ardeith l carter <[log in to unmask]> writes:

> Fawn wrote:
> And I think most nursing done after the age of two, anywhere, is
> probably more for emotional and bonding purposes than nutritional.
>
> Ardeith writes:
> Not necessarily.....we only have that luxury in our Western cultures.
> In many Third World cultures, the only way a child survives is by
> nursing as long as possible.....four or five years is normal.........
> according to the WHO......


as one of those flag-waving, card-carrying la leche league members,
<smile> i wanted to say that i find it so difficult to separate the
nutritional from the emotional benefits of breastmilk.

i have often thought of the fact that many kids in our culture are
raised without the benefit of extended nursing (or any nursing) but
perhaps we don't even know what they are missing.  there are so many
ills that plague us as adults (addictions, depression, health
concerns) and after nursing a three year old, i KNOW breastmilk and
breastfeeding are way more important than we realise (and can't be
sold in a can in a supermarket, and no one makes money off our milk).

As far as nutritional benefits go, though, breastmilk rules.  the fat
content, enzymes, healthy bacteria, nutrients, and hydration factor
are all useful when my kid gets a bug and stops eating for a couple of
days.

Jana