I love being pregnant, and I love having kids. I love breastfeeding. But I hate, and hate is really not a strong word compared to how I actually feel, nursing bras. They're all terrible. First of all, they're gigantic. Breasts become fuller with milk, of course, so they get bigger...and bigger, and bigger and bigger until they feel like they're going to burst. Hence, once needs a giant bra for the giant breasts. I can get behind that--it's rational and makes sense.

What I don't understand is why they have to be so hideously ugly and not actually provide the support required to tote around said enormous breasts. And while I may be funny, I'm also being dead serious. I have three or four (I think I banished one it was so awful) nursing bras from various manufacturers that were clearly designed with someone who either has never had breasts swollen with milk or who never wanted to look even remotely attractive without her shirt on. Those with underwires are uncomfortable. Those without lack any real support.

There's also the issue of the bras never quite managing to hold onto the breastpads placed in them to keep them from getting covered with milk leakage. I have had, however, quite a bit of success with Lily Pads, which are technically designed to be worn under things with which one can wear no bra or at night when one doesn't want to wear a bra to bed. Some women have reverted to wearing regular bras in larger sizes or just going braless all together.

What about you? Do you hate nursing bras, or have you found one that answers your prayers? Do you have a trick for making them more comfortable, or at least more tolerable?

Source

Is there a downside to breastfeeding? A new report from the New York Times might have you thinking so. In a recent article, several studies monitoring a lack of vitamin D in infants might support that breastmilk is not enough to prevent things like rickets in children. The biggest fear is that the deficiency is more common than previously thought and is going undetected. Breastmilk apparently does not necessarily provide enough of the vitamin to children.

Doctors, of course, are rare to say anything at all negative about breastfeeding. Unlike perhaps even fifty years ago, women are being told that they simply must breastfeed, that they are wrong for not doing so, and that breastmilk is the ultimate wonder food for their infants. This may well be true, but the medical profession that's been pushing breastfeeding down our throats has also admitted to knowing there is a probable link between vitamin D deficiency and diseases like diabetes and cancer.

The answer, of course, is not to stop breastfeeding, but rather to augment a child's nutrition by adding vitamin drops, or, my favorite, cod liver oil (yummy!). The other pretty obvious answer is that if a woman is deficient in something, so, too, will be her breastmilk. Mothers should be getting plenty of vitamin D themselves in order to pass on the right amount to their infants. That should be good news to those of us who are committed to breastfeeding exclusively for as long as possible. Both the American Academy of Pediatrics and my own pediatrician recommend supplementing with the vitamin D drops.

Thoughts? I for one drink enough milk while pregnant and nursing to keep a small dairy in business. Is it enough? Who knows. Did you supplement breastfeeding with vitamins for your infants or enjoy a little cod liver oil?

Pic by timtom.ch [surfin' USA].

Source

So this is a weird one. When we travel we always bring along Parmalat for our toddler. It's much easier, obviously to transport and deal with on the road as it's vacuum-sealed and doesn't need to be refrigerated (until it's opened of course). Upon a recent trip to Central Park Zoo, a friend said someone had once told her that Parmalat isn't really milk.

The friend's acquaintance who made this claim was vegetarian (as is our family) and my friend was actually commenting on how people make such strange distinctions. The acquaintance refused to drink Parmalat because it wasn't "real milk." My understanding is that Parmalat is, indeed, real milk, it's just packaged differently, and perhaps treated a little differently to ensure it's safe to be packaged in a way that allows it to not need to be refrigerated (until opened).

So what is the deal? A recent trip to the Parmalat website upped my curiosity factor. They refer to the milk they distribute as "milk products." They also call it "ESL milk" which means Extended Shelf Life--not English as a Second Language. With regard to the whole vegetarian thing, while we don't necessarily eat meat, a good deal of us do drink milk--Parmalat included. Vegans don't do any animal products whatsoever, but quite a few vegetarians do.

So what's the deal? Is Parmalat really milk, or not? To me, if it looks like milk, smells like milk, and tastes like milk, and they call it milk, it's probably milk.

Pic by allanpatrick.

Source

Source

Source

Source

If you have a box of Pepperoni Hot Pockets in your freezer, you might want to pull it out and have a look at the box. Some packages of the frozen pizza snacks may contain 'foreign objects', which are most certainly not edible and potentially dangerous.

Nestle Prepared Foods Company has received complaints from four consumers who found hard red plastic pieces as well as some clear flexible rubber stuff in their Hot Pockets Pepperoni Pizzas. Roz O'Hearn, a spokesperson for Nestle, says they suspect these pieces might have splintered off from a testing device and become buried inside the product. Some of the pieces may have sharp edges and pose a risk of serious injury should you end up with one in your mouth.

In response, Nestle is recalling about 215,660 pounds of Hot Pockets Pepperoni Pizzas packaged in the 54-ounce, 12-pack cartons. Printed on the side of each carton is "8157544614D," "EST 7721A," and "BEST BEFORE JAN2010." These were produced on June 5 and distributed to retail establishments nationwide.

For more information, call Nestle at 800-350-5016.

Source

We almost always have dinner together with the whole family -- Rachel, Jared, Sara, Ezra, and I -- and plan to continue doing so as long as the kids are still living with us. That's the way my folks did it and I think there are definite benefits to sharing a meal together. Of course, there is the occasional exception, but for the most part, we all eat together.

Sometimes, however, that gets a mite tiresome. As much as I love my kids, sometimes I long for adult conversation. Rachel and I talk, but it seems that we invariably end up talking about the kids or other family matters. In addition, we've been together so long (nearly twenty years) and experienced so much together that we're comfortable just being together without talking.

Last night was different. I had dinner with another woman and the conversation was not about whether or not we would take them to the symphony this weekend or when we would get around to clearing out the attic. Instead, we talked of travel and of concerts and of youthful experiences. We laughed, we shared, we had a grand time. We barely even noticed that the kids were there.

Suri Cruise is nearly two and a half years old. Heaven knows you couldn't forget that if you tried. And while she has more fashion sense than pretty much any other tot on the planet, there is one thing that seems to still give us all pause. No, it's not how her celebrity parents could have actually spawned her, nor is it how much is spent keeping her best-dressed and -tressed. Nah--it's that thing where she's still carrying around a baby bottle.

Yes, still. It seems like this first made the news when Suri was more than a year old and still using a bottle. Like sippy cups are so great. Now she's making headlines again for still sporting the baby bottle--when she's not even really a baby. My question is this: what is the big deal? My kid is nearly seventeen months old and he still occasionally uses a bottle. We've tried really hard to break him of the habit, but, for a while, he simply eschewed the sippy cup. He could use one, sure, but he couldn't get the same amount of milk from the sippy as from the bottle. So, we let him roll with it. Eventually, he switched over to predominantly using the sippy.

I know there are standards and practices for how we're supposed to raise our children. I know that guidelines have been set to help us make our way through this crazy maze called parenthood. But with issues as large as world hunger, violence, abuse and immunizations out there for us to tackle, why does anyone give a rat's butt about whether or not Suri Cruise still uses her baby bottle? I feel sorry for Tom Cruise and Katie Holmes--they're busy people who are trying to raise a kid and have full-time jobs too. it ain't easy. And not every kid fits the model she's supposed to. Is it really the end of the world if Suri still uses a bottle?

Source

Being overweight is tough for a kid. There are many options toward weight loss, but some are more (or less) appealing than others. For many, over the years, the weight-loss camp has been a dream. But, while "fat camp" is almost as American as apple pie, it's now going the way of many other American dreams--it's too darned expensive to attend. Like any other camp, weight-loss camp costs money to run and maintain. With more than nine million children who are considered obese in this country, such camp can seem like a knight in shining armor for families struggling to get their kids' weight under control. The weight-loss camps, while they can be affective, are far from free. Few to none accept insurance.

The government generally offers no more assistance than insurance companies. Instead the children rely on their essay writing skills and other means to win scholarships to attend. Yes, even weight loss camp is something only possible for the rich. Corporate sponsorship is one way to help get kids who can't afford the often more than $1,000-a-week pricetag what they need. Advocacy groups are being formed, such as the Childhood Obesity Treatment in Action. Some tax deductions are coming into play, and some insurance is starting to cover a portion of the cost--mostly in the cognitive behavior area.

But is it enough? Rarely. And financial cost is to say nothing of the emotional cost to the children, who are often left with either feeling exploited by their situation--their essays and their experiences become the property of the camp, who share that information freely with the media in hopes of growing the industry--and/or have to deal with life after camp, which can be even harder than before they found their salvation. While most children lose some portion of their body weight at the camps, few manage to keep it off after returning to the real world.

Pic by skampy.

Source

Whether you are heading to the beach, the park or just hanging out in the back yard, great snacks are an essential ingredient to a fun day. But spending hours in the kitchen preparing for your outing can spoil the fun before it has even begun. Simple snacks like fruit, chips and sandwiches are fine, but why not whip up something a little more special next time you are packing your picnic basket?

Cheaper than buying prepared foods from the store and quicker than you would think, The Observer has a list of 101 picnic recipes that can be put together in 20 minutes or less. Not all are kid-friendly (curried egg salad) and some sound downright strange (cold pizza and lemon), but all are unique and a lot more interesting than plain old potato salad and ham sandwiches.

I've bookmarked the page and will definitely reference it the next time we head out to the beach. What about you? Do you have your own crowd-pleasing picnic basket favorite?

Source

Red Bull, the popular energy drink may give you wings in more ways than one -- according to an Australian study, they might get you a harp as well and a new, fluffy home in the clouds. Researchers found that even one can of sugar-free Red Bull appears to make blood more "sticky," increasing the risk of blood clots.

"After one can it seemed to turn the young individual into one with more of the type of profile you would expect to see with someone with cardiovascular disease," said Scott Willoughby, of the Cardiovascular Research Centre at the Royal Adelaide Hospital and Adelaide University. "People who already have existing cardiovascular disease may want to talk to their physician before they drink Red Bull in future."

"The study does not show effects which would go beyond that of drinking a cup of coffee," says Red Bull spokeswoman Linda Rychter. "Therefore, the reported results were to be expected and lie within the normal physiological range." Some of students that participated in the study said they drink as many as eight cans of Red Bull a night when they want to stay awake to study; the cans already warn customers not to drink more than two a day.

Although the study was done with college students, I know that a lot of high school students -- and kids even younger -- drink Red Bull. It might be worthwhile to talk to them to make sure they don't drink too much.

Source

In a draft report recently issued, the Federal Drug Administration has concluded that Bisphenol A is safe --at least when used in food containers. Commonly known as BPA to consumers, the chemical can be found in all sorts of children's products as well as cars, plastic food containers and lining aluminum cans.

This most recent study was one of two funded by the industry itself. Gee, of course any study funded by the industry that stands to make money off it is going to come out with data supporting a chemical's safety. There rationale is that people are exposed to so little of it that it won't do them harm. In other studies BPA has been found in 93% of testees' urine and has been known to cause cancer and behavioral disorders in lab animals. The EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) supports the findings as well.

Opponents of the decision say the study agencies don't have enough data to support their findings that BPA is safe. The country of Canada has banned the use of BPA and products containing the chemical, and national retail chain giants Wal-Mart and Toys R Us are set to remove all children's merchandise containing the chemical from their shelves as of January 2009.

Source

Several studies in a recent New York Times article entitled "Honey, I Plumped the Kids" seem to be pointing in that direction. As we all know by now, human beings are getting bigger--and by bigger, I really mean fatter. In 2005 it was estimated there were 400 million obese people on the planet. Yes, 400 MILLION. And, in what is a recent phenomenon, some of those obese people happened to be women who then became pregnant and gave birth. The result? Well, if the studies are to be believed, a pregnancy for an obese woman can lead to her children being obese as well.

Similar news to this has been circulating for some time now. It's also no news that being obese, whether or not you're pregnant, can have dramatically harmful results. Cancer, diabetes and heart disease are just a few of the pleasantries headed your way if you happen to be obese. But, what does being obese mean for your unborn child? In one of the studies cited in the Times article, women who gave birth to children before they had surgery to correct their obesity were more likely have an obese child; once the women had the surgery, the children they later bore tended to not be obese. Hence, the obesity doesn't on the surface seem to be due to genetic predisposition, but rather to the mother being , well, fat.

One theory as to why this is concerns the fact that people have access to an overabundance of sugar and fat. As a direct result, so do their fetuses. In another study pregnant female rats were allowed to have as much as they wanted of either human junk food or regular old rat food. Those who had access to the junk food ate 40% more food than their rat-chow eating buddies. The baby rats born to the junk food rats were more inclined to eat such food and were more likely to be overweight as a result of consuming too many calories.

So what does this mean for all us preggies out there? Perhaps that we should listen to our doctors and cut back on the sugar and fats. Pregnancy cravings aside, the article and the studies make a good case for being even more healthy when you're pregnant--for you and your baby.

Pic by armchairgeek.

Source

Where I live, the first of the leaves have begun to turn red on a handful of maples, and the crickets are singing their ruckus end of summer song. In a matter of days, school will start.

In a matter of days, if you have a kindergartner or first grader, your child will be embarking on a completely new academic adventure. Back pack in tow, your kid will climb onto a yellow school bus at the curb, or perhaps you'll drive her there and watch as she runs towards her classroom door with a lump the size of a mango pit in your throat.

The first day of school is a nervy, butterflies-in-your-stomach kind of morning for everyone--and to make sure it goes as smoothly as possible, here are a list of a few things to expect and remember on that all important day.

Start the morning with a good breakfast. Much research has been done about the link between breakfast and academic success. And while the first few days (or weeks even) of kindergarten and first grade are less about plunging into academics and more about building a strong classroom community, a good breakfast will give your child an added boost of confidence. Hungry kids are often anxious and moody, and sugar-packed pop tarts and other breakfast items often leave kids crashing mid morning. Opt for oatmeal with brown sugar and raisins, french toast, scrabbled eggs, or even, my son's favorite (our family's version of a toad in the hole): a grilled bagel with a fried egg in the hole.

Pack a healthy snack. After your child arrives in her new classroom, she'll likely spend the morning doing fun activities such as drawing, writing her name and decorating a name tag, and participating in a morning meeting where all the children will get to meet each other and be introduced. Before she starts to delve into the academic part of the morning your child will probably have a chance to eat snack. Remember, many--if not most--classrooms have children with peanut and nut allergies, so instead of packing these stand-bys opt for other protein rich options like a mini bagel & cream cheese, string cheese, yogurt, or veggies & hummus. Your child probably won't eat a lot--so instead of packing a huge amount of one thing, pack small amounts of foods your child likes in reusable containers (think GREEN!)

Include a note. New kindergartners and first graders love getting notes--and their teachers will always be willing to read them--so don't worry if your child can't read yet. Something as simple as "We are so proud of you!" on a post-it, or as fancy as a little letter on specialized princess stationary will make the rest of your child's morning just that much more positive.

After snack your child will probably spend some time exploring books, even if she is not yet a reader, and some time investigating basic math concepts. Your child might also have the chance to meet a few more new teachers if her class has a "special" like music, art, P.E. or technology scheduled for the morning.

Make sure your child will be having a healthy lunch. If your child will be eating a hot lunch from the cafeteria--go over the lunch options in advance, so that there are no tears when she gets something she doesn't want to eat. On days that the menu doesn't work, or if you send a cold lunch every day, remember to think in terms of something from every food group. There are so many great blogs and websites out there right now to provide inspiration for school lunches. I'm kind of into the idea of bento boxes--except, does anyone really have as much time as this super mom to make your kid's lunch look this cool?

In the afternoon your child will probably spend some time listening to a read aloud, doing an art or craft activity, writing, and sharing. A good lunch will give her the necessary foundation for afternoon success and happiness. One thing I can't help but rant about here--because I see it every year--are those ridiculous pre-packaged lunches. The portion sizes are too small--for any of the foods that contain actual nutritional content--and they are packed with sugar and sodium which invariably result in grumpy tired kids. Skip them except for an occasional treat (if at all.)

Be on time to pick your child up. Whether you're meeting your child at the bus stop, or picking her up at school--nothing is worse for your kiddo than expecting to see you...and then not. If you're running really late or are stuck in traffic, call the school secretary and she'll pass the message on to your child's teacher.

Ask specific questions. Without a doubt your child will have an amazing first day--but when you ask her "How was your day?" Odds are she'll say "Fine." And that will be that. The trick to finding out more about your kid's day is to ask her specific questions--like: "Did you find someone to play with at recess?" "What was your favorite thing about lunch time?" or "Did your teacher read a book to the class today?" These kinds of questions will get your child started talking--and soon you'll know all about how their first day went.

As a teacher, the first day of school is one of my favorite days. I love watching the kids come in and get started--bustling and eager, or shy and reserved. I love their new school clothes and their brand new back packs and their ready grins. Happy back-to-school!

Teenagers have lots on their plates, but don't let that be an excuse for skipping chores.

It seems like it should be common sense. Don't diet while pregnant. Yet for many moms these days that seems to be the trend. Many of them are successful at it--but at what cost to their unborn children? In the United States as well as in the UK, pregnant women are succumbing to what is being termed "pregorexia," wherein the consume as little as possible during pregnancy to avoid weight gain. Experts agree this is harmful to both mother and unborn child. Fetuses get their nutrients straight from mommy; when she doesn't supply enough, like with calcium, they get it from her bones. If they can't get the nutrient from the mother, they suffer--kids are born prematurely, with a low birth weight and an increased risk of spina bifida all from mothers being underweight during pregnancy.

In Hollywood, the recent barrage of women giving birth would have have us think they were barely pregnant at all. Most of them gain hardly and weight and sport only the tell-tale bump. Almost as soon as they've given birth, they return to their pre-pregnancy weight, which was scandalously low in the first place. Some, like Nicole Kidman, have even drawn harsh rumors that she was never even pregnant at all--after seeing her less than a month post-baby her body was scarily small, prompting the media to generate the notion that her sister, who'd basically remained under cover during the pregnancy, was the one actually carrying the baby.

With all these Hollywood celebrities maintaining tiny frames while they attempt to bring another human being into the world, it's hard to not feel the pressure to be thin in our own lives. Forget the fact that it's pure misogyny at work, isn't it also the worst thing in the world to deprive not only yourself but your unborn child of vital nutrients and sustenance? Experts suggest that women of normal weight (meaning not underweight nor overweight) gain between 20-25 pounds during a pregnancy. That number was recently lowered from the old notion of anywhere from 25-35 pounds (and in some cases 40). instead of worrying about gaining too much weight, shouldn't we be more focused on getting our children--and ourselves--the nutrition needed to be happy and healthy?

Source

Is hiding vegetables in your kids' food wrong? What if that's the only way to get your child to eat something green (that isn't a booger)? One cookbook author strongly disagrees with the notion that it's ok to sneak healthy foods into unhealthy ones, and she's aiming to do something about it. On her blog and in her new cookbook, anyway. Tanya Steel is the author of the newly published "real food for healthy kids." She's also a "food professional." She and co-author Tracey Seaman instead focus on glorifying vegetables and trying to make them more appealing rather than sticking them in a brownie. According to Steel, who has a good point, why would we want to send the message to our children that brownies are GOOD for you, when in fact we have an obesity crisis on our hands in the United States?

Steel acknowledges that not all children are that easy to coax into eating anything green. She also demures that it can be difficult to work your way back up the beaten path of feeding your kids things that aren't as healthy because you've run out of options of what they'll actually eat. I can empathize with this problem. We recently ended a bout of our son refusing to eat ANYTHING other than Cheerios. Sure, they're healthier than pork rinds, but I didn't spend my entire pregnancy eating broccoli only to have my kid refuse to even look at a vegetable.

Steel offers suggestions to help steer kids in the right direction. She suggests offering kids "no thank you bites" to get them used to a new food and making sure to set a good example by eating healthy foods yourself. She also, of course, promotes her healthy eating cookbook. "real food for healthy kids" may not be The Joy of Cooking that Steel claims (whimsically) it is, but I'm sure there's something in that cookbook, as with any book designed with kids in mind, to offer nutritious alternatives for our children.

What do you think? Is deception the only way to get a vegetable-refuser to consume some legumes? Or is it best to just keep trying to offer different kinds of vegetables in the hopes that eventually you'll see change?

Pic by Mike Licht, NotionsCapital.com.

Source