I've re-read some more of this thread (not the whole lot, because it's long). It's usually the same story. FF -v- BF = an emotive treadmill to nowhere. And I wonder anew why we do this, and to what end?
BF rates in the UK are woefully low and it might be helpful if we honestly investigated why this is the case. To view feeding an infant as in some way socially taboo is bizarre, and it seems even protecting breastfeeding mothers by law hasn't enabled much progress. There are still cries of 'I don't want to see it!', whilst by the same token low-cut tops seem perfectly acceptable.
FF mums seem sensitive to judgmentalism from BF advocates, and are sick of hearing the mantra (breast is best), whereas the underlying message to BF mums seems to be to sexualise their chosen feeding method and display (society, this is) a rather strange prudery over the natural function of the humble, ordinary humble breast. I've seen feeding babies compared to defecating or having sex in public as both are 'natural' bodily functions. Sexualising feeding is what's odd, and comparing sterile milk to an offensive health hazard makes no sense whatsoever.
An organic product is always going to be preferable to a manufactured one, but circumstances vary and it simply may not fit. How many mums with a boisterous 3-YO can sit feeding for hours and hours of the day? I did BF, and in different circumstances, if I felt it best for my family, I'd possibly make a different choice.
You do not - no one has to - to justify your parenting decisions on the internet. Because, when it really boils down to it, who cares about the approval or disapproval of a bunch of fonts?