And They Called it Women’s Liberation

I was once reading the Equal Pay Act of 1963 which John F. Kennedy signed into law. Which provides (in part): within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs[,]. A thought crossed my mind to research on it thoroughly. So I did and found that up until now (more than four decades) men’s and women’s salaries have yet to reach parity. Also, during the research I came across this well researched & written article by Areeba bint Khalid, which state many facts along with the history.

How Women Were Lured Out of the Home in the USA

By Areeba bint Khalid
Posted: 9 Jamad-ul-Awwal 1424, 27 June 2004

From the 1800s to the present day, family life in the West has remarkably changed. While the West calls this change part of the women freedom movement, a look at history may show otherwise.

America before the 1800s was a farming country and ninety percent of the population lived and worked on private farms. Households were mainly self-sufficient–nearly everything needed was produced in the house. The few things that could not be produced at home were bought from local craftsmen. Some other things, especially imports from Europe, were bought from stores. Males would take care of the fields and females would take care of the home. In addition, they would engage in spinning, knitting, weaving, and taking care of the farm animals.

Industrial Revolution

The Industrial Revolution, which began around the early 1800s, brought a major change to this way of life. In 1807, in the wake of the war between Great Britain and France, President Jefferson signed the Embargo Act, which stopped all trade between Europe and America. The Act meant that European goods would no longer be available in the US and Americans would have to produce them. One major European import to America was cloth, and so merchants used this opportunity to create a cloth industry in America.

In 1814, Francis Cabot Lowell, a man from Boston opened the first modern factory. Work here was to be done way faster than before. Instead of manually making things in houses, things were to be made at higher speeds in a factory and all stages of the work were to be completed under the same roof. Now what Lowell needed were workers. He found out that women, especially unmarried daughters of the farmers, were more economical to use in labor than men. They were also more willing to work as hired people in factories.

But Lowell had to make the working outside of home acceptable in a society which was not used to it. He assured parents that their daughters would be taken care of and kept under discipline. And he built a boarding community where the women workers lived and worked together.

Soon after, more and more factories emerged across America. Factory owners followed Lowell’s example of hiring unmarried women. By 1850 most of the country’s goods were made in factories. As production of goods moved from the country to the city, people too moved from the country to the city.

For money to be earned, people had to leave their homes. When women worked on the farm, it was always possible to combine work and family. When work for women moved outside the home, however, the only women who could follow it were those without family responsibilities or those who had no husband or no income. Likewise, the only women who could take care of their families were the ones that didn’t have work.

This working out of home became a part of life for unmarried women. They would work until their marriage. But as time passed, women found family life interfering with their work life and instead of viewing working out of home as optional, they viewed family life as such. Many women started delaying marriage even more and some decided to stay single.

Married women however stayed home and dedicated their time to their children. Now that there wasn’t any farm work to do, women had even more time to spend with the children. In 1900 less than about 5.6% of married women worked outside. If a married woman were to work, it would be considered that her husband was invalid or that she was poor.

World War I

The first major entry of married women to the workforce came during World War I in 1914. Men went to fight the war and the country needed workers to take over the jobs they left behind. Unmarried women were not sufficient for the labor needs, so employers started to invite married women too, to work. By 1919, 25% of the women in the workforce were married. But this was only the beginning.

Another change World War I brought was the entry of women to the army. About 13,000 women enlisted in the US Navy, mostly doing clerical work–the first women in US history to be admitted to full military rank.

Great Depression

The Great Depression came in the 1930s. The unemployment rate climbed from 3.2% in 1929 to 23.6% in 1932. Jobs became scarce for skilled people and men. Fathers went to search for jobs. Some, under despair, deserted their families. The responsibility of earning fell on mothers in many families.

Most women and children, however, found jobs more easily than men because of the segregation of work categories for men and women. Although 80% of men during the Great Depression opposed their wives entering the workforce under any circumstances, economic factors made it necessary for the women to work. Hours were long and pay was low. Twenty percent of white women were in the workforce.

World War II

World War II came in the early 1940s. Men were drafted to fight, and America needed workers and supplies. Again, the employers looked towards the women for labor. Unmarried and married women were invited to work, as had been done during World War I.

But still, public opinion was generally against the working of married women. The media and the government started a fierce propaganda campaign to change this opinion. The federal government told the women that victory could not be achieved without their entry into the workforce. Working was considered part of being a good citizen, a working wife was a patriotic person.

The government founded the Magazine Bureau in 1942. The Bureau published Magazine War Guide, a guide which told magazines which themes stories they should cover each month to aid war propaganda. For September 1943, the theme was “Women at Work”. The slogan for this was “The More Women at Work the Sooner We Win.” Magazines developed stories that glorified and promoted the placement of women into untraditional jobs where workers were needed. The idea was that if smaller, unexciting jobs were portrayed as attractive and noble more women would join the work force.

The media created Rosie the Riveter, a mythical character to encourage women into the workforce. Rosie was portrayed as a patriotic woman, a hero for all American women. “All the day long, Whether rain or shine, She’s a part of the assembly line. She’s making history, Working for victory, Rosie the Riveter… There’s something true about, Red, white, and blue about, Rosie the Riveter.”

The propaganda efforts worked. More than six million women joined the workforce during the war, the majority of them married women. In 1940, before the war, only 36% of women workers were married. By 1945, after the war, 50% of women workers were married. The middle class taboo against a working wife had been repealed.

Post World War II

The 1950s marked an era of prosperity in the lives of American families. Men returned from war and needed jobs. Once again, the government and media got together to steer the opinion of the public. This time, however, they encouraged women to return home, which shows that the women were brought out not for their freedom but because workers were needed.

But this effort was not as successful and was abandoned quickly. First, women from lower economic ranks had to remain in the workforce because of economic necessity. And second, there came the rise of consumer culture.

The baby boom took place during the 1950s as well. Women who returned home dedicated their lives once again to their children. But around the same time an important change had come in the American life. This was the spread of the television. By 1960, 90% of the population owned at least one set. Families would gather around the screen for entertainment. In the early days, everything including commercials was watched with great interest.

Most middle-class families could not afford the goods the television declared necessary to maintain or enhance quality of life with one paycheck alone. Many women returned to work in order to live according to “the American standard of living,” whatever that meant to them.

The number of American women in the workforce from 1940 to 1950 increased by nine percent. From 1930 to 1940 there had only been a three percent increase.

Effects

As mothers returned to work, the television became the most important caretaker of a child. Children in the 1950s spent most of their non-sleeping hours in front of the television screen.

In 1940, less than 8.6% of mothers with children under eighteen worked. By 1987, 60.2% of women with children under eighteen were working.

As wives assumed larger roles in their family’s financial support, they felt justified in demanding that husbands perform more childcare and housework. Across the years, divorce rates doubled reaching a level where at least 1 out of 2 marriages was expected to end in divorce. Marriage rates and birthrates declined. The number of single parent families rapidly increased. People grew unhappy with their lives, when compared to the lives of people on television.

Women working affected the society in many different ways. The first and most important of these was that children with working mothers were left alone without the care of a mother. As the number of working women increased, the number of children growing up unsupervised increased, and with this increased crime among teens.

Since most women placed their career ahead of family life, family life was greatly affected since unmarried women were generally able to make more money than married ones. For example, according to a study by a Harvard economist, women physicians who were unmarried and had no children earned thirteen percent more per year than those who were married and fifteen percent more than those with children.

Today

The majority of women still work at the lower levels of the economic pyramid. Most are employed in clerical positions, factory work, retail sales, or service jobs. Around 50% of the workforce is female. While about 78% of all cashiers and 99% of all secretaries today are female, only 31% of managers and administrators are female. Equality in the workplace has been a mirage but it has conned millions of women into leaving their homes and destroying the family structure.

It was only when economic or political factors made it necessary to get more workers that women were called to work. The Industrial Revolution, the Great Depression, and the World Wars, all the major events which increased the proportion of women workers, were times when the capitalists required more workers in order to be successful in their plans and so they used women.

The move of women from home to the public workforce has been gradual. First poor women went. Then unmarried women. Then married women without children. Then married women without young children And then, all women. The same thing can be seen to be happening in developing countries around the world, as the West spreads its propaganda of freedom for women to work. The results of this move will probably be the same too.

Bibliography

• Hawes, Joseph M., ed. American Families: A Research Guide and Historical Handbook. New York: Greenwood Press,- 1990.
• Mintz, Steven. Domestic Revolutions. New York: the Free Press, 1988.
• Gary B. Nash, American Odyssey. New York: Glencoe McGraw-Hill, 2002.
• Wilson, Margaret Gibbons. The American Woman in Transition. Connecticut: Greenwood Press, 1979.
• Goldstein, Joshua S. War and Gender: How Gender Shapes the War System and Vice Versa. Cambridge University Press, 2001.
• U.S. Department of Labor, Women’s Bureau. Women in the Force, 1900-2002. http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/0/1/0/4/6/7/A0104673.html
• The Library of Congress Rosie the Riveter: Real Women Workers in World War II http://www.loc.gov/rr/program/journey/rosie-transcript.html

Cancer cell treatment = Curry Spice

An extract found in the bright yellow curry spice turmeric can kill off cancer cells, scientists have shown.

The chemical – curcumin – has long been thought to have healing powers and is already being tested as a treatment for arthritis and even dementia.

Now tests by a team at the Cork Cancer Research Centre show it can destroy gullet cancer cells in the lab.

Cancer experts said the findings in the British Journal of Cancer could help doctors find new treatments.

Dr Sharon McKenna and her team found that curcumin started to kill cancer cells within 24 hours.

‘Natural’ remedy

The cells also began to digest themselves, after the curcumin triggered lethal cell death signals.

Dr McKenna said: “Scientists have known for a long time that natural compounds have the potential to treat faulty cells that have become cancerous and we suspected that curcumin might have therapeutic value.”

Dr Lesley Walker, director of cancer information at Cancer Research UK, said: “This is interesting research which opens up the possibility that natural chemicals found in turmeric could be developed into new treatments for oesophageal cancer.

“Rates of oesophageal cancer rates have gone up by more than a half since the 70s and this is thought to be linked to rising rates of obesity, alcohol intake and reflux disease so finding ways to prevent this disease is important too.”

Each year around 7,800 people are diagnosed with oesophageal cancer in the UK. It is the sixth most common cause of cancer death and accounts for around five percent of all UK cancer deaths.

{Ref: BBC News – Health, 28th Oct 2009
h**p://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8328377.stm }

Village ‘witches’ beaten in India

This is one of the most strange news Ive ever read. Just see how contradictory and far from Truth this is. Not that the crux of the news is false but the ‘way’ it is being shown to the world.

First they say that the victims had been labelled as witches by a local cleric. And then they say, there are certain women in the village who are possessed by holy spirit and can identify those who are witches. These women recently identified five women from the same village as being witches who practised witchcraft and brought miseries to the area.

Now the question is, How can ‘a’ local cleric become ‘certain women’ ?

Secondly, deputy inspector general Murari Lal Meena said no one in mob came forward to help the victims. Whereas in the video, all those who can understand Hindi or Urdu can clearly hear the mob yelling in rage to beat them up, etc. When they themselves are wholly involved in this act, saying such that ‘no one in mob came forward to help’ is just utter nonsense.

How much lies can one stand !! sigh.. I wonder where the so called women rights people in India are !?

Five women were paraded naked, beaten and forced to eat human excrement by villagers after being branded as witches in India’s Jharkhand state.

Local police said the victims were Muslim widows who had been labelled as witches by a local cleric.

The incident occurred on Sunday in a remote village in Deoghar district.

Correspondents say the abuse of women who are branded as witches is common, but rare footage of the incident has caused outrage across India.

Police went to Pattharghatia village after being informed about the incident by a group of villagers.

‘Possessed’

They have lodged a case against 11 villagers, including six women. Four people have been arrested in connection with the incident.

Armed police have since been deployed to the area.

“On Sunday morning the victims were taken to a playground where hundreds had assembled to watch the ghastly incident,” deputy inspector general of police Murari Lal Meena told the BBC.

“No one in the mob came forward to rescue the victims as they were being stripped and beaten up,” he said.

The victims are now under police protection.

Police say that people in Pattharghatia believe that certain women in their village are possessed by a “holy spirit” that can identify those who practise witchcraft.

“These women recently identified five women from the same village as being witches who practised witchcraft and brought miseries to the area,” a police official said.

Soon, an unruly mob broke into their huts, dragged them out and started beating them up.

Footage of the incident has been aired on television channels in India prompting outrage.

Hundreds of people, mostly women, have been killed in India because their neighbours thought they were witches.

Experts say superstitious beliefs are behind some of these attacks, but there are occasions when people – especially widows – are targeted for their land and property.

Ref: { by Salman Ravi – BBC News, Ranchi
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8315980.stm }

The Wooden Bowl

Ofcourse, one might have read this already elsewhere. And since it’s very inspiring I thought to post it here too.

A frail old man went to live with his son, daughter-in-law, and four-year-old grandson. The old man’s hands trembled,his eyesight was blurred, and his step faltered. The family ate together at the table. But the elderly grandfather’s shaky hands and failing sight made eating difficult. Peas rolled off his spoon onto the floor. When he grasped the glass, milk spilled on the tablecloth. The son and daughter-in-law became irritated with the mess. We must do something about Grandfather,” said the son. I’ve had enough of his spilled milk, noisy eating, and food on the floor. So the husband and wife set a small table in the corner. There, Grandfather ate alone while the rest of the family enjoyed dinner. Since Grandfather had broken a dish or two, his food was served in a wooden bowl.

When the family glanced in Grandfather’s direction, sometimes he had a tear in his eye as he sat alone. Still, the only words the couple had for him were sharp admonitions when he dropped a fork or spilled food.

The four-year-old watched it all in silence. One evening before supper, the father noticed his son playing with wood scraps on the floor. He asked the child sweetly, “What are you making?” Just as sweetly, the boy responded, “Oh, I am making a little bowl for you and Mama to eat your food when I grow up.” The four-year-old smiled and went back to work.

The words so struck the parents that they were speechless. Then tears started to stream down their cheeks. Though no word was spoken, both knew what must be done. That evening the husband took Grandfather’s hand and gently led him back to the family table. For the remainder of his days he ate every meal with the family. And for some reason, neither husband nor wife seemed to care any longer when a fork was dropped, milk spilled, or the tablecloth soiled.

Allah mentions in Quran, Surah Al-'Isrā' 17:23-24

” And your Lord has decreed that you worship none but Him. And that you be dutiful to your parents. If one of them or both of them attain old age in your life, say not to them a word of disrespect, nor shout at them but address them in terms of honour. ” (verse 23)

” And lower unto them the wing of submission and humility through mercy, and say: “My Lord! Bestow on them Your Mercy as they did bring me up when I was small. ” (verse 24)

Reason and Revelation

By Khalid Baig

American economist Robert Samuelson recently made an interesting observation about the American society in his Newsweek column: “America’s glories and evils are tightly fused together.” Quoting sociologist Seymour Lipset, he asserts that America’s economic vitality and progress come from the same source as do crime, family breakdown, inequality, and vulgarity. Freedom and individualism have fired economic advance, yet have also inhibited social control. But why the qualities that bring the best in a nation also should bring the worst in it? Is humanity doomed by having its vices and virtues so intricately mixed?

Samuelson does not probe the issue. Instead he seems to be happily resigned to it. “We are burdened as well as blessed by our beliefs,” he says. Economics, we may be reminded, is the dismal science.

Actually the world is not doomed by design. Samuelson comes very close to the truth but he confuses approaches or tools with attributes. A tool that works great in one area is also being used in another for which it was never designed. The problem lies with the user who keeps on insisting on its use in the second area citing its success in the first. To put matters simply, it’s the free use of reason and intellect that is behind most of America’s (and West’s in general) phenomenal scientific and material progress. It’s the use of the same tool in moral, and religious life that has caused its equally phenomenal moral degeneration!

Every tool has a designated area of application. Outside, it will fail to work. A 4 bit computer is good for some elementary math involving whole numbers. It may multiply 2 by 20 and give the correct answer instantly. But burdened with complex calculations involving several decimal digits, it will give the WRONG answers. A weighing scale meant for gold will not work for iron and vice versa. Their resolution and capacity are inappropriate for those applications.

Same with the tools we use for learning about the world. Our senses and intellect are wonderful things. Science and technology are all about their use. Certainly it was free inquiry driven by reason that led to so many of the discoveries of science. It happened at an accelerated pace during the past four centuries and the results are everywhere around us to be seen.

But a tool that is so great in one area may be totally useless, even dangerous, in another. Pure Reason, uninformed by Divine Guidance, is a defective tool for deciding purpose of life or suggesting its values. What is Right and what is Wrong? These questions require knowledge beyond what we can acquire by using our senses and reasoned analysis. As a direct result, everyone’s reasoning is different. That is why philosophers have never been able to agree upon what should be the goal of life. Happiness? Survival? Pleasure? Love? Self-fulfillment? You name it. In addition, it is impossible for us to separate our reasoning in these matters from our feelings. Pure or uninformed reason becomes just a tool to justify what we desire.

Today West’s problem is that it has accepted the wrong tool for developing its moral compass. Probably the majority of its people abhor homosexuality. They may know that it is an abomination and evil. Yet today same-sex marriages are getting legal sanction in the West. And they are helpless in trying to stop its advances. Why? Because they cannot argue that it is wrong based on pure reason. It is easier to make a case against smoking in public places, then against the worst forms of immorality. Such is the result when pure reason becomes the accepted arbiter of right and wrong.

There is nothing modern about this either. Several centuries ago, Obaidullah Hasan Qirwani, a leader of the renegade batani cult declared it foolish for a brother to marry his beautiful sister to a total stranger, while trying to be content with a less qualified wife — another stranger. She would be much more suited to be wife of her own brother, with whom she may be a lot more compatible, he argued. His argument is, no doubt, sickening. But is there a counter argument based on pure reason?

Certainly mankind needs a superior tool for determining the values and purpose of life. A source of guidance that is based on certain knowledge, not conjecture. One that can inform our desires rather than being subservient to them. This is what Prophets, Alayhim assalam, came with. They claimed to have access to the higher source of knowledge, the Divine Revelation. Those who accepted them used reason and observation to verify their authenticity and character. But they accepted Divine Revelation as a SUPERIOR source of knowledge! That is why a son can tell his father:

“O my father! To me has come knowledge that had not reached you. So follow me. I will guide you to a Way that is even and straight.” (Maryam, 19:43).

All this is obvious, except in implications. We accept this is Right and that is Wrong because the Revelation TOLD us, not because it PROVED it to us. What is wrong with riba? Gambling? Pork? Alcohol? Revelation told us that they were wrong. Why is hijab necessary? Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam, ordered that. What are the rights of men and women? Those given to them by Allah and His Prophet, Salla-Allahu alayhi wa sallam. The attribute of the Muslims is that they “listened and followed” (Al-Baqarah, 2:285). It is not that they listened and questioned, and argued, and investigated and then if they felt like it, they followed. That is also THE message of Prophet Ibrahim, alayhi assalm’s, sacrifice, a defining event for Islam. For the Qur’an describes the moment when the father and son were ready for the ultimate sacrifice by saying: “When they surrendered” (Al-Saffat, 37:103). Literally it can also be translated: “When they accepted Islam.” For pure reason could have raised a million questions about the command for that sacrifice.

Normally it is difficult for us to say “I don’t know.” It is even more difficult for nations to admit a weakness in their celebrated tools of inquiry. That is the dilemma of the modern world, which sees so much wrong with itself but cannot bring itself to admitting the problem with its basic approach. But a Muslim is the person who has both the wisdom and the courage to surrender before the higher source of knowledge and guidance. For him Revelation informs his reason and his reason controls his emotions. Such is the person who is blessed, but not burdened, by his beliefs.

Is Islamic finance the answer?

Investments worth £800bn are made through Islamic finance products.

Experts in Islamic finance believe their way of doing business has shielded them from the global credit crisis.

But how does it differ from conventional Western finance?

A former executive director of the International Monetary Fund, Dr Abbas Mirakhor, says wider Islamic economics relies on God’s guidance, handed down almost 1,400 years ago.

There is a “consciousness of a supreme creator and a system that he has provided”, he says.

What we know as the conventional Western way does not have that, which is “really the major difference between the two”, he adds.

In practical terms, the most significant difference is that charging interest is not allowed in Islamic finance.

Neither are most forms of speculative investment permitted, such as hedging or derivatives trading.

“We don’t recognise the concept of interest… to look for some profit from trading money,” explains Dr Bambang Brodjonegoro from the Islamic Development Bank.

“In the Islamic concept, money is strictly for the purpose of exchange or storing value, but not for the transaction of looking for excessive profit,” he says.

Sharing risks

How then, does an Islamic bank, and a customer who puts money in that bank, make a profit?

The system is asset-based, with tangible assets or commodities at the heart of it. There are buyers and sellers, not borrowers and lenders.

Here is a comparison.

In Los Angeles a customer who wants to borrow money to buy a car would go to a conventional bank and agree a loan. The bank would hand over the money.

There would be regular repayments, which include interest accrued on the loan.

In Lahore a customer could go to an Islamic bank and sign a contract with the bank to buy a car from them.

The bank would not loan the money but buy the car itself. Then it would sell it to the customer at a mark up.

The customer would agree to pay back the cost in instalments over a regular period.

One of the core principles at the heart of Islamic economics is risk sharing. The bank and the people who put their money in it share any profit, or loss, from investments.

“In Islam we appreciate merit, so if someone works harder in a business…they (the bank) will get the sharing benefit,” explains Dr Brodjonegoro.

“The more important thing is that there will be no bank that rules everything. It will be bank and borrowers at the same level and they share the risk and benefit.”

Alternative way

This sense of equality is important. It is one of the defining characteristics which proponents of Islamic economics say make it different from the conventional western way.

Islamic economics also highlights a belief in benefitting the wider Muslim community.

The former IMF Executive Director Dr Mirakhor says that it chimes with “a movement toward becoming more ‘other conscious’…having consciousness about the other fellow, about the general public interest.”

This contrasts with what he described as the “simple narrow basis of self interest which motivates, supposedly, the economic agents in the liberal economic system.”

Some see the Islamic model as an alternative. Others see it as complimentary to the system which has dominated the western world.

“I don think that this Islamic banking system is the alternative, that we have one or the other. I think this is a complimentary service, a way of doing service,” says Prof Ekmeleddin Ihsanoglu, Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Countries.

“It needs to be an option there where people can find different ways of doing the same thing.”

Compromising principles

Islamic economics is not the exclusive preserve of Muslims.

London is emerging as a major financial centre for Islamic finance. Islamic banking products are also widely used by non Muslims in Malaysia.

UK has 8th largest Islamic finance sector according to the DTI

“This is an alternative system that can be applied to everybody. Everybody can use it regardless of their religion,” says Dr Brodjonegoro from the Islamic Development Bank.

Major banks like Britain’s HSBC and Citi of the US have set up Islamic banking subsidiaries that are flourishing. Some of the champions of the Islamic way want to see business expand beyond the natural market of Muslim countries.

They believe that now, more than ever, there is a market for non Muslims who share in the values espoused in Islamic economics.

But there are some who fear that by expanding the Islamic way is becoming less Islamic.

Time to reflect

“Unfortunately what is happening is that Islamic finance in some ways is moving more and more closely to the conventional finance,” says Prof Habib Ahmed, a world authority on Islamic finance.

“If you look at the development in the past few years, Islamic finance appears to be mimicking most of the products of conventional finance.”

There has never been a better time to champion an economic model which is different to the one laying in shreds on Wall Street, says Prof Ahmed. But he believes that the Islamic concept is being diluted.

“As people after this crisis are looking for solutions…the Islamic finance industry is moving towards that very system,” he says.

“I think it is time for Islamic finance to pause and think of the direction it is taking”.

Ref: {BBC News – By Robin Brant – Malaysia correspondent
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8025410.stm }

Breastfeeding ‘protects mother’

Women who breastfeed their babies may be lowering their own risk of a heart attack, heart disease or stroke, research suggests.

A US study found women who breastfed for more than a year were 10% less likely to develop the conditions than those who never breastfed.

Even breastfeeding for at least a month may cut the risk of diabetes, high blood pressure and high cholesterol.

The research features in the journal Obstetrics and Gynaecology.

The study adds to a growing body of evidence suggesting breastfeeding has health benefits for both mother and baby.

Research has found that breastfeeding reduces a woman’s risk of ovarian and breast cancer and osteoporosis in later life.

And the list of benefits for the baby is long, with breast milk credited with protecting against obesity, diabetes, asthma and infections of the ear, stomach and chest.

The latest US study, by the University of Pittsburgh, focused on nearly 140,000 post-menopausal women.

On average, it had been 35 years since the women had last breastfed – suggesting the beneficial impact lasts for decades.

As well as cutting the risk of heart problems, breastfeeding for more than a year cut the risk of high blood pressure by 12%, and diabetes and high cholesterol by around 20%.

Fat stores

It has been suggested that breastfeeding may reduce cardiovascular risk by reducing fat stores in the body.

However, the researchers believe the effect is more complex, with the release of hormones stimulated by breastfeeding also playing a role.

Researcher Dr Eleanor Bimla Schwarz said: “We have known for years that breastfeeding is important for babies’ health; we now know that it is important for mothers’ health as well.

“Breastfeeding is an important part of the way women’s bodies recover from pregnancy.

“When this process is interrupted women are more likely to have a number of health problems (including heart attacks and strokes).

“The longer a mother nurses her baby, the better for both of them.”

In the UK, the Department of Health recommends exclusive breastfeeding for six months.

June Davison, a cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, said: “Breastfeeding has long been thought to be beneficial to baby and mother.

“This research suggests that it might have also have heart health benefits for mum too.

“However, it only showed an association between breast feeding and these health benefits. We will need further research to understand why this is the case.”

Ref: [ BBC news - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8008678.stm ]

Islamic Banking

Image credit goes to khalil @ bendib.com