It WAS very childish of me, but I got a dig in at some Formula companies today......

[VeniVidiVickiQV]

Got sent a market research survey today asking me my opinions on formula milk.

So i gave them.....

But your baby is an individual, amyjade, presumably the best fake milk for 25% of babies is not the best for the other 75%. So you're back to trial and error, anyway.

Oh thanks, VVVQV. I try to avoid B+B threads, not sure why I let myself even look at this one. Does sound awful, though. You're baby apparently wants more calories so you deal with it by giving him less (effectively). Before I learnt about breastmilk I would have assumed that it had more calories, was somehow richer or more fortified.

amyjade, a lot of this thread has been about the appalling lack of information about formula - mothers are not aware of (for example) where prebiotics come from, or what some of the 'novelty' ingredients are, or what research has been done on the safety and effectiveness of some of the ingredients .

I am pretty sure I was one of the posters who explained something about casein ('hungrier' baby) dominant milks versus whey-dominant milks, so somewhere in this mahoosive thread you can find info on that! Any midwife or HV should know the basic differences, though.

Zebraz, the main diff is, yes, to make it less easily digested. It has nothing to do with calories or fats. The protein is 'tougher' so it is harder for the baby's gut to metabolise, and so it sticks around in the tummy for longer.

Without any obvious special need (such as a serious allergy), it would be very hard to say which formula was best for any individual baby.

Formula is a commercial, homogenous product - always the same. It has to be, to ensure consistency.

This is, of course, where breastmilk differs. It is never consistent. This is its strength.

only read a little bit of the thread - BUT i did have a health professional recommend a particular type of formula for dd1 - as she needed top ups and then was formula fed - the head of neonatal unit at the hospital where dd1 was in SCBU recommended a particular brand to be used with dd1.

Not surprising, eidsvold. Health professionals often recommend brands, but as there is no good information comparing UK brands from an independent source, and they speak to reps trying to sell the stuff, or else get little 'gifts' , their recommendations may not be based on anything trustworthy.

I would hazard a guess the neonatal professional recommended Aptamil.

Yes there needs to be proper information about formula for everyone to enable parents to make informed decisions about which brand to choose if they use formula at any point in their babies life.

Ds had Aptimil when he was weaned of BF - I BF for 6 mths and it made him physically sick when they changed the composition and added probiotics - the company had the packet back from me and tested it for contamination, and reported it was fine so definately nothing to do with their product - I tried him on it again after a week of not having it (and being fine) - and within in 2 'feeds' he was sick and had the runs again, he was grey it made him feel so awful.

Where and how are incidents like this checked - don't think they are, certainly nothing is advertised as how to complain about a baby milk product.

Very interesting, Meand.....there has been concern expressed on a number of occasions after observations of babies on formulas with prebiotics (they're pre- not pro-, by the way, though pro- will probably arrive soon as the latest rinky-dink marketable ingredient just as soon as the manufacturers gear up to mass production...there's quite lot if you Google on probiotics infant formula).

I think there have been a few posts on mumsnet, too.

Prebiotics do have an effect on babies' guts - this is inevitable, though they are often marketed as being beneficial to brain and eye development, some brands (eg Omneo Comfort) proclaim they help babies with gut problems.

That some babies respond by developing gut problems of their own, apparently as a result of the added ingredients, is known by people who care about these things and about the lack of info to parents. But as far as I know, no one has really documented it seriously.

Oops yes should be prebiotics, just shows how effective and insidious advertising really is.

I shall go and have a look thanks tictoc.

The Ecologist article mentioned in this thread is now availible online if anyone fancies a read:

www.exacteditions.com/exact/browse/307/308/1267/3/22

very interesting. thanks.

\link{http://www.exacteditions.com/exact/browse/307/308/1267/3/22\Here's the article from The Ecologist.} (You need to use the arrows at the bottom of the page to scroll through the whole article; there are round about 6 pages in all.)

Thanks for that, Bornberry. I have looked unsuccessfully in local newsagents for the magazine, just to read the breastfeeding article you mentioned.

Interesting that the article seems to back up my own opinion which was that formula companies don't tell us what is in formula not because of any advertising ban, but because they don't want to. I suspect that this unwillingness is a combination of a desire to protect trade secrets from competitors and to shield unpalatable facts about the provenance of formula from consumers. But who knows?

(Would like to add more, but have to get on with making supper...)

Thanks for that link LucyJu, it's taken me ages to read but well worth it.

I particularly liked the bit near the end where it said "women don't fail to breastfeed, health professionals and wider society fail to educate and support them" or something along those lines.

I'm staggered that Sweden's bf rates are the best in the world according to this article. I really had no idea htat even in the developing world, bf rates aren't as good as in Sweden. And they're brilliant compared to most of the developed world, but still not what I'd call exemplary.