Tik Tok is leaving MN as a result of the Milupa advertisement on the home page.

mears always said she'd wait for the outcome -

Come on Mears and Tiktok...you don't get away that easily....heh, heh, heh!

Back to the treadmill! (please)

Indeed batters. And I know everyone is pleased about the thread that they have now posted re the advert but it leaves a bad taste of bullying in my mouth.

It would be a far weaker site without Tiktok and Mears, IMO.

I hope Tiktok reconsiders in the light of MN's revised advertising policy.

wise words batters

Updating.

she was brill when I had problems feeding dd2

(your 10.56 post on Tiktok giving you more help than Apamil)

Well said, Enid.

Jools if you look on the NCT site, it will give info.

Also the WHO site has a load of info on this.

nobody knows then?

can anyone tell me or point to some research on how the benefits to breastfeeding (as stated in alohas post) are made?

I'm not disputing it just wondering - in my own little world I know people who would prove and disprove these claims.

btw - I do agree that breast is best

It may not sound very nice to say it, but as a stand alone fact it is true.

But as you say, I'm sure there are much stronger correlations (in fact proven causation) between many other lifestyle factors and diabetes/high blood pressure/certain cancers and my personal risk assessment has always been that it is much better to add 30 years to DS's life by trying to teach him to eat healthily, exercise regularly and not smoke, than fret about the 5 years he might have lost by my mix feeding him.

And after all that, he'll probably get run over by a bus when he's 42

Cross posted - this thread takes a bugger of a long time to load now, doesn't it?
Hard to post on that subject without sounding tactless or cruel, which I don't want to be.

Actually I think that was a crap way of putting it.
Instead think of it that if breastmilk is the standard then you raise your child's risk of certain illnesses if you give formula. It's doesn't sound very nice to say that though. And yes, we do all take risks with our kids, if we judge the risk to be worth it or unavoidable. I'm certainly not perfect and my ds's diet could be better and I should give him more fruit and vegetables for example.

Oh thank you Aloha, I think you have answered my question before I had time to post it!

Well, no, I've not seen anyone here talking about it (and I have tried to pay attention throughout the whole thread), but, when you get a quote like this from Baby Milk Action:

'The aggressive, idealizing and dishonest promotion in the advertisements remains unchanged and undermines efforts to raise awareness of the risks of artificial feeding.' (my italics)

you do start to wonder. It seems there are two options:

1. there are risks, that no-one wishes to discuss for fear of undermining formula feeding mothers
2. there are no risks, but there is scaremongering.

Both equally unpalatable, I'm afraid. But which is it, I wonder?

Gizmo, the phrase 'risks of formula feeding' is used instead of 'the benefits of breastfeeding' because breastfeeding is the normal way to feed to babies in the sense that it is the food that babies are designed to eat, and it fulfils many important functions, many of which we don't fully understand. If you choose not to breastfeed, there are risks involved in that decision. For example, breastfeeding reduces the risk of certain types of breast cancer in both the breastfeeding mother and in her daughter who is breastfed. Breastfeeding probably plays a role in regulating your weight over your whole lifetime, and in keeping your blood pressure healthy. Breastfed babies are less likely to become diabetic. There are many other correlations.
You can phrase it as 'breastmilk has many benefits over formula' but that does sort of imply to some people that breastmilk is not the norm.
Just as you might say that looking before you cross the road has benefits, but it probably makes more sense to say that not looking is risky.
Does that make any sense?

Gizmo I don't think there's any harm done to a baby by feeding them formula and I don't think anyone has said there is.

But I do remember Mears (? maybe?) once posting that the biggest reason for admission of children under 1 into hospital is for gastric problems, and that those babies are disproportionately likely to be bottlefed.

well Enids Own Old Wives Tale about formula fed babies is that they make fussy eaters as the poor old babies get one taste rather than the varied taste of breastmilk

i always thought that bottle feeding is second best because it lacks things that breastfeeding can offer babies - not that it is actually harmful

Can anyone direct me to any threads where there are clear explanations of the harm that feeding formula does babies?

I would like to understand what the risks are if you chose to bottle feed. I understand that breastfeeding has many, many benefits, but I don't understand if there is actual evidence that formula is harmful (in the UK, obviously. I do understand that it is a killer in countries where water supplies are not reliable).

Please, I'm sure this discussion has already been done to death in other threads, so I don't want to revive it here - just a link will be enough.

Agree enid. Whilst I'm sure M are paying well for it, it could cost MN a lot more in terms of lost credibility if "experts" feel it is a compromise too far. At the end of the dya that will affect those for whom their advice is most vital. I still wonder if the use of the A brand name is actually even just within the ASA standards since it is an umbrella name for all their milk products including Infant Formula.