Sarah, I can't help but notice by your email address that appear to be
in the UK.  I'm not sure if you're aware, but our health care system in
the US is 1000% different than it is where you are. Doctors, medical
groups, and insurance companies run EVERYTHING here, so no, they do NOT
often weigh the evidence and change their minds, especially when it
could cost them money.  Perhaps if we had a national healthcare system
like you do, the medical profession's main motivation would not be
greed.  If you are at all confused about the way things work here,
there are plenty of documentaries you can check out to set you straight.

The study on breastfeeding in sibling pairs was published two and a half years ago, and did *not* find a difference in IQ related to breastfeeding. (The study is at http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/333/7575/945.)
The one mentioned in the link you gave was a completely different paper, published ten years ago (available at http://www.ajcn.org/cgi/content/full/70/4/525). It was a meta-analysis of all the research into breastfeeding and cognitive outcomes that had been done at that time, and it did indeed find that breastfeeding was associated with an increase in IQ scores. However, the problem with that was that most of the research didn’t control for other things that the mother might be doing that might boost the child’s IQ – mothers who spend more time talking to their children, playing with them, and taking them out to see the world might well also be more likely to breastfeed, and that would give rise to an apparent association between breastfeeding and IQ that was actually due to the effect of those confounding factors rather than the breastfeeding.
A better paper, that actually looked at the quality of the available studies and concentrated on the ones that controlled for maternal stimulation of the child and were decent-quality studies in other ways, found that the results when you only took the good-quality studies in this area were *much* more mixed and equivocal. That one is available at http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/109/6/1044. The biggest analysis of breastfeeding outcomes overall (at http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=hstat1b.chapter.106732) also concluded that breastfeeding was not related to cognitive levels once you allow properly for confounders.
On a different point that you made, I can tell you as a doctor that the medical profession weighs the evidence and changes their minds so often that it makes our poor heads spin trying to keep up with all the new guidelines constantly coming out. It’s just that getting that to filter down to individual doctors is, sadly, a different matter.

Hm. The breastfeeding article states that the infant formulas under consideration did not contain DHA/ ARA, two omega-3 compounds known for improving brain function. These days, most formulas do contain DHA/ ARA or, if they don't (or the mom is rightfully wary of the questionable "natural" source of such), omega-3 compounds are readily available OTC. Also interesting: DHA/ ARA concentrations in breastmilk depend on the mother's consumption of omega-3's in fish etc., so the studies cited would have to take that and its socioeconomic implications into account, too.
And yeah, my boobs stopped making milk 3 months pp. I promise that my little daughter isn't going to come out the village idiot, tho. :-)

You have to let us know if your doctor replies to you about the EFM article! I would LOVE to hear his response! ;)

First time I find this blog and woohoo!! What a topic!!
I had a breech birth without a C-section. I had probably the last midwife alive who was willing to do that.
The experience was amazing, everything went smoothly and neat. And there's one hell of a story to tell because it's the baby who does all the work, she pushed like a trooper, it was awesome!
And I've been able to encourage a colleague to go for a vaginal birth as well, even if her baby was breech.
Thanks for this post, I'm coming back to read more!!!