 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Dentistry / April 2005My wife nurses our 21month old son (overnight) - he has cavities (link ?)
Okay, today we went to the local Pediatric Dental specialist - she claimed that our son has the need for several fillings and blamed it squarely and with no hestitation on the fact that my wife is still breastfeeding him (even overnight - he sleeps with her/us). At first we blamed ourselves (I admittedly blaming my wife as it was her who let our son start sleeping with us, much against all the advice we'd been given by experienced parents). A couple of hours later however, my wife reckoned that this dentist was (milking the situation - no pun intended). She just couldn't believe that natural breast milk would create these cavities (its a new surgery, very plush and the dentists there are quite young(ish)). This (female) dentist, said that it was a common misconception to continue to breastfeed after the first 5months. I took this "professional's" opinion straight at face value - but call us cynical (we are in North Africa), and the 'truth' isn't always forthcoming (she was trained in Paris, young, educated but we both suspect not herself a mother). Later that afternoon (after looking around on the internet) I'm now beginning to wonder whether this female dentist had a clue about what she was talking about. According to most of what I've read, there isn't any link between breastfeeding and cavities (though I have read that carbs mixed with the milk causes cavities, as does sugar, lack of dental hygiene etc). We're beginning to wonder whether a second or third opinion (of course from alternative dentists) would be best before we jump into putting our son through any dental surgery. Preferably from a dentist who *is* pro-breastfeeding. Incidentally, we think that what he has developed, is probably a combination of hereditary and lack of brushing. P.S. I've just talked to my wife who admitted that this dentist made her cry for hours after this visit (example, when we were with the dentist, our son wanted to feed and my wife naturally let him - straight away the dentist told us this was VERY wrong). Please advise. Many thanks. a_newsrea...@yahoo.com wrote: Well, my daughter is 3 years and 3 months of age, and she is still nursing, and has no cavities as far as I can tell. She still nurses to sleep about half the time, and when she's sick, she still nurses in the middle of the night. (She sleeps all night under normal conditions). My parents are dentists, and they haven't said the first thing about nursing causing cavities, and in fact have said that it tends to inhibit cavities in most people. IF your son has a tendency toward cavities, then it might be a problem. But breastmilk has anti-bacterial properties, and only in the presence of other sugar or carbs on the teeth can it cause a problem. We've always just brushed my daughter's teeth right before bed, and then nursed right after that, and so far, so good. As for your dentist's suggestion that there's no benefit beyond 5 months of age; that's just plain wrong, AND in my opinion, dangerous. If a baby isn't getting breastmilk, then they must get their fluids elsewhere, and breastmilk is the safest source of fluids for babies. The World Health Organization suggests that babies should be nursed for 2 full years, and beyond that for as long as both mother and child want to. I would get a second opinion on his teeth, and see if the fillings are really necessary. But make absolutely sure to brush his teeth before bed, and nothing but water after that or breastmilk, or in the worst case is that your wife may need to night-wean your son, IF he has a tendency toward cavities. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 a_newsrea...@yahoo.com wrote: > Okay, today we went to the local Pediatric Dental specialist - she > claimed that our son has the need for several fillings and blamed it [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > her who let our son start sleeping with us, much against all the advice > we'd been given by experienced parents). I forgot to mention, that my daughter slept with us until she was a little past her 3rd birthday, and then she asked to sleep in her own bed, where's she's been ever since. It was never forced, and was *her* decision. Now that said, she has her own room, with a regular-sized bed in it, all ready for her to use, and sometimes she chose to nap in there, and she knew it was "her" bed. There are plenty of experienced parents who let their kids sleep with them, and it works out fine in the end. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > Okay, today we went to the local Pediatric Dental specialist - she > claimed that our son has the need for several fillings and blamed it > squarely and with no hestitation on the fact that my wife is still > breastfeeding him (even overnight - he sleeps with her/us). Ack! I hate her, your dentist, that is, not your wife! > A couple of hours later however, my wife reckoned that this dentist was > (milking the situation - no pun intended). She just couldn't believe > that natural breast milk would create these cavities (its a new > surgery, very plush and the dentists there are quite young(ish)). This > (female) dentist, said that it was a common misconception to continue > to breastfeed after the first 5months. What??? My dentist said that it's pooling of liquid containing sugars (apple juice, cow's milk, breastmilk) in the mouth that causes calcification, which leads to cavities. Using bottles causes pooling, because liquid comes out regardless. Nursing does NOT. If you are not actively expressing, milk does not come out. > Later that afternoon (after looking around on the internet) I'm now > beginning to wonder whether this female dentist had a clue about what > she was talking about. According to most of what I've read, there > isn't any link between breastfeeding and cavities (though I have read > that carbs mixed with the milk causes cavities, as does sugar, lack of > dental hygiene etc). I believe this is correct. > We're beginning to wonder whether a second or third opinion (of course > from alternative dentists) would be best before we jump into putting > our son through any dental surgery. Preferably from a dentist who *is* > pro-breastfeeding. Agreed. > Incidentally, we think that what he has developed, is probably a > combination of hereditary and lack of brushing. I think heredity plays a BIG part in this. Both of my parents have very bad teeth and my brother and I have bad teeth. Which is why I am being so vigilant about Pillbug's teeth. I have had too many cavities and crowns to count, and if forcing Pillbug to brush morning and night prevents even one cavity, it would be worth it. > P.S. I've just talked to my wife who admitted that this dentist made > her cry for hours after this visit (example, when we were with the > dentist, our son wanted to feed and my wife naturally let him - > straight away the dentist told us this was VERY wrong). I'm so sorry your wife had to go through this. It's difficult enough to be a first-time parent and to do what you believe in, and to have a so-called professional make you feel like you did something wrong is very upsetting. Let your wife know that, at least, one person here in this newsgroup is on her side! Basically, we've done exactly what you've done: nursed and co-slept. The only difference, which you have already addressed, is brushing. But, of course, there's also genetics. So, get another opinion, but stand firm on what you feel in your gut. -- Anita -- > Nursing does NOT. If you are > not actively expressing, milk does not come out. Really? Then why do they sell those special pads to be worn in the bras of nursing moms? > > Nursing does NOT. If you are > > not actively expressing, milk does not come out. > > Really? Then why do they sell those special pads to be worn in the bras of > nursing moms? Breast pads are very seldom necessary after the first few months of breastfeeding. Leaking milk is mainly a symptom of engorgement and/or overproduction at the onset and during the establishment of lactation. While I suppose it remains a persistent problem for a small proportion of women, I don't know many women who were nursing at 6 months who were still leaking (except possibly in response to a baby crying). FWIW, I only needed breast pads for a couple of days or weeks at most, and that was when I was tandem nursing a 2yo and newborn and probably could have produced enough milk to feed a small army.  SignatureBe well, Barbara Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3) I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan) >> Nursing does NOT. If you are >> not actively expressing, milk does not come out. > > Really? Then why do they sell those special pads to be worn in the > bras of nursing moms? They're mainly for the early weeks, when letdown happens a lot. I gave mine away after a couple of months because they'd not been necessary. I don't know any nursing mums who needed them after about 6 months. > >> Nursing does NOT. If you are > >> not actively expressing, milk does not come out. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > necessary. I don't know any nursing mums who needed them after about 6 > months. Oh, I HOPE so-Alli's 4 1/2 months, and I still leak at the slightest provocation. Which I guess is good, since I have a baby who has problems sucking, but it's very annoying. >>>> Nursing does NOT. If you are >>>> not actively expressing, milk does not come out. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > provocation. Which I guess is good, since I have a baby who has > problems sucking, but it's very annoying. I leaked for over 6 mos with my first and I leaked when I skipped a feed or pump session well past a year. The bed would be wet at night. With my second I only leaked a couple months. Weird how that can be so different between babies. SignatureNikki > I leaked for over 6 mos with my first and I leaked when I skipped a feed > or pump session well past a year. The bed would be wet at night. Ditto, and I could let down at the drop of a hat-or the whine of a dog, cat, baby, breeze blowing the right way......;) Jess > > They're mainly for the early weeks, when letdown happens a lot. > > I gave mine away after a couple of months because they'd not been [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > provocation. Which I guess is good, since I have a baby who has problems > sucking, but it's very annoying. That's interesting -- I wonder if somehow your body is responding to your daughter's needs, by letting down with less "provocation" than it might take for a baby who was a strong nurser? SignatureChildren won't care how much you know until they know how much you care > > Nursing does NOT. If you are > > not actively expressing, milk does not come out. > > Really? Then why do they sell those special pads to be worn in the bras of > nursing moms? (1) I didn't need them past the first couple of months, and, as other posters have pointed out, the "leaking" isn't usually a problem past that time: I guess the breasts figure out how to do it right. And we ARE talking about babies over a few months old, not newborns. (2) The leaking only happened when my breasts were full -- NOT soon after a nursing. When a baby stops active sucking/swallowing, the breast is NOT full, and spontaneous leaking doesn't happen. And a baby is always swallowing when they are sucking. SignatureChildren won't care how much you know until they know how much you care The leaking only happened when my breasts were full -- NOT soon > after a nursing. When a baby stops active sucking/swallowing, the > breast is NOT full, and spontaneous leaking doesn't happen. And a > baby is always swallowing when they are sucking. I'm not trying to be a pain because both my kids nursed a lot at night and I didn't worry about it...and it wasn't a problem for them. They were night weaned before 21 months however. I will say though that mine often fell asleep while nursing and as often as not, milk would run out of the corners of their mouth so I'm pretty sure milk sat around on their teeth. This was especially true when they fell asleep because they would end the session half asleep and comfort sucking. I'm not sure why people are so bent on denying that night nursing might in fact cause decay. It seems reasonable to assume that anything but water sitting on teeth runs a risk of causing decay. It doesn't for *every* baby. Some babies probably don't comfort suck as much so milk doesn't sit in their mouth, some probably have tougher teeth, some probably swallow more often in their sleep etc. etc. Mine were awake a lot in the night...that probably helps clear the mouth. I don't know I guess but seems plausible. There has to be at least one benefit :-) Hunter has cavities now so his teeth aren't made of iron or anything. My brother hardly ever brushed his teeth in high school and never had a cavity. I brushed mine religiously and I have a mouth full of them. I'm not against night nursing and I wouldn't night wean on that basis of cavity risk unless my kids turned out to actually have problems with them. SignatureNikki > I'm not sure why people are so bent on denying that night nursing might in > fact cause decay. It seems reasonable to assume that anything but water > sitting on teeth runs a risk of causing decay. I too think it's reasonable. However, you have to evaluate your risks, and truely understand them. Is it a *high* risk? Is it *likely* to cause decay? Or is it a problem in some kids? I have a problem with the AAPD recommending full weaning (not just night weaning) more than a year before the World Health Organization does, for no apparant reason. Daytime nursing past one year seems perfectly fine for the teeth (even good- it has lots of calcium). So what are women supposed to serve their kids to drink after that time? Cow's milk? Seems like at very least a wash with regard to human milk, and less healthful anyway. Juice? Bad for the teeth. Water? Ok, I suppose, but milk is supposed to be a great source of fat and protein and nutrients. So why in the heck would they recommend cow's milk over breastmilk? Even the AAP recommends "at least one year, and longer if it's so desired." I also have a problem with a dentist who crosses the line into giving parenting advice. That dentist, according to the original poster told them to stop nursing (not night weaning) period, and gave them incorrect information about the benefits of nursing (not needed after 5 months, etc). All the data shows that extended breastfeeding helps prevent a variety of illnesses in the child, helps prevent obesity, etc. There is some disagreement about how risky night breastfeeding is, in conjunction with good hygiene and a good diet. There doesn't seem to be a study that satisfies everyone (there seems to be flaws in all of the ones quoted here, from not being a respected enough journal, to other issues) Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > I'm so sorry your wife had to go through this. It's > difficult enough to be a first-time parent and to do [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > genetics. So, get another opinion, but stand firm on > what you feel in your gut. I completely agree with you. My kids in fact had bottles after we stopped nursing, and they continued with them until they were 3-4 years old. Theoretically, they should have horrid teeth, but each of them had one cavity -- in their teens. They have nice teeth aside from that. I think it's important for the Original Poster to see another dentist. This one sounds like she could be the start of a very unpleasant and long-drawn out problem. Rupa > [...]This > (female) dentist, said that it was a common misconception to continue > to breastfeed after the first 5months. [...] <rolls eyes> How do medical professionals get away with this crap? And where do they pick it up? Signaturez e l d a b e e @ p a n i x . c o m http://NewsReader.Com/ > Later that afternoon (after looking around on the internet) I'm now > beginning to wonder whether this female dentist had a clue about what [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Incidentally, we think that what he has developed, is probably a > combination of hereditary and lack of brushing. You're probably right that this has nothing to do with breastfeeding and more to do with heredity and poor dental hygiene. Many, many, many people (dentists and doctors included) are woefully ignorant regarding breastfeeding. The dentist probably assumed that breastfeeding was the same as bottle feeding in this regard, and that's just not true. That said, this ignorance regarding breastfeeding probably doesn't affect her ability to figure out that your son has cavities or her skill in filling those cavities. It's common for dentists to be ignorant about breastfeeding, as it's not their area of specialization. It would be a huge deal for a pediatric dentist to be ignorant of diagnosing and treating cavities, which is a mainstay of her practice. On the other hand, it sounds like you have some significant reservations, in which case a second opinion is never a bad idea, even if it just confirms the original diagnosis. There is a possibility that the dentist let her judgement of the breastfeeding situation color her diagnosis/recommendations. I don't think that's terribly likely, but a second opinion may give you some peace of mind. Best wishes, Ericka > That said, this ignorance regarding breastfeeding probably > doesn't affect her ability to figure out that your son has cavities or her > skill in filling those cavities. It's common for dentists to be ignorant > about breastfeeding, as it's not their area of specialization. It would > be a huge deal for a pediatric dentist to be ignorant of diagnosing and > treating cavities, which is a mainstay of her practice. It doesn't matter how good the dentist is if they're saying stuff like that - they don't deserve the business. I'm sure there are plenty of other highly qualified and not so ignorant (and rude) dentists. SignatureChris Craig http://ciotog.net This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me into what I want to hear ........ When his work goes bad, there are lots more willing to replace it! Joel M. Eichen DDS > > That said, this ignorance regarding breastfeeding probably > > doesn't affect her ability to figure out that your son has cavities or her [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Chris Craig > http://ciotog.net > This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, > unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Joel M. Eichen DDS OTOH, some of us luck out with caring, friendly, competent dentists who aren't rude. For a pediatric dentist, I'd say personality was extremely important. I'd have a problem assuming rudeness and competence are positively correlated in other fields, why should it be so for dentistry? Rupa This was not the choice we were presented. The discussion was whether breast-feeding could cause cavities. Several dentists reported studies that suggest that it can. Then the "hearers of bad news" went on the attack." That's not to say that the dentists are nut friendly, competent, and loaded with charm. I didn't hear "rude" from the dentists ....... Joel > > This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, > > unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > > Rupa > That's not to say that the dentists are nut friendly......... I'm quite pleasant when around pecans. carabelli >> That's not to say that the dentists are nut friendly......... > >I'm quite pleasant when around pecans. > >carabelli Pistachios do it for me. -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com I like walnuts myself! Good catch by the way. Joel;' > > That's not to say that the dentists are nut friendly......... > > I'm quite pleasant when around pecans. > > carabelli Just as an aside, if a patient asked me about mother's milk, I would tell them where to possibly look for the answers, but I would profess zero knowledge about the finer points of breast feeding. This is because its an emotionally-charged issue as we have seen right here. A parallel happened the few times someone asked me (in practrice) about whether mercury fillings poison people. I learned my lesson. Dentistry is about what we CAN do for people not about arguments abouts what we should/should not do. Joel People always say I have a good beside manner. > I like walnuts myself! > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > > > carabelli >I like walnuts myself! > > Good catch by the way. > > Joel;' Well my BB coach always put me in right field - that says it all. carabelli > This was not the choice we were presented. The discussion was whether > breast-feeding could cause cavities. Several dentists reported studies that > suggest that it can. Then the "hearers of bad news" went on the attack." But you *were* presented with that choice. The OP talked specifically about some of the rudeness of the first dentist, and wondered if he should seek a second opinion. As for the studies, several of us have pointed to information on medline and other sources that shows that the studies that were presented had significant flaws. But rather than wondering if perhaps the AAPD recommendations might be wrong, or perhaps wondering if long-held believes were wrong, some dentists on this thread attacked our own studies. So, left with that, how are we supposed to proceed? Just say, "uh, OK, you must be right? Your studies *must* be superior?" Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > > This was not the choice we were presented. The discussion was whether > > breast-feeding could cause cavities. Several dentists reported [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > about some of the rudeness of the first dentist, and wondered if he > should seek a second opinion. REPLY OK, its always wise to get a secoind opinion to hear other strategies ....... If a patient is put off by someone's style, then a new practitioner is in order. Joel > As for the studies, several of us have pointed to information on > medline and other sources that shows that the studies that were [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, > unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me > into what I want to hear ........ > > When his work goes bad, there are lots > more willing to replace it! This has nothing to do with being politically correct. It *is* possible to find a dentist who is both skilled, AND has good beside manner. When I was in graduate school, I had a classmate (a teacher and mother of two) who told me that she didn't care how nice or how good a doctor's bedside manner is... she just wants him/her to be skilled enough to make her better. I disagreed so much. When my father had cancer, his first oncodoc was a real jerk. My father wanted to be as possitive as possible, and asked that he not be told his "chances" of survival, because he knew it would just get him down. He had a very dangerous form of cancer (esophogeal) where only about 5% make it 5 years. His oncologist told him anyway, despite his expressly stated wishes to the contrary. It was one thing after another like that. Eventually, when dad was in the hospital, at his very sickest (his white blood cell count had bottomed out after the chemo and radiation, and he was sick as hell) he fired that oncologist. He had been working with a psychologist doing hypnosis and guided imagery, and he asked him who the most "mental" friendly doctor in that practice was. After firing the original oncodoc, he asked for the new one, and hired him on the spot, and liked him very much. Dad credits this second doctor, and his surgeon with his survival to a cure. It's been 9 years, and no evidence of recurrance. So, I believe very strongly that a patient must have a level of trust with his or her healthcare practicioner - and that included feeling confident of the information they give you, and knowing they aren't going to be judgemental and condemning of healthful and normal parenting practices. The issue with bedside manner got to be such a big one, that medical schools are now teaching it specifically. I would assume that Dental Schools would do the same. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 I agree. A good beside manner is important. Besides the beside manner, intellectual honesty is also important. I had a patient who refused antibiotics and refused root canal therapy believing that the abscess would go away if only enough eccinacea were applied. Needless to say, the tooth is now in the trash. But the patient is very happy in that her primary care PHYSICIAN does not roll his eyes anymore when she mentions eccinacea. Joel > > This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, > > unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > I agree. A good beside manner is important. > Besides the beside manner, intellectual honesty [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > PHYSICIAN does not roll his eyes anymore when she > mentions eccinacea. Eccinacea has it's uses. However, it isn't a cure-all, and expecting it to deal with something like a need for a root canal is foolish. I certainly hope you don't roll your eyes at anyone who mentions alternative medical approaches, as long as they aren't doing anything actually dangerous (like turning down treatments that are needed). It wasn't all that long ago that physicians always rolled their eyes at acupuncture; they don't anymore. I used to see a doctor who was both certified as a family practice physician and as a homeopathist. He practiced in a place that supported wholistic approaches to medicine, and was probably the best doctor I've had. He managed several chronic conditions homeopathically that had been resistant to "normal" approaches. On the other hand, when a case of poison ivy got out of control (as it almost always does for me...) he prescribed antibiotics, antihistamines and steroids. SignatureChildren won't care how much you know until they know how much you care > > I agree. A good beside manner is important. > > Besides the beside manner, intellectual honesty [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Eccinacea has it's uses. However, it isn't a cure-all, and expecting it > to deal with something like a need for a root canal is foolish. REPLY Yup, just making the point that no practititoner in their right mind can make black into white. Some try, but in the long run, we shouldn't do that. Joel > I certainly hope you don't roll your eyes at anyone who mentions > alternative medical approaches, as long as they aren't doing anything [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > -- > Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care > > I agree. A good beside manner is important. > > Besides the beside manner, intellectual honesty [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > wasn't all that long ago that physicians always rolled their eyes at > acupuncture; they don't anymore. REPLY Actually, I never roll my eyes as that's not polite. But that does not stop me from informing people what I have taken years and years to learn (and where I learned it). Its for their benefit, mainly, not mine! Joel > I used to see a doctor who was both certified as a family practice > physician and as a homeopathist. He practiced in a place that supported [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > -- > Children won't care how much you know until they know how much you care LOL! >I agree. A good beside manner is important. > Besides the beside manner, intellectual honesty [quoted text clipped - 58 lines] >> Cathy Weeks >> Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 INTERNET: Where we go for information, and some ideas about other therapies. This is not patient care and no beside manner is indicated. Some of the information is right and some is wrong, but you get to hear all of it. Why do we have such a "feelgood society?" Joel > > This is true, give me a politically correct, sloppy, > > unskilled dentist anytime who can sweet-talk me [quoted text clipped - 42 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 "Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote ....... > Why do we have such a "feelgood society?"..... > > Joel Joel!!!! FYI, some conservative is spoofing your addy. carabelli > "Joel M. Eichen" <joeleichen@yahoo.com> wrote ....... > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > carabelli YIKES! Jan Drew is going to lose two accounts over this. Joel (the real one). >The issue with bedside manner got to be such a big one, that medical >schools are now teaching it specifically. I would assume that Dental >Schools would do the same. > >Cathy Weeks Be careful about checking out a dentists' *bedside* manner. You may end up getting your cavities drilled. -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > Okay, today we went to the local Pediatric Dental specialist - she > claimed that our son has the need for several fillings and blamed it [quoted text clipped - 38 lines] > > Many thanks. Simply put, this dentist is an idiot. She is clearly prejudiced against BF, and you don't want to stay with someone who made your wife cry. Please seek another dentist. Did you notice that what the dentist said to you is so out of sync with the WHO, AAP, CPS recommendation that BF continues for more than a year? Unfortunately, she isn't the only one. As for cavities, the issue is usually diet, dental hygiene or genes. This is why brushing twice a day is mandatory as soon as the first tooth comes in as well as a dental visit starting at an earlier age. Good luck. Marie DD-1yo >> Okay, today we went to the local Pediatric Dental specialist - she >> claimed that our son has the need for several fillings and blamed it [quoted text clipped - 55 lines] > as > well as a dental visit starting at an earlier age. You're being unfairly (and wrongly) tough on this dentist. Here's what the mom wrote: "The dentist...blamed it squarely and with no hestitation on the fact that my wife is still breastfeeding him (even overnight - he sleeps with her/us)." Of course the overnight breastfeeding is causing the caries! There are dozens of studies to support her claim. Here's an excerpt from the abstract below: "ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding should be discouraged after the first primary tooth erupts" Here's another excerpt: "Weaning from the breast or the bottle should be encouraged by 12 to 14 months of age" It sounds to me like the dentist is making the correct suggestions. Here's the entire abstract, with reference: Pediatr Dent. 2004 Sep-Oct;26(5):459-62. a.. Pediatr Dent. 2004 Sep-Oct;26(5):389. Diet counseling during the infant oral health visit. Nainar SM, Mohummed S. Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University ofMichigan, Ann Arbor, Mich, USA. nainar@umich.edu Diet counseling is an integral part of anticipatory guidance during the infant oral health visit. Similar to dietary instructions for children of all ages, the primary emphasis is on sugar intake frequency. There are, however, other infant-specific dietary issues that must also be addressed during the infant oral health visit. Breast-feeding should be promoted during the first year of life, although ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding should be discouraged after the first primary tooth erupts. Bottle-fed infants should not be put to sleep with the bottle. Weaning from the breast or the bottle should be encouraged by 12 to 14 months of age. Infants older than 6 months and with exposure to less than 0.3 ppm fluoride in their drinking water need dietary fluoride supplements of 0.25 mg fluoride per day. Only 4 to 6 oz of fruit juice should be consumed by infants per day. Infants should not be given powdered beverages or soda pop, as these drinks pose increased risk for dental caries. Iron-fortified infant cereals, along with breast milk or infant formula, should be consumed by infants who are at least 6 months of age. Cow's milk should be completely avoided in the first year of life and restricted to less than 24 oz per day in the second year of life. Parents should be cautioned regarding the potential of various foods to constitute a choking hazard for infants. <snipped for space> > You're being unfairly (and wrongly) tough on this dentist. No, what I said is true. > Here's what the mom wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Here's an excerpt from the abstract below: "ad libitum nocturnal > breast-feeding should be discouraged after the first primary tooth erupts" http://www.kellymom.com/bf/older-baby/tooth-decay.html > Here's another excerpt: "Weaning from the breast or the bottle should be > encouraged by 12 to 14 months of age" What of these links as below? http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/feb05breastfeeding.htm American Academy of Pediatrics: "The policy recommendations include: Exclusive breastfeeding for approximately the first six months and support for breastfeeding for the first year and beyond as long as mutually desired by mother and child. " http://www.cps.ca/english/statements/N/BreastfeedingMar05.htm "The Canadian Paediatric Society: ...and breastfeeding may continue for up to two years and beyond. " http://www.who.int/child-adolescent-health/NUTRITION/infant_exclusive.htm World's Health Organization "A recent review of evidence has shown that, on a population basis, exclusive breastfeeding for 6 months is the optimal way of feeding infants. Thereafter infants should receive complementary foods with continued breastfeeding up to 2 years of age or beyond." May I suggest reading the link re: extended BF benefits? http://www.kellymom.com/bf/bfextended/ebf-benefits.html > Here's the entire abstract, with reference: > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > infant oral health visit. Similar to dietary instructions for children of > all ages, the primary emphasis is on sugar intake frequency. Agreed. >There are, > however, other infant-specific dietary issues that must also be addressed > during the infant oral health visit. Breast-feeding should be promoted > during the first year of life, although ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding > should be discouraged after the first primary tooth erupts. Read the link above. Brush the teeth before bedtime. > Bottle-fed > infants should not be put to sleep with the bottle. Agreed. > Weaning from the breast > or the bottle should be encouraged by 12 to 14 months of age. Heartily disagreed. Refer to the links above. > Infants older > than 6 months and with exposure to less than 0.3 ppm fluoride in their > drinking water need dietary fluoride supplements of 0.25 mg fluoride per > day. Only 4 to 6 oz of fruit juice should be consumed by infants per day. My DD doesn't drink juice for an obvious reason. > Infants should not be given powdered beverages or soda pop, as these drinks > pose increased risk for dental caries. Okay, she doesn't drink them, either. > Iron-fortified infant cereals, along > with breast milk or infant formula, should be consumed by infants who are at > least 6 months of age. Cow's milk should be completely avoided in the first > year of life and restricted to less than 24 oz per day in the second year of > life. Parents should be cautioned regarding the potential of various foods > to constitute a choking hazard for infants. Marie DD-1yo > <snipped for space> >> [quoted text clipped - 88 lines] > > Heartily disagreed. Refer to the links above. Your links above are all older than the reference that I gave you. The abstract that I cited appears in the Sept. 2004 issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Pediatric Dentistry. When the WHO and AAP next sit down to digest the latest data and revise their recommendations, they'll be more inclined to take the suggestions from a peer-reviewed dental journal than from "kellymom.com", don't you think? I know you disagree with the idea of stopping breast feeding at the age of 12-14 months, but as a dentist looking out for the health of childrens' teeth, I'm inclined to follow the recommendations set forth in a dental journal. To infer that a dentist is "a quack" for adhering to suggestions made in a peer-reviewed scientific journal makes you look foolish and misinformed. > Your links above are all older than the reference that I gave you. The > abstract that I cited appears in the Sept. 2004 issue of the peer-reviewed > Journal of Pediatric Dentistry. And mine's newer than yours: J Pediatr (Rio J). 2004 Nov;80(5 Suppl):S199-210. [Breastfeeding and early childhood caries: a critical review] Ribeiro NM, Ribeiro MA. OBJECTIVE: To find scientific evidence that can prove or refute the assumption that nocturnal and on demand breastfeeding are associated with caries in infants and preschool children. SOURCES OF DATA: MEDLINE, Lilacs, and SciELO articles were searched, as well as important internet sites, technical books and consensus publications of national and international organisms. The following keywords were used: "early childhood caries", "dental caries", "dental decay" and "breastfeeding". References cited in the articles selected were also included. SUMMARY OF THE FINDINGS: Studies associating caries with breastfeeding invariably observe factors associated with how this disease develops, letting aside those associated with breastfeeding. Many of these factors act as confusing variables because in the same way as they interfere in breastfeeding, they also influence the development of caries. Besides, current studies have already demonstrated the cariogenic potential of some types of aliments given to children against the non-cariogenic potential of the human milk. CONCLUSIONS: There is no scientific evidence proving that human milk can be associated with the development of caries. This is a complex relation to be established, as it is often blurred by too many variables. PMID: 15583771 [PubMed - in process] The full text in English is at http://www.jped.com.br/conteudo/04-80-S199/ing.asp. I quote the following from the full text: "The various studies that investigated the association between breastfeeding and ECC are shown in Table 1. The most important limitation of these articles is that they do not employ the internationally adopted definitions of breastfeeding. Some authors do not present a definition for ECC (40,64), while others use multiple definitions (12) or their own definitions (65). As may be observed, most authors did not find a correlation between ECC and breastfeeding or with its duration (12,25-27,40,65-70). The obtained results often are contradictory and the findings were not always reproduced. The same was observed by Valaitis et al. in a systematic review of 151 articles. These authors found a moderate correlation between breastfeeding and ECC in only three studies. They verified that the quality of the studies is relatively poor and that the variables were difficult to compare because their essential definitions were weak, inconsistent, ambiguous or even absent, for instance, the definition of breastfeeding on demand, exclusive breastfeeding and breastfeeding at night. Finally, these authors concluded that: (1) there is no strong and consistent evidence between breastfeeding and the development of ECC; (2) there is no specific period for weaning, and women should be encouraged to continue breastfeeding for as long as they wish; and (3) rigorous studies are necessary before issuing any public statements correlating breastfeeding with the development of ECC (21)." ... "In another systematic review involving 73 studies, Harris et al. identified 106 risk factors significantly associated with the prevalence or incidence of ECC. Among these, only three factors are related to breastfeeding (duration, frequency and breastfeeding at night) and three to breastfeeding and/or bottle-feeding (when used to feed or to stop the infant from crying at night, to put him/her to sleep and duration of breastfeeding longer than 18 months). Few articles showed a high methodological quality and used validation measures for oral hygiene and eating habits. Most of these studies showed that variables should be treated as risk indicators, as they are only probable or putative risk factors and were not able to clearly establish a relation between exposure and caries. The most consistent associations with caries were early streptococcal infection acquisition, highly cariogenic diet, poor toothbrushing routines and enamel hypoplasia (5)." ... "Although there is no scientific evidence that confirms the association between breastfeeding and caries, many professionals still express disbelief at the fact that human milk is non-cariogenic, thus cultivating the myth into which this association turned. We believe that breastfeeding at night should not be discouraged and no strict diet should be adopted for a nursing infant. At this age, infants are still adapting to complementary foods, adjusting themselves to new eating patterns and learning to regulate their schedules. Therefore, exclusive breastfeeding should be encouraged up to the sixth month of life, maintained at least up to the second year of life, with flexibility of schedules or shifts, and complemented with appropriate weaning foods." You don't have to agree with the conclusion of the authors of this review. But the Cochrane review that Ericka cited agrees with this one: there is no scientific evidence proving an association between breastfeeding and caries. So, the question is, who is foolish and misinformed? SignatureBe well, Barbara Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3) I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan) >> Your links above are all older than the reference that I gave you. The >> abstract that I cited appears in the Sept. 2004 issue of the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > J Pediatr (Rio J). 2004 Nov;80(5 Suppl):S199-210. True. And here are several excerpts from your link: " In dentistry, there is quasi-consensus that breastfeeding on demand, especially at night and if prolonged, produces caries (10,11,16-18). Likewise, in pediatrics, there are publications that share the same opinion (7,19). The American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) declared that breastfed and bottle-fed infants are at a potentially devastating risk for caries due to breastfeeding. This is related to prolonged and repetitive feeding without proper oral hygiene, and is also related to the fact that parents are encouraged to offer their infants beverages in drinking cups before their first year of life and to stop bottle-feeding them between 12 and 14 months of life. " "Similarly, the American Academy of Pediatrics considers that infants who are put to bed with the bottle or who breastfeed during the night are at great risk for dental caries (2,23)." "Official view of the American Academy of Pediatric Dentistry (AAPD) Currently, the AAPD supports the recommendations made by the American Academy of Pediatrics regarding breastfeeding (of at least one year). However, it states that frequent feeding at night including bottle-feeding, breastfeeding on demand and frequent use of spill-proof drinking cups is associated with ECC, but is not consistently implicated. It recommends that infants should not be put to bed with the baby bottle and that ad libitum breastfeeding at night should be avoided after the eruption of the first tooth." ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- So the author of your article disagrees with the AAPD. I'm a dentist in the US. Until the AAPD changes its position to agree with your Brazilian authors' conclusions, I'm going to follow the AAPD recommendations...and recommend that my patients follow them as well. ;-) > >> Your links above are all older than the reference that I gave you. The > >> abstract that I cited appears in the Sept. 2004 issue of the [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > > > J Pediatr (Rio J). 2004 Nov;80(5 Suppl):S199-210. <excerpts snipped for space> > So the author of your article disagrees with the AAPD. Yes, the authors disagree based on the available *evidence*. Both the AAP and AAPD appear to hold a view about the relationship of breastfeeding to caries that is not supported by the available evidence. Just because a lot of people *believe* something is true doesn't make it true. (Remember, it wasn't all that long ago that we believed it was safer for babies to sleep on their tummies because it would prevent them from choking to death when they spit up. I think it's safe to say that that belief has been proved wrong by the evidence.) > I'm a dentist in the US. Until the AAPD changes its position to agree with > your Brazilian authors' conclusions, I'm going to follow the AAPD > recommendations...and recommend that my patients follow them as well. ;-) That's your prerogative, of course. But the Brazilian authors reviewed studies conducted all around the world, including in the US. Therefore, their conclusions are as likely to hold in the US as in Brazil as in anywhere else in the world. Smilies notwithstanding, I'm a believer in evidence-based medicine (which includes dentistry). Are you? SignatureBe well, Barbara Mom to Mr. Congeniality (7), the Diva (5) and the Race Car Fanatic (3) I have PMS and ESP...I'm the bitch who knows everything! (T-shirt slogan) >> >> Your links above are all older than the reference that I gave you. >> >> The [quoted text clipped - 32 lines] > Smilies notwithstanding, I'm a believer in evidence-based medicine (which > includes dentistry). Are you? Absolutely. So show me the evidence. In another Brazilian study published in the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, they actually found a higher percentage of caries in the 12-36 month old kids who breast-fed: "Of the 468 children included in this study, 133 (28.4%) had caries. Only 59 (12.6%) of the children examined had been breast-fed, 20 (33.9%) of whom presented with caries. Three hundred and twenty-seven (69.9%) subjects had been bottle-fed with sugared milk, 86 (26%) of whom had caries. Two hundred and eight children had five or more sugary meals per day, 70 (33.6%) of whom had caries. " So 33.9% of the breast-fed kids , 33.6% of the sugary-meals kids, and 26% of the bottle-fed kids had caries. I assume that because of the unequal sample sizes for each group, they came to the conclusion that there was "no statistically significant relationship between breast-feeding and the prevalence of tooth decay". Regardless, the numbers are interesting. I'm not saying breast-feeding causes a higher risk of caries, but I do believe it carries an equal risk to baby bottles and "sugary meals". That being said, you have to look at when teeth are most susceptible to decay: night time when the baby is sleeping. Nocturnal feeding of any kind (including breast-feeding) is very hard on the dentition, and should be discouraged beyond 12-14 months. Source: Int J Paediatr Dent. 2004 Nov;14(6):439-45. Breast-feeding and early childhood caries: an assessment among Brazilian infants. Rosenblatt A, Zarzar P. > Absolutely. So show me the evidence. In another Brazilian study published > in the International Journal of Paediatric Dentistry, they actually found a [quoted text clipped - 14 lines] > between breast-feeding and the prevalence of tooth decay". Regardless, the > numbers are interesting. You can't just sweep a lack of statistical significance under the carpet. Also, where's the definition of "breastfed"? Any breastmilk at any time? Any breastmilk at a specific age? The definition matters greatly. Lots of "breastfed" infants get bottles of formula at bedtime or at night, but you can hardly compare them to "breastfed" infants who only nurse at the breast for those feedings. There are just flat out a lot of poor quality studies out there. When you consider that you are messing with an infant's primary source of nutrition (and nighttime feeding is a significant component for many infants, no matter how little parents might like it), there's an obligation to exercise some serious caution. Best wishes, Ericka > I'm a dentist in the US. Until the AAPD changes its position to agree > with your Brazilian authors' conclusions, I'm going to follow the AAPD > recommendations...and recommend that my patients follow them as well. ;-) That is incredibly short sighted, I'm not going to argue the about whether breastmilk causes cavities, it may well do. But you have to balance that against the benefits of breastfeeding, if you plot a graph of lifespan against length of time fed on mothers milk for other mammals there is a strong correlation, read off how long humans should be breastfed from this graph and you get 4 years! Did mother nature get it wrong? Each year a mother breastfeeds reduces her chances of getting breast cancer by 7%, plus there are numerous benefits for the child, maybe bm does cause cavities, but perhaps that's why we have milk teeth? Anne >> I'm a dentist in the US. Until the AAPD changes its position to agree >> with your Brazilian authors' conclusions, I'm going to follow the AAPD >> recommendations...and recommend that my patients follow them as well. >> ;-) > > That is incredibly short sighted, It's not short-sighted. Read back to the first post that started this thread. She wanted to know why her 21 month old baby had a bunch of cavities. The dentist told her it's because she's nursing the child at night time in her bed. >I'm not going to argue the about whether breastmilk causes cavities, it may >well do. From the studies that I've read, it appears to have the same cariogenic potential as bottled cow's milk. > But you have to balance that against the benefits of breastfeeding, if you > plot a graph of lifespan against length of time fed on mothers milk for [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > getting breast cancer by 7%, plus there are numerous benefits for the > child, Sure. It's up to the parent to weigh the pros and the cons. But don't get mad at the pediatric dentist who states that nocturnal breast-feeding past the age of 12-14 months is not recommended by the AAPD because it can cause tooth decay. maybe bm does cause cavities, but > perhaps that's why we have milk teeth? Perhaps. But I've seen what happens to the adult dentition when those primary teeth rot out of the toddler's mouth before their due time. Accelerating the process is not a good idea. > It's not short-sighted. Read back to the first post that started this > thread. She wanted to know why her 21 month old baby had a bunch of > cavities. The dentist told her it's because she's nursing the child at > night time in her bed. So, maybe the dentist is wrong? We don't know what kind of oral hygiene they had. It's easy to blame breastfeeding, but what if they never brushed his teeth before bed, doing it only in the morning? > >I'm not going to argue the about whether breastmilk causes cavities, it may > >well do. > > From the studies that I've read, it appears to have the same cariogenic > potential as bottled cow's milk. Then you've just admitted that you've not read the posts that others have posted. Several of them said that breastmilk does NOT appear to be cariogenic. You out of ignorance mocked "kellymom" (when all it did was quote published studies) which is one of the foremost breastfeeding sites on the internet. If you actually read through it you might (though probably not) change your mind. However the issue of it being non cariogenic was mentioned in other articles mentioned here. This *sounds* like a case of your believing only what you want to believe. > Sure. It's up to the parent to weigh the pros and the cons. But don't get > mad at the pediatric dentist who states that nocturnal breast-feeding past > the age of 12-14 months is not recommended by the AAPD because it can cause > tooth decay. The anger had a lot to do with factors other than the nighttime breastfeeding. Like telling them (incorrectly) that breastfeeding isn't needed beyond 5 months of age, and that extended breastfeeding (not nocturnal, but extended) was a bad idea. That dentist was out line giving them parenting advice, AND giving them healthcare advice that was downright negligent (the 5 months thing). > Perhaps. But I've seen what happens to the adult dentition when those > primary teeth rot out of the toddler's mouth before their due time. > Accelerating the process is not a good idea. Certainly. And if parents followed good oral hygiene, then nighttime breastfeeding is harmless in most kids, and is even beneficial. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 >> It's not short-sighted. Read back to the first post that started > this [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > hygiene they had. It's easy to blame breastfeeding, but what if they > never brushed his teeth before bed, doing it only in the morning? I'd bet dollars to dimes that that child wouldn't have developed cavities *EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF BRUSHING* if the breast-feeding was limited to day time. Why do I say this? Because I see parents of 1 1/2 to 2 year olds come in and ask "when should I start brushing his/her teeth?" Ummmm. A year ago. Surprisingly, the kids typically don't have decay at that age. >> >I'm not going to argue the about whether breastmilk causes cavities, > it may [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > have posted. Several of them said that breastmilk does NOT appear to > be cariogenic. No peer-reviewed journal article says that. What they say is that the evidence is "inconclusive". > You out of ignorance mocked "kellymom" (when all it > did was quote published studies) which is one of the foremost > breastfeeding sites on the internet. If you actually read through it > you might (though probably not) change your mind. However the issue of > it being non cariogenic was mentioned in other articles mentioned here. Breast milk provides all of the key ingredients to cause tooth decay. If it lays against the teeth for any length of time in the presence of Strep mutans, it will cause tooth decay. > This *sounds* like a case of your believing only what you want to > believe. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > breastfeeding. Like telling them (incorrectly) that breastfeeding isn't > needed beyond 5 months of age, I agree. But that's not the only reason why you guys jumped on that dentist. You're defending ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding beyond the 12-14 months suggested by the AADP...and then unfairly attacking a dentist who pointed this recommendation out to the mom of a child with decay at age 21 months. > and that extended breastfeeding (not > nocturnal, but extended) was a bad idea. The AAPD suggests weaning at 12-14 months, both night time and day time feedings. If the dentist told that mom 12-14 months (instead of 5 months), you would have still jumped all over the dentist. >That dentist was out line > giving them parenting advice, AND giving them healthcare advice that > was downright negligent (the 5 months thing). The kid wasn't 5 months old. He was 21 months old...so the dentist wasn't wrong in stating that the nocturnal breast-feeding is causing the decay, and that it should be stopped if they want to stop the decay process. >> Perhaps. But I've seen what happens to the adult dentition when > those [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Certainly. And if parents followed good oral hygiene, then nighttime > breastfeeding is harmless in most kids, and is even beneficial. "harmless in most kids"? What about the *other* kids (like the one mentioned in the beginning of this thread)? The dentist was asked to determine the causitive factor for tooth decay in a 21 month year old child who still breast-feeds ad libitum during the night. Given the evidence, I'd say that the dentist was right on with her analysis. > I agree. But that's not the only reason why you guys jumped on > that dentist. You're defending ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding > beyond the 12-14 months suggested by the AADP...and then unfairly > attacking a dentist who pointed this recommendation out to the mom > of a child with decay at age 21 months. Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and UNICEF over a dental association? >> and that extended breastfeeding (not >> nocturnal, but extended) was a bad idea. > > The AAPD suggests weaning at 12-14 months, both night time and day > time feedings. If the dentist told that mom 12-14 months (instead > of 5 months), you would have still jumped all over the dentist. Well, yes. Because while a dentist knows about teeth, apparently dentists don't know about infant nutrition. >Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and UNICEF >over a dental association? Somehow I suspect not by a long shot. They seem to be so concerned about teeth they are forgetting the body they are attached to. Megan -- Seoras David Montgomery, 7th May 2003, 17 hours. http://seoras.farr-montgomery.com DS2: Lachlan Alan, 28th February 2005 > > I agree. But that's not the only reason why you guys jumped on > > that dentist. You're defending ad libitum nocturnal breast-feeding [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and UNICEF > over a dental association? REPLY Why would you follow the advice from a music group about dentistry? Joel > >> and that extended breastfeeding (not > >> nocturnal, but extended) was a bad idea. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > Well, yes. Because while a dentist knows about teeth, apparently > dentists don't know about infant nutrition. > > Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and UNICEF > > over a dental association? [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Joel If you are joking... that's pretty good. But on the chance that you aren't, WHO is a reference to the World Health Organization. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 Cathy Weeks does not know me! Of course I know the WHO uses dental floss. Joel > > > Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and > UNICEF [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > Cathy Weeks does not know me! > > Of course I know the WHO uses dental floss. Heh, heh.... I guess I asked for that one. :-) I recognize your name - I've been on the parenting groups for years, and have seen occasional posts from you regarding dentistry, usually in response to flouride info requests, or other child-related dental questions. I always follow dental posts - my parents are both dentists, so I've a bit more knowledge than the average layman, so it's not at all surprising that I know who you are. On a related note, my mother weaned me at age 4.5 months, only to regret it as I developed a serious cow's milk allergy that could have been avoided had I been breastfed longer. She never put me to sleep with a bottle, except perhaps if it had water in it. I had no cavities until I was a teenager - Mom was pregnant with my brother, and craved lots of sweets, so we had lots around the house for those 9 months. I wound up with three *tiny* fillings (about the size of a pencil lead) in my upper molars. I've not had a cavity in 20 years. My brothers were both breastfed until about a year. She weaned my older brother in order to get pregnant with my younger brother who self-weaned at one year. But she nursed both of them to sleep without cleaning their teeth afterwards (though she did brush their teeth before bed religiously - she *is* a dentist, after all!). Neither of my brothers had any early-childhood caries at all. By the way, both of my parents have mouths full of fillings - and since my brothers and I all have good teeth, I suspect my parents problems had more to do with poor habits, than with genetics. My stepson was nursed to sleep - no cavities at all, in either sets of teeth (though it seems like the baby teeth are falling out of his head in droves in the last few months - I think he's lost like 4 or 5 baby teeth in the last 3 months). My husband has terrible teeth, due to poor hygiene as a kid, so he's pretty up on making sure his kids have better habits than he did. My daughter, at age 3 still nurses to sleep sometimes, and she has perfect teeth. But, we try to limit the amount of sugary foods in our house, and her teeth get brushed EVERY night before bed. So, I know this is all anecdote, but I've never even known anyone who had problems with their teeth due to breastfeeding. My parents, who have been practicing dentistry for 35 years also say that it's rare, that the worst cases are bottle-mouth babies, not breastfed babies. My father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with preventing decay is hygiene in conjunction with diet, that in recent years he's seen more childhood caries associated with the drinking of soft drinks, and that despite the use of flouide in the drinking water. Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > My > father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with > preventing decay is hygiene in conjunction with diet, that in recent > years he's seen more childhood caries associated with the drinking of > soft drinks, and that despite the use of flouide in the drinking water. Today, many kids drink bottled water without fluoride. I attribute the increase in childhood caries to the reduction in the consumption of fluoridated city water. >> My >> father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >increase in childhood caries to the reduction in the consumption of >fluoridated city water. At my dd's dental visit the hygienist stated, "fluoridated water is good for the teeth developing but not yet erupted. It won't do a thing for teeth already present." We don't have fluoridated water, but I give her a vitamin with fluoride supplement as well as have her rinse with ACT treatment. Was the hygienist incorrect? Nan >>> My >>> father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > fluoride supplement as well as have her rinse with ACT treatment. > Was the hygienist incorrect? No, she was not. Fluoride in drinking water gets into the saliva and helps to remineralize the teeth. Teeth are in a constant state of demineralization/remineralization . Whenever you eat or drink anything, the bacteria present in your mouth use the sugars in the food/drink to produce an acid. The acid dissolves the mineral content of the enamel. Your saliva helps to partially buffer the acidity, and helps to wash away the sugars. Saliva also contains minerals like fluorida and calcium that help to remineralize (ie--"heal") the enamel. Once a hole develops in the enamel (aka--"cavity"), fluoride won't help. But in the early stages of demineralization, the fluoride in toothpastes, drinking water, and mouth rinses like ACT absolutely help. >No, she was not. Fluoride in drinking water gets into the saliva and helps >to remineralize the teeth. Teeth are in a constant state of [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >demineralization, the fluoride in toothpastes, drinking water, and mouth >rinses like ACT absolutely help. Thank you for such a thorough answer :-) Nan >>> My >>> father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] >good for the teeth developing but not yet erupted. It won't do a >thing for teeth already present." Hogwash >We don't have fluoridated water, but I give her a vitamin with >fluoride supplement as well as have her rinse with ACT treatment. >Was the hygienist incorrect? Yes ! >Nan -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > > My > > father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues with [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > increase in childhood caries to the reduction in the consumption of > fluoridated city water. You want to know what my dad did? He took a 16-ounce bottle of Mountain Dew, figured out how many grams of sugar was in the bottle (not the amount by serving, but the total amount in the bottle), emptied it out, washed and dried it, and put that number of grams of plain sugar back into the bottle. It was a SHOCKING amount (like it was 1/8 full of plain sugar or something) He displays it on the receptionist's desk with a note alerting parents to the amount of sugar, and they take one look at it and are HORRIFIED. Just a tip. :-) Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 >> > My >> > father even goes so far to say that the two most important issues [quoted text clipped - 24 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 Our orthodontist did something like this. He has a rack of test tubes on the front desk labeled as soda, small package fruit snacks, apple, pop tarts, and a few other things. It's really shocking to see how much sugar is in those test tubes. > > Cathy Weeks does not know me! > > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > bit more knowledge than the average layman, so it's not at all > surprising that I know who you are. REPLY Hello! And thanks. I see myself as a somewhat polite spammer, occasionally reminding folks to drop over to sci.med.dentistry when they have some dental questions ....... FOR US! Not for you. We simply love to talk shop! I guess you know what I mean! PS~ Did you know grapes (yes grapes) are hugely loaded with fluoride? Joel > On a related note, my mother weaned me at age 4.5 months, only to > regret it as I developed a serious cow's milk allergy that could have [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > Cathy Weeks > Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 > PS~ Did you know grapes (yes grapes) are hugely > loaded with fluoride? Yeah, I think I remember seeing that somewhere. So is tea (if you don't cancel out the effects by loading it with sugar) Cathy Weeks Mommy to Kivi Alexis 12/01 >Cathy Weeks does not know me! > >Of course I know the WHO uses dental floss. > >Joel Horton the Who --or-- that loud rock band ? -- W_B Take out the G'RBAGE wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > >Cathy Weeks does not know me! > > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Horton the Who REPLY Tim Horton ....... donuts in Canada. > --or-- > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Take out the G'RBAGE > wubbabubbazG@RBAGEyahoo.com > > Horton the Who > > REPLY > > Tim Horton ....... donuts in Canada. Donuts are quite ordinary, but they have good coffee SP SignatureFinally: take out the TRASHH > > > Horton the Who > > [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Donuts are quite ordinary, but they have good coffee > SP Canadian guys are always eating them! > -- > Finally: take out the TRASHH > > > Tim Horton ....... donuts in Canada. > > > > Donuts are quite ordinary, but they have good coffee > > SP > > Canadian guys are always eating them! Canadian guys are as ordinary as their donuts. What else can I say? We are a nation that accepts mediocrity at every turn (and I _do_ mean every ). SP SignatureFinally: take out the TRASHH >> Am I the only person who would follow the advice of the WHO and >> UNICEF over a dental association? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Why would you follow the advice > from a music group about dentistry? *applause* > I'd bet dollars to dimes that that child wouldn't have developed cavities > *EVEN IN THE ABSENCE OF BRUSHING* if the breast-feeding was limited to day [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and ask "when should I start brushing his/her teeth?" Ummmm. A year ago. > Surprisingly, the kids typically don't have decay at that age. If you're going to give that level of credence to anecdotal evidence, then what about all the anecdotal evidence from all those who night-nursed well beyond 12-14 months with no decay? And given the benefits of breastmilk and the difficulties of night weaning for some families, is there no obligation to consider the big old elephant in the room of no dental hygiene?! And if appropriate dental hygiene mitigates any risk potentially associated with night nursing, why should it not then be perfectly appropriate for parents to choose child-led night weaning along with appropriate dental hygiene? > "harmless in most kids"? What about the *other* kids (like the one > mentioned in the beginning of this thread)? The dentist was asked to > determine the causitive factor for tooth decay in a 21 month year old child > who still breast-feeds ad libitum during the night. Given the evidence, I'd > say that the dentist was right on with her analysis. What evidence is there (beyond anecdote) that inadequate dental hygiene is not associated with decay, but night nursing (at the breast) is? I'm still waiting to see a credible, well- designed study purporting to show this. Best wishes, Ericka |
Enable EMail Alerts
Start New Thread
Reply to this Message