Does breastfeeding benefit allergies?

Allergy benefits of long-term breastfeeding questioned
By Belinda Kontominas
Published in Sydney Morning Herald 02/05/07
www.smh.com.au

BREASTFEEDING for longer does not protect babies from developing asthma or eczema as young children, according to Australian research that challenges national guidelines.

Results from a Sydney study show babies breastfed longer than six months may be more susceptible to allergies at five years old. They also show that babies who begin eating solids before three months of age may be less likely to have allergies as a young child.

National guidelines aim to "encourage, support and promote exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months of life" and target 80-90 per cent of new mothers. The guidelines also discourage the introduction of solid foods before four-six months to protect against allergic diseases such as asthma, eczema and hay fever.

Allergy experts at the Children's Hospital at Westmead, tracked more than 500 children from birth to five years, with a family history of asthma. They found those introduced to solids before three months of age were 50 per cent less likely to have positive skin prick tests, or atopy, at age five. Previous studies have shown conflicting evidence on the link between breast milk and allergies.

A senior author of the study and respiratory physician at the Woolcock Institute of Medical Research in Camperdown, Dr Guy Marks, said although the study conflicted with national guidelines, there was no reason for them to be changed or for mothers to panic.

"This is not to tell people not to breastfeed, but to say that if you have a family history of asthma, breastfeeding may not prevent the onset of allergic disease in your child," he said.

Dr Marks said while there was no cut in the risk of eczema and asthma, there had been no increase in the risk either.

Researchers were unsure why this was the case, but suggested "unexpected immunological effects" of the duration of breastfeeding and the timing of introduction of solid foods needed further examination.

Andrew Kemp, professor of Pediatric Allergy and Immunology at the Children's Hospital at Westmead, said mothers who were unable to breastfeed for prolonged periods should not feel guilty if their child developed allergies later on.

Breastfeeding had been proven to help aid neuro and respiratory development and prevent gastrointestinal infection, Professor Kemp said.

The president of the Australian Lactation Consultants Association, Gwen Moody, said it would still promote exclusive breastfeeding of children up to about age six months.

i have asthma and I wouldn't use this article to have stopped me from breastfeeding either boy....It seems that things are always being "proven" and then "proven wrong" so i just go with what I feel is best and try not to read too much into anything....apart from that article that said pregnant woman who eat lots of chocolate have happier babies - practically had that framed.

Maya wrote: What I'd like to know is how they conducted the testing. For example they say starting solids early doesn't increase the risk of allergy - did they give a group of babies solids at 2-3 mths to test this and if so isn't it a huge gamble with the health of the babies if they're wrong?

There are really strict ethical guidelines to doing research on children. These studies are usual longitudinal which means they study a huge group of babies from birth to whenever doing regular tests on all aspects of health and development along the way.

They work backwards as such on trying to identify causes of any problems. So they will identify a subgroup of these kids that developed food allergies then look to see when solids were introduced. If significantly more were introduced solids at a young age then there is evidence there is a relationship. Note - this is just evidence not proof as there may be other factors that have caused this allergy to occur.

If they tried to introduce early solids to a study group and have a control group that were introduced solids later this is extremely unethical as they are potentially causing damage to children in their study group. They would never receive permission or funding to run this study from the hospital/university or whover was funding it. All medical journals would refuse to publish their results and without publications its really hard to get more funding.