo 5 by satellite from Trieste, Italy at the ABM annual meeting in Miami, FL in November 2011 is reproduced in these pages. The message explains the inequities and inequalities embedded in the field of breastfeeding and human lactation. Profound! Read it.
We also thank our many reviewers who have helped evaluate the manuscripts submitted to the journal. We doubled our submissions in 2011. Reviewers are listed on pages 65–66 in this issue.