In a message dated 97-08-28 03:08:28 EDT, Jeanine wrote:

>  The reason why I took this supplement wasn't for my bones, maybe I need to
>  clear this up, but for a substitute for dairy in my diet while pregnant
and
>  nursing.
Hmm.  Why do you think you need the extra calcium, if not for your bones?
It is used for other functions in the body, but your body takes that calcium
from the supplies in your bones, hence the concern about depletion of
bone mass.

>  That's why next time I may not nurse because of the choice of  me eating
>  these foods and baby being exposed to these allergens or taking the
>  supplement and avoiding dairy, etc.. and have baby be cranky with tummy
>  problems.
>  Any response to maybe better off not nursing?

As the previous poster indicated, these recent studies show that concerns
about calcium depletion during lactation may be unwarranted -- so you
should be able to omit the supplement.

You have to decide the question yourself about nursing.  However, coming
from an allergic family, you probably already know that your chances
for minimizing his/her allergies are better if you nurse.  I've been
dairy-free
since my son was 2 months old and nursing the whole time (he is now
13 months).  I am SO glad to be nursing him -- I have a friend with a formula
fed, allergic child, and she went through formula hell trying to find
something
her baby didn't react to which were still sufficiently nutritious.  Even the
dairy-free formulas have things in them that are highly allergic.  She told
me that he has a peanut allergy and that peanuts are really ubiquitous --
hidden in all sorts of ingredients, including some in most formulas.  There
is no way of knowing how things would be if the child was breastfed, but
she wonders if his allergies would at least have been less severe had she
breastfed (she gave up early on, due mostly to some very bad advice
and lack of support from her pediatrician).

Good luck to you on whatever you decide -- I know that every case is
different!

Kathleen