"is to persuade posters like you of the need to tackle this subject carefully and with tact"
I agree that we should all start from the position that as mothers we all try to do our best for our babies - based on what we know and what is feasible and livable for us as individuals.
It makes me upset when I see people implying that those who stopped bf early didn't 'try hard enough' or don't care enough. I know this isn't true. I also know that women who don't choose to bf feel they have their babies' best interests at heart. I acknowledge the grief and anger of women who tried and couldn't breastfeed.
But the disappointment, grief and (unnecessary) guilt of women who can't/haven't bf their baby is often used to stifle debate on this subject - to call for silence on the subject of the health risks of using formula - which are not widely known about or understood. I think this is plain wrong. I really don't think anyone has a moral or personal argument for trying to suppress the discussion about formula.
I also think it's outrageous the way those of us who voice concerns about formula milk as 'nazis', 'zealots' - all the mud slinging, spite and sneering. It's really ugly and it's WRONG. We have a right to discuss this issue frankly and freely. If you've used formula and it upsets you to hear this - put your fingers in your ears. If you disagree with what's being said then put up a logical argument against. But stop with all the moralising, emotional blackmail and the personal insults. It's demeaning.
"The government would not allow for the only alternative to breast milk to be nutritionally inferior but rather the best alternative for those that need it".
Formula IS nutritionally inferior to breastmilk! Even the companies that make it acknowledge this! It is ADEQUATE to sustain normal growth and development. But it's still inferior to breastmilk, which sets the standard as to what is the most appropriate and safest food for babies. Formula isn't better and it isn't equal. It's therefore inferior.