From the Academy
Position Paper
Position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Promoting and Supporting Breastfeeding

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2014.12.014Get rights and content

Abstract

It is the position of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics that exclusive breastfeeding provides optimal nutrition and health protection for the first 6 months of life, and that breastfeeding with complementary foods from 6 months until at least 12 months of age is the ideal feeding pattern for infants. Breastfeeding is an important public health strategy for improving infant and child morbidity and mortality, improving maternal morbidity, and helping to control health care costs. Research continues to support the positive effects of human milk on infant and maternal health, as it is a living biological fluid with many qualities not replicable by human milk substitutes. Recent research advancements include a greater understanding of the human gut microbiome, the protective effect of human milk for premature infants and those born to women experiencing gestational diabetes mellitus, the relationship of breastfeeding with human immunodeficiency virus, and the increased ability to characterize cellular components of human milk. Registered dietitian nutritionists and nutrition and dietetics technicians, registered, should continue efforts to shift the norm of infant feeding away from use of human milk substitutes and toward human milk feeds. The role of registered dietitian nutritionists and nutrition and dietetics technicians, registered, in breastfeeding promotion and support, in the context of the professional code of ethics and the World Health Organization’s International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes, are discussed in the “Practice Paper of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics: Promoting and Supporting Breastfeeding,” published on the Academy website at: www.eatright.org/positions.

Section snippets

Human Milk Composition

Human milk contains factors that serve both nutritive and non-nutritive functions,1, 3, 8, 10, 11 and it has been well characterized that the relatively low protein content and high bioavailability of essential minerals are optimally suited to the immature digestive system of the young infant.1, 3 Human milk provides maternal immune factors, appetite-regulating hormones, and factors thought to support development of the healthy infant gut microbiome.10, 11 Mammary-gland−derived stem cells have

Infant and Maternal Health Outcomes

It is important to note that it can be a challenge to rate the strength of breastfeeding research, secondary to inconsistent definitions of breastfeeding (eg, exclusivity, frequency, intensity, duration), and unethical to conduct the randomized controlled trials necessary to answer many questions.3, 17, 18 However, systematic reviews and meta-analyses continue to indicate that infant feeding mode is associated with infant and maternal health outcomes.17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23 The Figure

Cost of Not Breastfeeding

A recent pediatric cost analysis was conducted to evaluate the economic burden of suboptimal breastfeeding practices.5 Both direct and indirect costs for disease and the cost of premature death were included. It was determined that if 90% of families in the United States breastfed exclusively for 6 months, $13 billion per year could be saved. A similar study focused on maternal outcomes.4 In this study, direct and indirect health costs and the economic costs of premature death associated with

Emergent Topics

Several issues concerning breastfeeding and the feeding of human milk have emerged that will require additional study. For example, a trending increase in providing human milk exclusively as pumped milk may increase the prevalence of infants receiving human milk for the optimal duration.39 However, little is known about the impact refrigeration/freezing and subsequent thawing might have on the immunologic properties of human milk. In addition, research to tease out the benefits of breastfeeding

Conclusion/Future Needs

Research continues to support the impact of human milk on infant and maternal health outcomes and, as such, federal initiatives supporting the effort to increase national, regional, and local breastfeeding rates continue to be strengthened. Since publication of the 2009 position paper, an effort has been made to quantify the risks of not breastfeeding and to detail the economic costs associated with suboptimal breastfeeding behaviors. Information presented here and in the accompanying practice

References (39)

  • A.I. Eidelman et al.

    Breastfeeding and the use of human milk

    Pediatrics

    (2012)
  • M. Bartick

    Mothers' costs of suboptimal breastfeeding: Implications of the maternal disease cost analysis

    Breastfeed Med

    (2013)
  • M. Bartick et al.

    The burden of suboptimal breastfeeding in the United States: A pediatric cost analysis

    Pediatrics

    (2010)
  • M.C. Bartick et al.

    Cost analysis of maternal disease associated with suboptimal breastfeeding

    Obstet Gynecol

    (2013)
  • World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund. Global Strategy for Infant and Young Child Feeding....
  • F. Hassiotou et al.

    Cells in human milk: State of the science

    J Hum Lact

    (2013)
  • M.C. Neville et al.

    Lactation and neonatal nutrition: Defining and refining the critical questions

    J Mammary Gland Biol Neoplasia

    (2012)
  • Institute of Medicine. Dietary reference intakes for calcium and vitamin D....
  • D.J. Chapman et al.

    Impact of maternal nutritional status on breast milk quality and infant outcomes: An update on key nutrients

    Adv Nutr

    (2012)
  • Cited by (88)

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    This Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics position was adopted by the House of Delegates Leadership Team on March 16, 1997, and reaffirmed on September 12, 1999; June 6, 2003; May 20, 2007; and March 23, 2012. This position is in effect until December 31, 2019. Requests to use portions of the position or republish in its entirety must be directed to the Academy at [email protected].

    Reviewers: Virginia Carney, MPH, RD, IBCLC, FILCA, FADA (St Jude Children’s Research Hospital, Memphis, TN); Public Health Community Nutrition dietetic practice group (DPG) (Phyllis Stell Crowley, MS, RD, IBCLC, Utah Department of Health/WIC, Salt Lake City, UT); Claire Dalidowitz, MS, MA, RD, CD-N (Connecticut Children’s Medical Center, Hartford, CT); Sharon Denny, MS, RD (Academy Knowledge Center, Chicago, IL); Women’s Health DPG (Heather Goesch, MPH, RDN, LDN, Heather Goesch Nutrition, Holly Ridge, NC); Pediatric Nutrition DPG (Stephanie Howard, MPH, RDN, LD, IBCLC Saint Luke’s Hospital, Kansas City, MO); Mary Pat Raimondi, MS, RD (Academy Policy Initiatives & Advocacy, Washington, DC).

    Academy Positions Committee Workgroup: Denise A. Andersen, MS, RDN, LD, CLC (Chair) (Business Consultant in Private Practice, Mendota Heights, MN); Mindy G. Hermann, MBA, RDN (The Hermann Group, Inc, Mount Kisco, NY); Alena M. Clark, PhD, MPH, RD, CLC (Content Advisor) (University of Northern Colorado, Greeley, CO).

    We thank the reviewers for their many constructive comments and suggestions. The reviewers were not asked to endorse this position or the supporting paper.

    View full text