"Ultimately, we don't know what the 'true' bf rates would be in a situation where women were genuinely free from undue influence, had information and had everything they needed in order to either bf or ff successfully."
Or indeed what would happen if we grew up in a culture where a product, the use of which is known to severely disrupt the normal functioning of breastfeeding, is thrust in women's faces day in day out through constant multi-million pound marketing campaigns, is ubiquitous, and is seen as the socially normal way to feed a baby.
Marketing campaigns, should I add, which on which much, much more money is spent than on health promotion of breastfeeding within the NHS.
"And Shag mental health,behaviour- seriously PMSL"
Amazing that you think this research - which is included on the UNICEF Baby Friendly site (UNICEF being responsible for overseeing quality standards in infant feeding training and accreditation across the NHS) is 'laughable'. Did you read it? If it's so ridiculous and not a serious piece of research, why has UNICEF included it on the site?
"Because a) the science is crap"
Can you be specific, or are you just going to say that off the top of your head without giving any detail? because you can't as you haven't read it properly
"even the dept of health don't think this is a benefit worthy of mention"
The study from the Telethon Institute in Australia was widely reported and has not been dismissed out of hand by other researchers, just be people like yourself who have a vested emotional interest in believing it to be a pile of crap. You'll find there is a mass of research out there on a whole range of health issues, not just breastfeeding, which is not specifically referred to in NHS recommendations or Dept of Health guidelines, because they tend to draw on the findings of clinical reviews of a wide range of evidence and not just individual studies. But the irony is that you and Chunderella and various others on this thread are not just going to dismiss out of hand the findings of any individual studies suggesting previously undiscovered benefits to breastfeeding, you also consistently and repeatedly dismiss pretty much everything the Department of Health and NHS information has to say on the subject anyway.
I don't think you'd believe there are any proven, significant benefits to breastfeeding if God himself came down from heaven and told you it was true - you simply don't want to accept it because you have a vested emotional interest in rubbishing the evidence, no matter where this evidence comes from or who it's validated by - the NHS, UNICEF, the Department of Health. As far as you're concerned it's all distorted, unreliable, insignificant.
"and c) poor mental health is caused by a whole host of things such as poverty,debt,unemployment etc,etc,etc"
Well, duh. 
I don't think anyone has set out to prove that bf is the only or the most important factor in depression, only that it might play a part.
Which of course you know. But if you acknowledged this it would damage your argument that the research is a pile of crap.
(wonders about the logic of many people happily accepting that diet rich in fish oils may well have a positive affect on some children's mental health and behaviour, but finding it completely bizarre that breastfeeding - which contains completely different fats than formula - might have an impact on the way the brain develops during a child's fastest period of growth).