To all those saying that BF is significantly better than FF, as though this suggests a large difference, you are really misunderstanding the stats.
In research significantly only means that a difference was found with an approx 19 in 20 chance that the difference is real. The word has no value or magnitude. The difference can be real but tiny, short lived, of uncertain meaning or value etc etc...Not quite the same as what is intended when we say significantly as lay people or outside of research.
And this is the problem with the breast is best campaign; that it is based on statistically significant data of really small and uncertain magnitude...hence the millions of healthy people who were FF.
As I said, I have BF 2 and will breast feed a third shortly. This is because:
When it works well, it’s very convenient. Walking around with a food/drink supply on tap means one less thing to carry. When it works well, that marginal difference is easily achieved. When it works well, it is a naturally ideal food source.
However, I still say fed is best and see evidence all the time of how the breast is best message has turned women off from the outset, and been used to cause so much guilt that some women watch their children fail to thrive or starve, treating formula like poison.
As a HCP, I do despair at the lack of information and informed consent around Women’s Health issues, including breast feeding.