What message are we sending bottle-feeding families when we place formula in the same retail category as cigarettes?
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
I have a powerful memory of first reflecting on Irish breastfeeding politics. I was 20 and visiting a then- \nnew American coffee chain that had arrived on my local main street. Amid trying to figure out which \nseries of words they wanted me to say to produce what was erstwhile obtainable as a ?large black \ncoffee? I noticed something unusual about the setting: the caf? had a disproportionate number of tables \nfilled with women with babies. It was middayish and perhaps some kind of class had just finished \nnearby. At one table of four, two women were in different stages of openly breastfeeding babies and \nchatting. Initially?in line with my Irishness?I looked away, embarrassed by the possibility of a tiny \namount of nudity. And then, thinking about how nice it was that Ireland?the Ireland of the Magdalene \nlaundries, Mother and Baby homes and no divorce until the mid-1990s?had, at least in this leafy \nsuburb, reached a place where some women felt at peace having a breast, or part of a breast, out at work \nin public. I thought about what a marker of spiritual growth this represented for the country and did my \nbest to offer what I?m sure was an awkward and possibly creepy ?good on you? smile in their general \ndirection. \nI say all of this to say that I think that it?s wonderful that we have come to a place where breastfeeding \nin public can be a more relaxed part of family life. We have National Breastfeeding Week, an annual \n?Latching On? ceremony, Breastival, and increasingly, parental leave contracts include special \nprovisions to support breastfeeding women returning to work. I don?t doubt that we still have far to go, \nand that many still face difficult choices and anxiety in their infants? journeys to solid food, but I?m \nhopeful that the promised land on that front is much closer than it has ever been, and, is approaching \nwith ever-greater haste. \nThese improvements for breastfeeding parents have not sprung from nowhere. Governing bodies at \nvarious levels have implemented policies aimed at increasing national breastfeeding figures because \nIreland?s rates are low when compared with socioeconomically similar countries. This push towards \nbreastfeeding has, in my view, had some negative consequences for people who formula feed. This \narticle is about what I perceive to be a radical dogma that has emerged in Ireland. Having read what I \ncan only describe as a bizarre and frustrating characterisation of the current situation by Sabina Higgins, \nas a research academic, I feel somewhat compelled to say a few words about some of this mythos. I am \nalso a new mother, at great peace with a choice I made early on about feeding my daughter, and \nfrequently flabbergasted by the rhetoric I find in the literature and advice on feeding infants. So, I try \nto do two things below: 1) make the case that the public rhetoric around feeding babies is often extreme \nand misleading, and 2) I discuss my own motivations in deciding to formula feed.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,007 | 0,035 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,008 | 0,006 |
| Communication savante | 0,010 | 0,012 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,003 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,007 | 0,010 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,050 | 0,011 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».