OUR BABIES.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVII, Issue 2634, 16 October 1909, Page 4 (Supplement)

OUR BABIES.

(Bv “Hygeia”)

Publi-.ned under the auspices of tho Society for the Promotion oi the Health of Women and Children. IN DEFENCE OF THE BABY. A’-,’hen the article on C, E.\ .J. s letter was published t.iree weeks ago, 1 had. of course, no idea taut such a person existed. Now. it seems Liiat there is really an E. V. J-. and as some of vour readers who kuo.v nothing about the Society for tho Promotion of the Health of Women, and Children, and the Plunkei Nurses may. have been influenced by her letters, it appeals desirable to point out that in no particular mentioned bv herself did she carry out the instructions in the pamphlet she refers to. PERSONAL EXPERIENCES Before traversing E. A • J/s statements my' own personal experience, e.vtending over <x period of moie t*uni four years, may he comforting to anxions mothers. I lnxve lmd to do with a large number of babies, many <>- whom were very ill and others sadly emaciated when’they came under care, hut in no single instance has the baby failed to thrive and grown firm and healthy on “humanised milk.” The following extract from a letter which came after A. 13.’s telegram speaks for itself. (By the way, the telegram came from the husband —not from the wife, as I thought when writing previously on the subject). - I sent you tho wire rc the 3 iciiou lous letter in the Taranaki Budget because a great many people read such matter and are easily influenced, although it- was absurd on the face of it in the eyes of anybody who had had experience of humanised

milk. , . ~ The report of the work in tho Canterbury Province, which appeared in this column recently, and the annual reports of the other branches. of t.ie Society, all bear the most striking testimony to the success which attends the rational artificial feeding of babies, and lead us to believe that the day is not far distant when every infant m this Dominion that cannot have his birthright—namely, his own mother s milk —will be intelligently and therefore successfully fed on “humanised milk” as soon as the natural supply fails. . . Mothers, don’t wait until your baby has become ill before feeding it properly—do it now ! HOW E. V. J. FAILED TO FOLLOW THE INSTRUCTIONS. Now, we shall again quote what E. V, J. said in August; “I did the first unwise act by trying to breast-feed it (her infant). After battling for six months with a fretful and ailing baby, weak and ill myself, I was advised to give the child ‘humanised milk. • • I followed the instructions in the pamphlet on ‘The Feeding and Care of the Baby’ to the letter. After four months’ trial I noticed the baby was losing weight,” etc., etc. Let us sec how she followed the instructions in the pamph1. It was pointed out in the “Our Babies” column dealing with the above that E. V. J- did not have her baby weighed, as expressly enjoined in the pamphlet. Tho passage on “Weighing the Baby” was quoted at that time^ 2. In - her letter of September 17th, she tells us that sho prepared (for her “fretful and ailing” baby) “Humanised Milk No. 2”—not “humanised milk,” as she stated in her previous letter. Let us turn to the pamphlet and see whether E. V. J. was carrying out the instructions. After describing in detail liow a baby which canndt bo suckled should bo gradually, step by step, educated to digest pure humanised milk, on page 9, under heading “Second Month and Onwards,” it says: — This (humanised milk) can he continued throughout the first nine months of life, or towards the end of the fourth month, if the infant is strong and is digesting its food.well. Humanised Milk No. 2 may be blended with the standard humanised milk in gradually increasing proportions, until at fmir months and a half the child gets No. 2 pure. It should be noted that the change to Milk No. 2 is suggested merely as saving of trouble, because it takes less time to make than the first recipe. Both milks are of the same strength, but as the No. 1 is more easily digested, it should be continued longer, and may be used throughout, if No. 2 fails to agree. The method of starting a baby on humanised milk is given on page 10 under the heading “Dilute at Starting,” and in that paragraph “Humanised Milk No. 2” is not even mentioned. E. V. J. did not give her “fretful and ailing” baby “humanised milk at all, neither did she follow tlie instructions in tlie pamphlet—in fact, she went absolutely contrary to them. 3. E. V. J. states that Humanised Milk No. 2 is “recommended for babies over four months old.” Can anyone sav, after reading the above extracts from the pamphlet, that Humanised ATilk No. 2 is- recommended by us for “fretful, ailing babies” ? 4. The Appliances—There is no mention in the pamphlet of an enamel niiln measure costing 3s 6d, nor of scale, “anything over 55.” The pamphlet savs: “The only special appliances needed are a half-pint glass measure graduated in ounces, and a milk tliermometer costing Is or Is 6cl. In addition it is a great advantage to have a 2joz conical dipper and a -)-oz sugar measure.” Tlie price of the two latter in Dunedin has been Is for the two ; the half-pint glass can be bought for 2s fid. When one considers that it costs from 6s to 7s 6d a week to feed a baby as recommended by the proprietors of certain of the most-used patent foods, and that it costs only half as much to feed a baby on humanised milk, one sees at once that the saving in 10 days would pay for all necessary appliances. On the other hand, in giving humanised milk the mother would be doing the host thing possible for a child denied the unnuesticned advantages of suckling, while on the other hand the baby would be receiving a class of food which has been proved over and over and over again not to properly build up the constitution, and which tends to leave the child a weakling, however well it may appear to grow.

o. E. V. J. gives a partial explanation oi the method of preparing Humaiiisod Alilk No. 2, but as she loaves uiinientionod half of the essentials, it may be assumed that she paid no mere attention to them than she did to the question of which formula she ought to use for her sick baby. 6. By the way. the Nurse who prepare 1 the milk was quite right when she said that heating to IGOdog. F. did not matter. E. Y. J., with leer usual jumping at conclusions-, quotes this as a grave inaccuracy. The milk may l-e treated (as is explained to all Nurses trained by the Society) to 162.0di.-g. Iwithout any known harmful change being brought about. No extreme acculY.cv is necessary, the permissible latitude being from loOdeg to IG2 o.icg. F. Between l-iOd-.-g and loOdeg F. practically all noxious living germs are destroyed. and below lC2.sdeg. F. the soluble albumen of milk dots net begin to coagulate. Further, the change to the characteristic “boiled” taste cl superheated milk does not manifest itself under this temperature. Thus we strike loudog. F. as the happy mean, with a permissible range cf sd::-g or (king on either side. As every instruction with regard to tlie food of her baby was neglected by E. Y. J. it is utterly improbable that she would pay any serious attention to the paragraphs on Sunshine and Fresh Air (these are almost as important for the well-being of the baby as suitable food. Proper Clothing, Exercise, Fruit Juice, etc. .etc. etc. A CONTRAST.

E. Y. J. lias given us the history of her baby’s adventures as one might almost call them. Contrast it- with what would have happened had slm taken herself and her baby to the Knritane Hospital, or called at the Blanket Nurse’s Office, or even if she had really followed the instructions in the pamphlet on “The Feeding and Care of the Baby,” as so many mothers are now doing throughout tlie Dominion with perfect m.iecoss. Had she applied the Blanket Nurse would have told her liow to take care of her own health and that of her baby. She would have impressed upon her the importance of pure fresh flowing air day and night, would have pointed out where the baby ought to sleep, etc. She would have advised tlie mother about her own food and the times for feeding tlie baby. She would have investigated the baby’s clothing to see that there was nothing irritating or constricting. Then she would have asked the mother to wait until it was time to nurse her baby. Immediately before nursing tlie baby would have been weighed, and again immediately after, and tlie Nurse world then have known exactly how much food the baby had had. If the quantity was sufficient the mother would have been advised to attend strictly to all hygienic essentials for herself and her baby. There would almost certainly have been marked improvement. This would have continued, aiul probably she would have been able to nurse her baby for the full time, to the great benefit of herself and her offspring. If on weighing the quantity of milk had been markedly deficient she would have been asked to come again or stay for two or three nursings, so that the Nurse might get a better idea of liow much shortage there really was. Aleantime the baby would have been given after each nursing some properly adjusted humanised milk. If she had realN attended to the simple requirements for health her own milk would probably have increased in quantity and improved in quality, and she might soon have had enough for her baby; * lit if not the supplementing would still* have been continued. Of course the mother would have been advised to nurse her baby regularly every three or four hours, according to age, as long as she could supply good milk. If the milk failed altogether the baby could easily have been- weaned, as it would have boon already habituated to the new food and method of feeding. Next week we shall give a striking illustrative case and finish with E. V. J.