Posted on 05/26/2005 11:43:30 AM PDT by JZelle
Self-styled public-health activists often pursue issues that are surrogates for their real agenda. One example is the continuing attack on infant formula. Activists' underlying agenda is not the well-being of mothers or babies, but disparaging discrediting and disadvantaging multinational food producers. The U.N.'s World Health Organization soon will vote on whether to require prominent warnings that pathogenic microorganisms are present in infant formula. The principal supporters of such labeling -- including such scientific and medical powerhouses as Fiji, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Federated States of Micronesia, Nepal and Palau -- claim using infant formula can lead to malnutrition and respiratory infections and possibly cause death.
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
Since when can people in Third World countries afford baby formula?
What an excellent summary of just how dangerous WHO and the radical NGOs actually are.
WHO should henceforth be known as the Whacko Hysteria Organizers.
Several years ago I remeber listening Dennis Prager concerning this very subject. He had a guest on his program who was a breast feeding advocate, and invited those who disagreed with her to voice their views. It was a rather interesting hour; it seems the split was about 50-50, for various reasons that are mentioned in this article. Ultimately, it's a woman's choice whether she wants to breast or bottle feed her child.
-Regards, T.
The Federated States of Micronesia are part of the United States.
Is it better for the baby? Yup. Cheaper? Yup. Is Mrs. WBill going to try it? Yup. But, I get the distinct impression that - if we have an issue breastfeeding - the women teaching these classes would prefer to see our child starve, before being fed from a bottle. Some of them are real kooks.
Fortunately, Mrs. Wbill is pretty level-headed (that's why I married her!) and she sees through the BS. I can see where women that are younger, or less self-assured, would have real problems though.
What about the pathogenic organisms found in the water used to reconstitute the baby formula in these third world countries? Or the pathogenic organisms in their own mouths? That COULDN'T be the source of any disease, surely??? /sarcasm
People who were bottle-fed themselves or bottle-fed their children get defensive about this, but it is true. Every couple of years there are new discoveries of nutrients in breastmilk that are then added to formula.
But it is not that simple. Nutrients in breast milk also have delivery systems that make absorption more efficient. For example, formula has to have ten times as much iron to provide the baby what he can get from breast milk.
Breastmilk provides more than just nutrition. In third world countries the antibodies can mean the difference between life and death.
Breast milk is as complex as human blood. Would you like to depend on artificial blood to supply everything your body needs? It might be okay temporarily in an emergency, but I wouldn't want to depend on it long term.
I was bottle fed and I'm fine, THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!
You are definitely right about breastfeeding being the best.
Cow milk is problematic with its non-human proteins and soy is very bad for infants and children due to it creating legume allergies ie... peanuts. That's why so many kids are allergic to peanuts now - all the soy formulas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.