Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

C-Sections Tied to Childhood Obesity

Posted by   + Show Post

 http://www.parenting.com/blogs/show-and-tell/sasha-parentingcom/study-c-sections-tied-childhood-obesity?src=syn&dom=cnnhealth&lnk=rss

Thoughts? I thought it was interesting that the increase was STILL there after researchers factored out maternal obesity and high birth weight from the results. Please READ the article before replying. 

"Success is not Final, Failure is not Fatal; it is the Courage to Continue that Counts." -- Winston Churchill


Daisypath Anniversary tickers

Daisypath Anniversary tickers

Lilypie First Birthday tickers

by on Jun. 16, 2012 at 9:00 PM
Replies (51-56):
SunshneDaydream
by Silver Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:11 PM

Yes, the breastfeeding challenge makes more sense to me as to why the study found c-section babies to be at higher risk of obesity.  I was never saying I agreed 100% with the study, just that it made some good points.  I think the obesity rates probably have more to do with the eating habits and lifestyle of the mother, and the breastfeeding relationship.  I think you, muslimah, were one of the lucky ones who made breastfeeding a success despite the challenges that come with a c-section, and for that I congratulate you  :)

Quoting muslimahpj:


Infants delivered via cesarean section may have about twice the risk of becoming obese as infants delivered vaginally, according to a new study published in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood.

Researchers recruited more than 1,250 pregnant women from the Boston area and followed their children until the age of 3.

They found that at 3 years old, 15.7 percent of children delivered by C-section were already obese, while only 7.5 percent of children delivered vaginally were obese.

The mother's body mass index and the baby's weight at birth did not play a big role in predisposing children to obesity, the researchers explained. Previous research, however, has linked maternal obesity to obesity in their children.

Getty Images
A new study finds that infants born via... View Full Size
Vaginal Births After C-Sections Declining Watch Video
Supermarket Foods Altered Watch Video
Children Learn Persistence From Dad Watch Video

Dr. Susanna Huh, lead author and an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, said the findings still need to be confirmed in later studies, but they suggest that women considering having a C-section that isn't medically necessary should know that their children may be at higher risk for obesity.

"Almost one in three children are delivered by C-section in the U.S., and if cesarean delivery is a risk factor for obesity, this would be an important reason to avoid them if they aren 't necessary," Huh said.

But not all mothers who had elective cesareans would heed that advice.

Morgan Roberts of Wilton, Conn. opted for C-sections when she had both of her children, now 4 and 2. She went that route because the first time, she said, she was experiencing joint pain from Lyme disease. For her second child's birth, she wasn't having any medical problems, but just chose to have a C-section.

"They are literally the opposite end of the spectrum from obese," she told ABC News in an email. "As a matter of fact, I have to increase their calories as much as I can because they are superactive and actually below weight."

Roberts said even if she knew about this relationship between obesity and C-section deliveries, she would not have changed her mind. She believes that diet and exercise play a much bigger role in childhood obesity.

"Had all this research come out before I chose to have my C-section I would not have been swayed at all," she said. "I am a very active adult, (as well as my husband), and we strongly value eating well and engaging our children in a variety of activities."


How C-sections May Lead to Obesity Not Clear

The mechanism behind the relationship between C-sections and obesity is unknown, but Huh and her co-authors speculated there could be a few possible explanations.

"One possibility is that different modes of delivery may affect the bacterial communities established in the body at birth. This could affect obesity by affecting the absorption of nutrients from the diet, or the bacteria in the gut might interact with host cells in ways that promote obesity," she said.

"Another possible explanation is that hormones and protein signals released during labor may have an effect on the development of obesity," she added.

But Dr. Ann Budzak-Garza, a pediatrician with Gundersen Health System in La Crosse, Wis., said based on her experience as a physician, the findings are inexplicable.

"Our C-section rate at Gundersen is only about 20 percent, which is a lot lower than what's reported in the study," she said. "But the incidence of childhood obesity in La Crosse County is actually higher than in other parts of the country. One in three children is overweight or obese."

But she did say that if there is such a relationship, breastfeeding may play a role.

"It's well known that breastfeeding decreases the chances of obesity in children. A C-section makes breast feeding more challenging, and surgery delays when the milk comes in usually by at least a day. It's also a major abdominal surgery, which is painful."

The authors didn't find that feeding played a role, but the data could be hiding something that's difficult to find.

Other than some small studies, there hasn't been much research that explored the association between obesity and type of delivery, Huh said.

Holzman said while he wasn't very familiar with the link between obesity and C-section delivery, the study is important because it reinforces the message that unnecessary cesareans can be dangerous to mothers and babies.

"C-section babies are known to have a bit more breathing problems around the time of birth and a bit higher incidence of ending up in the neonatal intensive care unit. There are also potential risks related to feeding problems, and this study suggests there might also be another effect," he said. "It's worth thinking about whether there are other impacts of C-sections."


muslimahpj
by Ruby Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:25 PM

The OR is a sterile enviroment.

Either way, the baby is being exposed to the bacteria.

Quoting SunshneDaydream:


Isn't the environmental bacteria from the OR room and such different kinds of bacteria than what is found in the birth canal?  It would seem to me that it's more natural (and therefore more beneficial) for the baby's first bacteria to come from it's mother, not an OR or a pair of latex gloves.  

Quoting muslimahpj:

Is this what you are talking about? Because, either way, the baby is exposed to bacteria.



Sunday, January 16, 2011


Flora Backgrounder: Baby's first intestinal flora

Posts labelled "Flora Backgrounder" have general information about the gut bacteria in our bodies.

First, I want to know how we get our intestinal bacteria in the first place. Babies, after all, are born as bacterial blank slates. Bacteria soon stake their claim on the tiny little digestive systems - but how?

Lots of publications exist on the topic of intestinal flora of newborn babies. But Anaerobe - my new favourite geeky journal - published a particularly-succinct 1997 article by Greek microbiologist Eugenia Bezirtzoglou, called The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life.

The article begins by saying, "A human baby is devoid of bacteria before birth." Now, to some of us clean freaks, that might seem like a kind of paradise. No bacteria equals no worries, right?

Wrong. Having a bacteria vacancy means a baby is susceptible to all kinds of nasty bacteria moving in. Newborn babies need good bacteria to colonize their guts PRONTO, before the no-good bacteria sets up shop.

Okay, okay, so where does all the good bacteria come from?

A baby born via normal vaginal birth gets colonized by bacteria as she passes through her mother's birth canal.

A baby born via C-section, on the other hand, gets her very first bacteria from the surrounding environment: the doctor's hands, the delivery table. Luckily, most C-section babies are born in rather sterile environments (like hospitals), so the bacteria that take over the baby's digestive tract aren't the nasty kinds that can cause a lot of damage.

After baby has come out to greet the world, feeding also has an effect on her intestinal bacteria. Breastmilk populates the baby's gut with a slightly different set of bacteria than infant formula or animal milk. Apparently, breastmilk is a source of Bifidobacterium, or "Biff", which is a good bacteria that uses its boxing gloves to fend off bad-bacteria-related conditions such as gastroenteritis.

By the way, just be thankful you didn't start life as an elephant or a wooly mammoth baby. These species are known for feeding dung to their offspring to give them the bacteria they need. There's even proof that this repellent practice happened as far back as 42,000 years ago - the month-old baby mammoth named "Lyuba", found preserved in Russian permafrost in 2007, had both milk and mammoth dung in her stomach when she suffocated to death.

baby elephant food, P.E., South Africa
This travel blog photo's source is TravelPod page: Port Elizabeth and the 2 hr drive

So to finish off the human story, the bacterial flora of newborns tends to change a lot in the first few weeks and months of life. Fast forward to age two, though, and the gut flora (as measured by fecal content) is about the same as an adult's.

And now you know the story of your very first intestinal bacteria. Such a warm and fuzzy feeling, no?

Bezirtzoglou, E. (1997). The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life Anaerobe, 3 (2-3), 173-177 DOI: 10.1006/anae.1997.0102

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

So you'll completely disregard the scientific argument of the baby missing out on key intestinal bacteria that would have been picked up in the birth canal?  I'm not saying I 100% believe the study either, but that is a very good point.  There is a biological reason for every single thing that happens during a normal, natural, vaginal birth, including the transference of important bacteria and antibodies during delivery. 

Quoting Redwall:

I will NEVER believe this.  Both my boys are C-sections and both are are very slim.  It's still calories in and calories out...there's no mention of C-sections...






SunshneDaydream
by Silver Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:27 PM

I know it's sterile but there are many different kinds of bacteria.  I'm saying that the bacteria inside the mother's body is probably more suited to the baby coming out of it than the bacteria in the OR.  I'll do some research and get back to you...unless you beat me to it!

Quoting muslimahpj:

The OR is a sterile enviroment.

Either way, the baby is being exposed to the bacteria.

Quoting SunshneDaydream:


Isn't the environmental bacteria from the OR room and such different kinds of bacteria than what is found in the birth canal?  It would seem to me that it's more natural (and therefore more beneficial) for the baby's first bacteria to come from it's mother, not an OR or a pair of latex gloves.  

Quoting muslimahpj:

Is this what you are talking about? Because, either way, the baby is exposed to bacteria.



Sunday, January 16, 2011


Flora Backgrounder: Baby's first intestinal flora

Posts labelled "Flora Backgrounder" have general information about the gut bacteria in our bodies.

First, I want to know how we get our intestinal bacteria in the first place. Babies, after all, are born as bacterial blank slates. Bacteria soon stake their claim on the tiny little digestive systems - but how?

Lots of publications exist on the topic of intestinal flora of newborn babies. But Anaerobe - my new favourite geeky journal - published a particularly-succinct 1997 article by Greek microbiologist Eugenia Bezirtzoglou, called The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life.

The article begins by saying, "A human baby is devoid of bacteria before birth." Now, to some of us clean freaks, that might seem like a kind of paradise. No bacteria equals no worries, right?

Wrong. Having a bacteria vacancy means a baby is susceptible to all kinds of nasty bacteria moving in. Newborn babies need good bacteria to colonize their guts PRONTO, before the no-good bacteria sets up shop.

Okay, okay, so where does all the good bacteria come from?

A baby born via normal vaginal birth gets colonized by bacteria as she passes through her mother's birth canal.

A baby born via C-section, on the other hand, gets her very first bacteria from the surrounding environment: the doctor's hands, the delivery table. Luckily, most C-section babies are born in rather sterile environments (like hospitals), so the bacteria that take over the baby's digestive tract aren't the nasty kinds that can cause a lot of damage.

After baby has come out to greet the world, feeding also has an effect on her intestinal bacteria. Breastmilk populates the baby's gut with a slightly different set of bacteria than infant formula or animal milk. Apparently, breastmilk is a source of Bifidobacterium, or "Biff", which is a good bacteria that uses its boxing gloves to fend off bad-bacteria-related conditions such as gastroenteritis.

By the way, just be thankful you didn't start life as an elephant or a wooly mammoth baby. These species are known for feeding dung to their offspring to give them the bacteria they need. There's even proof that this repellent practice happened as far back as 42,000 years ago - the month-old baby mammoth named "Lyuba", found preserved in Russian permafrost in 2007, had both milk and mammoth dung in her stomach when she suffocated to death.

baby elephant food, P.E., South Africa
This travel blog photo's source is TravelPod page: Port Elizabeth and the 2 hr drive

So to finish off the human story, the bacterial flora of newborns tends to change a lot in the first few weeks and months of life. Fast forward to age two, though, and the gut flora (as measured by fecal content) is about the same as an adult's.

And now you know the story of your very first intestinal bacteria. Such a warm and fuzzy feeling, no?

Bezirtzoglou, E. (1997). The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life Anaerobe, 3 (2-3), 173-177 DOI: 10.1006/anae.1997.0102

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

So you'll completely disregard the scientific argument of the baby missing out on key intestinal bacteria that would have been picked up in the birth canal?  I'm not saying I 100% believe the study either, but that is a very good point.  There is a biological reason for every single thing that happens during a normal, natural, vaginal birth, including the transference of important bacteria and antibodies during delivery. 

Quoting Redwall:

I will NEVER believe this.  Both my boys are C-sections and both are are very slim.  It's still calories in and calories out...there's no mention of C-sections...







muslimahpj
by Ruby Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:30 PM

I dont know what the challenge is to breastfeeding if you have a c section. You either are going to try to breastfeed because you want to and work at it because its what you really want, or you wont.

Its nothing to congratulate, really. It was just a choice I made.

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

Yes, the breastfeeding challenge makes more sense to me as to why the study found c-section babies to be at higher risk of obesity.  I was never saying I agreed 100% with the study, just that it made some good points.  I think the obesity rates probably have more to do with the eating habits and lifestyle of the mother, and the breastfeeding relationship.  I think you, muslimah, were one of the lucky ones who made breastfeeding a success despite the challenges that come with a c-section, and for that I congratulate you  :)

Quoting muslimahpj:


Infants delivered via cesarean section may have about twice the risk of becoming obese as infants delivered vaginally, according to a new study published in the journal Archives of Disease in Childhood.

Researchers recruited more than 1,250 pregnant women from the Boston area and followed their children until the age of 3.

They found that at 3 years old, 15.7 percent of children delivered by C-section were already obese, while only 7.5 percent of children delivered vaginally were obese.

The mother's body mass index and the baby's weight at birth did not play a big role in predisposing children to obesity, the researchers explained. Previous research, however, has linked maternal obesity to obesity in their children.

Getty Images
A new study finds that infants born via... View Full Size
Vaginal Births After C-Sections Declining Watch Video
Supermarket Foods Altered Watch Video
Children Learn Persistence From Dad Watch Video

Dr. Susanna Huh, lead author and an assistant professor of medicine at Harvard Medical School, said the findings still need to be confirmed in later studies, but they suggest that women considering having a C-section that isn't medically necessary should know that their children may be at higher risk for obesity.

"Almost one in three children are delivered by C-section in the U.S., and if cesarean delivery is a risk factor for obesity, this would be an important reason to avoid them if they aren 't necessary," Huh said.

But not all mothers who had elective cesareans would heed that advice.

Morgan Roberts of Wilton, Conn. opted for C-sections when she had both of her children, now 4 and 2. She went that route because the first time, she said, she was experiencing joint pain from Lyme disease. For her second child's birth, she wasn't having any medical problems, but just chose to have a C-section.

"They are literally the opposite end of the spectrum from obese," she told ABC News in an email. "As a matter of fact, I have to increase their calories as much as I can because they are superactive and actually below weight."

Roberts said even if she knew about this relationship between obesity and C-section deliveries, she would not have changed her mind. She believes that diet and exercise play a much bigger role in childhood obesity.

"Had all this research come out before I chose to have my C-section I would not have been swayed at all," she said. "I am a very active adult, (as well as my husband), and we strongly value eating well and engaging our children in a variety of activities."


How C-sections May Lead to Obesity Not Clear

The mechanism behind the relationship between C-sections and obesity is unknown, but Huh and her co-authors speculated there could be a few possible explanations.

"One possibility is that different modes of delivery may affect the bacterial communities established in the body at birth. This could affect obesity by affecting the absorption of nutrients from the diet, or the bacteria in the gut might interact with host cells in ways that promote obesity," she said.

"Another possible explanation is that hormones and protein signals released during labor may have an effect on the development of obesity," she added.

But Dr. Ann Budzak-Garza, a pediatrician with Gundersen Health System in La Crosse, Wis., said based on her experience as a physician, the findings are inexplicable.

"Our C-section rate at Gundersen is only about 20 percent, which is a lot lower than what's reported in the study," she said. "But the incidence of childhood obesity in La Crosse County is actually higher than in other parts of the country. One in three children is overweight or obese."

But she did say that if there is such a relationship, breastfeeding may play a role.

"It's well known that breastfeeding decreases the chances of obesity in children. A C-section makes breast feeding more challenging, and surgery delays when the milk comes in usually by at least a day. It's also a major abdominal surgery, which is painful."

The authors didn't find that feeding played a role, but the data could be hiding something that's difficult to find.

Other than some small studies, there hasn't been much research that explored the association between obesity and type of delivery, Huh said.

Holzman said while he wasn't very familiar with the link between obesity and C-section delivery, the study is important because it reinforces the message that unnecessary cesareans can be dangerous to mothers and babies.

"C-section babies are known to have a bit more breathing problems around the time of birth and a bit higher incidence of ending up in the neonatal intensive care unit. There are also potential risks related to feeding problems, and this study suggests there might also be another effect," he said. "It's worth thinking about whether there are other impacts of C-sections."



muslimahpj
by Ruby Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:31 PM

LOL

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

I know it's sterile but there are many different kinds of bacteria.  I'm saying that the bacteria inside the mother's body is probably more suited to the baby coming out of it than the bacteria in the OR.  I'll do some research and get back to you...unless you beat me to it!

Quoting muslimahpj:

The OR is a sterile enviroment.

Either way, the baby is being exposed to the bacteria.

Quoting SunshneDaydream:


Isn't the environmental bacteria from the OR room and such different kinds of bacteria than what is found in the birth canal?  It would seem to me that it's more natural (and therefore more beneficial) for the baby's first bacteria to come from it's mother, not an OR or a pair of latex gloves.  

Quoting muslimahpj:

Is this what you are talking about? Because, either way, the baby is exposed to bacteria.



Sunday, January 16, 2011


Flora Backgrounder: Baby's first intestinal flora

Posts labelled "Flora Backgrounder" have general information about the gut bacteria in our bodies.

First, I want to know how we get our intestinal bacteria in the first place. Babies, after all, are born as bacterial blank slates. Bacteria soon stake their claim on the tiny little digestive systems - but how?

Lots of publications exist on the topic of intestinal flora of newborn babies. But Anaerobe - my new favourite geeky journal - published a particularly-succinct 1997 article by Greek microbiologist Eugenia Bezirtzoglou, called The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life.

The article begins by saying, "A human baby is devoid of bacteria before birth." Now, to some of us clean freaks, that might seem like a kind of paradise. No bacteria equals no worries, right?

Wrong. Having a bacteria vacancy means a baby is susceptible to all kinds of nasty bacteria moving in. Newborn babies need good bacteria to colonize their guts PRONTO, before the no-good bacteria sets up shop.

Okay, okay, so where does all the good bacteria come from?

A baby born via normal vaginal birth gets colonized by bacteria as she passes through her mother's birth canal.

A baby born via C-section, on the other hand, gets her very first bacteria from the surrounding environment: the doctor's hands, the delivery table. Luckily, most C-section babies are born in rather sterile environments (like hospitals), so the bacteria that take over the baby's digestive tract aren't the nasty kinds that can cause a lot of damage.

After baby has come out to greet the world, feeding also has an effect on her intestinal bacteria. Breastmilk populates the baby's gut with a slightly different set of bacteria than infant formula or animal milk. Apparently, breastmilk is a source of Bifidobacterium, or "Biff", which is a good bacteria that uses its boxing gloves to fend off bad-bacteria-related conditions such as gastroenteritis.

By the way, just be thankful you didn't start life as an elephant or a wooly mammoth baby. These species are known for feeding dung to their offspring to give them the bacteria they need. There's even proof that this repellent practice happened as far back as 42,000 years ago - the month-old baby mammoth named "Lyuba", found preserved in Russian permafrost in 2007, had both milk and mammoth dung in her stomach when she suffocated to death.

baby elephant food, P.E., South Africa
This travel blog photo's source is TravelPod page: Port Elizabeth and the 2 hr drive

So to finish off the human story, the bacterial flora of newborns tends to change a lot in the first few weeks and months of life. Fast forward to age two, though, and the gut flora (as measured by fecal content) is about the same as an adult's.

And now you know the story of your very first intestinal bacteria. Such a warm and fuzzy feeling, no?

Bezirtzoglou, E. (1997). The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life Anaerobe, 3 (2-3), 173-177 DOI: 10.1006/anae.1997.0102

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

So you'll completely disregard the scientific argument of the baby missing out on key intestinal bacteria that would have been picked up in the birth canal?  I'm not saying I 100% believe the study either, but that is a very good point.  There is a biological reason for every single thing that happens during a normal, natural, vaginal birth, including the transference of important bacteria and antibodies during delivery. 

Quoting Redwall:

I will NEVER believe this.  Both my boys are C-sections and both are are very slim.  It's still calories in and calories out...there's no mention of C-sections...








SunshneDaydream
by Silver Member on Jun. 17, 2012 at 9:36 PM
1 mom liked this

www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=babys-bacteria-related-to-birth-met-10-06-22

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/7843717/Naturally-born-babies-have-more-bacterial-protection-than-those-born-by-caesarean.html

www.bodyandsoulorganics.com/BeneficialBabyBacteria.html


Just a few I came across right away...sorry I can't make them clicky...

Quoting muslimahpj:

The OR is a sterile enviroment.

Either way, the baby is being exposed to the bacteria.

Quoting SunshneDaydream:


Isn't the environmental bacteria from the OR room and such different kinds of bacteria than what is found in the birth canal?  It would seem to me that it's more natural (and therefore more beneficial) for the baby's first bacteria to come from it's mother, not an OR or a pair of latex gloves.  

Quoting muslimahpj:

Is this what you are talking about? Because, either way, the baby is exposed to bacteria.



Sunday, January 16, 2011


Flora Backgrounder: Baby's first intestinal flora

Posts labelled "Flora Backgrounder" have general information about the gut bacteria in our bodies.

First, I want to know how we get our intestinal bacteria in the first place. Babies, after all, are born as bacterial blank slates. Bacteria soon stake their claim on the tiny little digestive systems - but how?

Lots of publications exist on the topic of intestinal flora of newborn babies. But Anaerobe - my new favourite geeky journal - published a particularly-succinct 1997 article by Greek microbiologist Eugenia Bezirtzoglou, called The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life.

The article begins by saying, "A human baby is devoid of bacteria before birth." Now, to some of us clean freaks, that might seem like a kind of paradise. No bacteria equals no worries, right?

Wrong. Having a bacteria vacancy means a baby is susceptible to all kinds of nasty bacteria moving in. Newborn babies need good bacteria to colonize their guts PRONTO, before the no-good bacteria sets up shop.

Okay, okay, so where does all the good bacteria come from?

A baby born via normal vaginal birth gets colonized by bacteria as she passes through her mother's birth canal.

A baby born via C-section, on the other hand, gets her very first bacteria from the surrounding environment: the doctor's hands, the delivery table. Luckily, most C-section babies are born in rather sterile environments (like hospitals), so the bacteria that take over the baby's digestive tract aren't the nasty kinds that can cause a lot of damage.

After baby has come out to greet the world, feeding also has an effect on her intestinal bacteria. Breastmilk populates the baby's gut with a slightly different set of bacteria than infant formula or animal milk. Apparently, breastmilk is a source of Bifidobacterium, or "Biff", which is a good bacteria that uses its boxing gloves to fend off bad-bacteria-related conditions such as gastroenteritis.

By the way, just be thankful you didn't start life as an elephant or a wooly mammoth baby. These species are known for feeding dung to their offspring to give them the bacteria they need. There's even proof that this repellent practice happened as far back as 42,000 years ago - the month-old baby mammoth named "Lyuba", found preserved in Russian permafrost in 2007, had both milk and mammoth dung in her stomach when she suffocated to death.

baby elephant food, P.E., South Africa
This travel blog photo's source is TravelPod page: Port Elizabeth and the 2 hr drive

So to finish off the human story, the bacterial flora of newborns tends to change a lot in the first few weeks and months of life. Fast forward to age two, though, and the gut flora (as measured by fecal content) is about the same as an adult's.

And now you know the story of your very first intestinal bacteria. Such a warm and fuzzy feeling, no?

Bezirtzoglou, E. (1997). The Intestinal Microflora During the First Weeks of Life Anaerobe, 3 (2-3), 173-177 DOI: 10.1006/anae.1997.0102

Quoting SunshneDaydream:

So you'll completely disregard the scientific argument of the baby missing out on key intestinal bacteria that would have been picked up in the birth canal?  I'm not saying I 100% believe the study either, but that is a very good point.  There is a biological reason for every single thing that happens during a normal, natural, vaginal birth, including the transference of important bacteria and antibodies during delivery. 

Quoting Redwall:

I will NEVER believe this.  Both my boys are C-sections and both are are very slim.  It's still calories in and calories out...there's no mention of C-sections...







Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)



Featured