Reproduced from 'Essence' magazine
Volume 41, Number 6
Exclusively for ABA subscribers
by Kathryn Wood
The recent media stories about fire retardant chemicals in breastmilk (a story was run on the 7:30 Report ABC in April 2005) have the potential to cause breastfeeding mothers much anxiety.
Studies are published every year detailing the levels in breastmilk of certain persistent organic pollutants (often called POPs) such as mercury, dioxins or the fire retardants used in plastics called polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs). So, why is there such an interest in breastmilk levels of these chemicals?
Breastmilk is often used to test population levels of environmental contaminants, as it is more convenient, cost effective, less invasive and less painful to sample breastmilk than blood or tissue biopsies. Would you rather give a sample of your breastmilk, or have slice of fat tissue removed? As well as being less invasive than blood or tissue testing, smaller amounts of breastmilk are needed, as the fat content of breastmilk is about ten times that of blood.
Levels of chemicals in breastmilk attract far more media attention than those in fat tissue or animal studies. Researchers have noticed that studies of rapidly increasing PBDE levels in Californian harbour seals generated a big yawn from the public, whereas studies of increases of PBDEs in Swedish breastmilk samples generated significant public and scientific attention worldwide (Hooper & She 2003).
There are thousands of man-made POPs in our environment. Some of these do not break down and cannot be excreted, and some can be toxic to humans and animals. They are found in air, our water supply, our food, certain personal products such as cosmetics, and are used for fire retardants in many plastics. Where and how you live have limited bearing on the levels of chemicals in your body. The only way to reduce exposure is for these chemicals to not be produced or used, or for chemical manufacturers to replace them with safer alternatives.
As a result of the presence of these chemicals in our environment, they are inevitably found in human and animal tissue, including breastmilk. Prenatally, babies are exposed in utero via the placenta, while postnatally babies are exposed to these contaminants via breastmilk, artificial baby milk, air, water, food, soil and even toys and dummies.
Artificial baby milk, and the water used to make it, also contain environmental contaminants (albeit different ones from breastmilk) in addition to the other better-known hazards of artificial feeding, including the risk of bacterial contaminants. The hazards of artificial feeding outweigh the potential reduction in postnatal exposure to environmental contaminants from breastmilk. The most important period for exposure to these chemicals is prenatally (in utero). Breastmilk contains substances that help a child develop a stronger immune system, and gives protection against environmental contaminants and pathogens. There is evidence that breastfeeding limits the damage caused by in utero exposure to environmental contaminants, and can to some extent 'rescue' the infant from these effects (WABA 2003).
Community anxiety about environmental contaminants is understandable, and will hopefully lead to advocacy and action to ensure that the levels of these contaminants do not increase. It is also hoped that interest in the state of our environment does not lead to misinformation or confusion about breastfeeding.
Resources:
|
