New Vitamin D Recommendations for Breastfed Infants

Here is the full article. And here is a quote:
To meet the new recommendation of 400 units daily, millions of children will need to take daily vitamin D supplements, the American Academy of Pediatrics said. That includes breast-fed infants — even those who get some formula, too, and many teens who drink little or no milk.

Baby formula contains vitamin D, so infants on formula only generally don't need supplements. However, the academy recommends breast-feeding for at least the first year of life and breast milk is sometimes deficient.

Most commercially available milk is fortified with vitamin D, but most children and teens don't drink enough of it — four cups daily would be needed — to meet the new requirement, said Dr. Frank Greer, the report's co-author.

The new advice is based on mounting research about potential benefits from vitamin D besides keeping bones strong, including suggestions that it might reduce risks for cancer, diabetes and heart disease. But the evidence isn't conclusive and there's no consensus on how much of the vitamin would be needed for disease prevention.

I have mixed feelings about this because they way these pediatricians construct their arguments come off as very pro-formula and that bothers me. What do you think?

 

I didn't read it as anti-breast milk. The dilemma about vitamin D as been brewing for some time. I think I would prefer to expose baby to some sun instead of use supplements. If I remember right, we only need 10 minutes exposure - without sunscreen - several times a week to get the vitamin D we need (but darker skin might require more time). Just getting out for a walk in nice weather will do the trick.

 

I was told to supplement with vitamin D cause I breastfeed. I only heard about that with the twins. So my other children were never ever given vitamin D. I haven't with the twins cause they do get a few formula bottles, but maybe I'll consider it with all my kids since we live far north. Thanks for the reminder.

 

I was told by my ped that I needed to give Natalie a vitamin everyday with Vitamin D since I was breastfeeding. It wasn't anything negative about breastfeeding, they just recommend it since they don't get it in their formula. I've been giving it to her since the beginning and it's no big deal. I think I used Trivosol and now I'm switching to Privosol or something like that.

 

What I find frustrating is that breast milk is not "deficient" -- the composition presumes that your child doesn't spend all of their time in a cave! Oh, and the supplements don't provide as much useable D as when your body manufactures it so you have to take a lot to get the benefit... similar to the high amounts of iron fortified into formula and the relatively low amount (but much more easily absorbed) in breastmilk.

 

My doc had the boys on trivasol (sp) in the beginning while my supply was getting established and we have just kept them on it. But he did suggest sunlight for Vit D- he said it is the best way to be sure they are getting it. He suggested 10 min a day even if it is their swing or bouncer in front of a window (as long as your windows are old like mine and don't have any protection built in ).

 

We do take the girls outside everyday for at least 10 minutes, but after today's reports and the article you've posted sullivanre, I'm not sure now if that's sufficient. I'm confused.

 

Our pedi said it wasnt' needed but we did it any way - I mean what can it hurt to have that insurance policy. I have been thinking about starting them again this winter since we live in the north and we are on whole milk now.

 

Vit. D is mainly for strong bones right? I can see toddlers needing a certain amount of D but infants? Don't agree that infants need certain amounts of D if they did then it would be included in our breastmilk

 

I found the last line of the article very interesting:

QUOTE
Several members of an academy committee that helped write the guidelines have current or former ties to makers of infant formula or vitamin supplements.


Gee, what a surprise.

Here's my take on the article overall: it seems like they're saying that some research suggests that megadoses of vitamin D may have disease-fighting powers. The research is pretty new, so hasn't stood up to the test of time, and the methods seem shaky:

QUOTE
Greer, a University of Wisconsin pediatrician, acknowledged that most studies suggesting vitamin D may play a much broader role in disease prevention have been observational, not the most rigorous kind of medical evidence.


Even if megadoses prove to be beneficial, that doesn't mean they're necessary. Just an extra. Megadoses of vitamin D may turn out to help prevent cancer, heart disease, and diabetes - but so does a healthy lifestyle (good food, healthy weight, exercise, no smoking, etc).

And how could it be possible that breastmilk is anything but perfect? I think scientists (especially those in the pockets of the formula & vitamin companies) tend to forget that babies have been doing very well when formula and vitamins didn't exist. There may be special cases where extra vitamin D is necessary (dark-skinned babies in gloomy Northern climates), but that's the exception, not the rule. All babies need is mom's milk.

 

I made sure to get out everyday (especially in the winter months) with the babies, whether it be a walk or just bundling them up in thier bouncies outside. No one likes to be couped up, so I figured they wouldn't want to either
Mine got about 2 doses of vit d.

FWIW- if this were true most adults would be on high dose vit d and that is not happening at any of my pharmacies.

 

QUOTE(fuchsiagroan @ Oct 13 2008, 07:36 PM) [snapback]1024884[/snapback]
I found the last line of the article very interesting:
Gee, what a surprise.

Here's my take on the article overall: it seems like they're saying that some research suggests that megadoses of vitamin D may have disease-fighting powers. The research is pretty new, so hasn't stood up to the test of time, and the methods seem shaky:
Even if megadoses prove to be beneficial, that doesn't mean they're necessary. Just an extra. Megadoses of vitamin D may turn out to help prevent cancer, heart disease, and diabetes - but so does a healthy lifestyle (good food, healthy weight, exercise, no smoking, etc).

And how could it be possible that breastmilk is anything but perfect? I think scientists (especially those in the pockets of the formula & vitamin companies) tend to forget that babies have been doing very well when formula and vitamins didn't exist. There may be special cases where extra vitamin D is necessary (dark-skinned babies in gloomy Northern climates), but that's the exception, not the rule. All babies need is mom's milk.


The above is why my pedi said it wasn't necessary for us to supplement. In his years as a pedi, he'd only seen a couple of cases of vitamin D deficiency and they were in darker skinned babies in upstate NY.

So we didn't supplement, just went for walks.

 

QUOTE(Chillers @ Oct 13 2008, 11:51 PM) [snapback]1025261[/snapback]
The above is why my pedi said it wasn't necessary for us to supplement. In his years as a pedi, he'd only seen a couple of cases of vitamin D deficiency and they were in darker skinned babies in upstate NY.

So we didn't supplement, just went for walks.

My kids are dark and live in New York

But honestly I'm not really worried that they are going to get rickets because they get mostly breastmilk. I know there is an increasing rate of Vit D deficiency because many kids don't go outside enough.

 

QUOTE(sullivanre @ Oct 14 2008, 12:11 AM) [snapback]1025273[/snapback]
My kids are dark and live in New York

But honestly I'm not really worried that they are going to get rickets because they get mostly breastmilk. I know there is an increasing rate of Vit D deficiency because many kids don't go outside enough.


I think he was in Rochester...are you that far north? LOL.

Definitely with you on the not enough outside time and also, increased use of sunscreen. Which is a good thing, but....

 

Even here in Minnesota my ped. said we were fine with no vitamins. Twins included. We just tried to get them out in sun. I agree totally with what Holly wrote!

 

Yeah, our ped told my DH our twins should take it for the Vit D. I didn't get a chance to ask him about it as I'd already left the exam room w/ one of the boys.

I looked at the recommendation and decided not to give it to them. If they are fuond to have a deficiency, surely we will give the supplement but until then the (unlikely) chance they'll get rickets is not reason enough for me to give them it.

 

QUOTE(Mellizos @ Oct 13 2008, 09:23 AM) [snapback]1023988[/snapback]
I didn't read it as anti-breast milk. The dilemma about vitamin D as been brewing for some time. I think I would prefer to expose baby to some sun instead of use supplements. If I remember right, we only need 10 minutes exposure - without sunscreen - several times a week to get the vitamin D we need (but darker skin might require more time). Just getting out for a walk in nice weather will do the trick.


I'm with you on the sun exposure.