Breastfeeding...

devil_in_a_blue_dress

Yeah, but it doesn't burn the 500 calories that your baby consumes. It burns some, which is why a lot of women do lose weight. Just not as many as a woman should actually be consuming in order to maintain the milk supply.

ETA: I did just Google it. It only burns about 150 calories to produce 25 ounces of milk. Those calories are drawn from the fat stores accumulated during pregnancy. So yeah, it burns some, but not enough to be ultra concerned about. Just eat the extra 500 that your baby will consume, or, 20 calories per ounce pumped.

Babies that age eat around 40-50 ozs of milk a day if they are only nursing.

No they don't. The average baby only drinks 25 ounces a day. That amount drops slightly once they start eating solid foods.

My current baby has never had more than 30 ounces of milk in one day. My first was the same. My son, who grew extremely fast, did drink about 36-48 ounces a day during growth spurts, and that was only after he was 6 months old.

How many calories you burn, like any 'exercise' would be based on your personal statistics like height and weight. That is why there I gave a calorie range of 200-500. It doesn't matter how many calories the actual milk is since the volume is being replaced. According to the Handbook of Paediatric Nutrition, 25 - 40 oz. is what a child that age should be eating -- so I am not sure where you 25 ounces a day statistic comes from, but 25 ounces is light. My daughter, who was bottle fed, ate closer to 40 and she is in the 50% percentile height, weight wise - just depends on the baby. Also, you'd have to be assuming the OP isn't expressing milk for storage. My recently nursing sister in law was just here, she tells me at this point she was expressing 12-24 ounces per day, in addition to what her baby was eating -- so there is just lots to take into consideration. But milk production definitely burns a real number of calories and should definitely be eaten back if somebody is eating 1,200 calories.

OP, I am glad you're eating some of those calories back. After I had my daughter, I focused on losing the weight (I was sick during my pregnancy, so I didn't gain much -- but I still felt horrible). People frequently told me not to worry about losing the weight, blah blah. While I know it was meant in a very positive way, it ticked me off -- it's entirely ok to want to shed the baby weight, and have your own goals outside taking care of your baby.

I don't understand what you mean when you say "the calories of the milk don't matter because the volume is being replaced". That doesn't make any sense. You have to eat enough calories to actually put them into the milk. Otherwise, they would just be taken from the mother's body. So, whatever amount the baby is taking, whether it's 25 ounces (which, do some research, it's what just about every source says is average-from ob's to pediatricians, to any number of websites about breastfeeding) or whether it's 50 ounces, those calories need to be consumed (again, 20 calories per ounce of milk). The actual amount of calories burned to produce the milk is negligible, just like the calories burned to produce a pint of blood after blood donation.

So yeah, the 500 calorie estimate is assuming her baby takes 25 ounces and that she is not pumping. I'm very familiar with how this all works. I've got three kids. I pumped for 6 months (60 ounces a day, 25-30 of which my baby drank, the rest got frozen). I'm not an idiot. Stop arguing with me just for the sake of arguing.

I'm not arguing you with for the sake of arguing, the calories burned producing milk are not negligible, on the low end you burn 1,400 per week producing milk -- they count and should be consumed. Suggesting otherwise is contrary to just about every reliable medical source. Period. Your body needs extra calories to actually produce the milk, not just to provide nutrients for the milk (or as you say "put them into milk"). When you are lactating, you're body is taking on another basic function and you raise your total daily energy expenditure (your TDEE). That's where the volume comment came it -- you seem to be totally ignoring the fact that your body is CONSTANTLY producing milk- similar to say breathing, not donating blood. You might lose 20 calories to "give" to the milk, but you still burned 100-400 to get the milk to put nutrients into in the first place. And that's for just what the baby need for food -- if she's storing up a 6 month supply like you, she's burning WAY more.

It's great you have children and pumped all that milk -- I really do hope you feel some sense of achievement from that, but that doesn't mean you are providing accurate information. Also, you're initial post's message was basically "don't worry about losing weight now, you're a mom and that all that matters". While I'm sure that's well intentioned because women are under so much pressure to bounce back, it's still smug and it's not helpful. She has every right to want to lose weight or have her body back for herself without people saying boo about it -- advise like that has NOTHING to do with her original post and yet you added it because you have three kids and seem to think that makes you an expert on anything aside from your own experience.

As to how many ounces a 2 month old should eat -- every piece of literature I still have from when I had my daughter indicates a range of 25-40 ounces for 2-3 months. So, consider that research done.

LovelySammi

Thank you for taking the time to answer & do the research you did, I appreciate it. Sorry it seemed to have fueled up something there. I've learned that some people are very confident in their opinions, and sometimes mistake them with facts. I did see the line about not worrying to lose weight, and although I did have a smart remark to respond I decided against it because it wouldn't have been worth arguing over. I want to lose weight so I am going to do what I can and that will not affect my baby or my mothering skills... Thanks for "sticking up for me" lol ;-)