Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
Infant feeding

Get advice and support with infant feeding from other users here.

Original poster

Read this shocking article about the damaging effects of formula and the immoral practices of the companies who peddle this junk.

542 replies

moondog · 28/07/2006 17:36

From The Ecologist magazine.

Here.....

Grim reading.

OP posts:
FrannyandZooey · 28/07/2006 18:30

I take on board what people are saying about feeling upset or shocked by the title. But some of these posts seem to suggest that the benefits of breastfeeding, or the drawbacks of formula, should never be discussed on here in case it hurts someone's feelings.

Greensleeves · 28/07/2006 18:34

I agree Franny, some of the posts do sound a bit like that. I think that's rather worrying - surely facts are facts and must be heard, regardless of people's (understandable) sensitivities?

FWIW I was pretty much forced by various circumstances - right f*ck-up it was to give up breastfeeding ds2 long before I would have wanted to. And it does still hurt me to think about it. But I don't think unsavoury facts about infant formula - or even people's negative opinions about formula feeding - should be suppressed. Far from it.

LaDiDaDi · 28/07/2006 18:35

I agree with the other posts that the thread title is actually offensive to myself and many other women who are giving or have given their babies formula. Breast is nearly always best but for many women and their babies exclusive breastfeeding is not possible for a variety of very good reasons, I repeat REASONS not excuses, and formula is very helpful for us. It is however very unhelpful to label formula as junk.

harpsichordcarrier · 28/07/2006 18:36

has anyone actually read this article yet? because it is very long and I would really like to have a discussion about it later when I have had chance to work through it. maybe a new thread title?

piglit · 28/07/2006 18:36

I'm confused. (It's been a long week). I breastfed ds1 and ds2 until they were 7 and 8 months respectively. They then went on to formula. What else was I supposed to give them? (Serious question).

foxinsocks · 28/07/2006 18:36

she's using the word junk from the article itself

harpsichordcarrier · 28/07/2006 18:37

MI I honestly thought it was more than that (that is what I hav been taught) but who am I to argue will check my references

Blondilocks · 28/07/2006 18:37

I think all articles should be taken with a pinch of salt. The author will dwell on the points which help them back up their article sometimes rather than giving the whole picture.

I didn't see anywhere a reference to using formula if the mother is unable to breastfeed for example.

Also I was breastfed but still got excema & hayfever. My LO had powdered baby milk & has no such allergies.

harpsichordcarrier · 28/07/2006 18:38

piglit - why not breastmilk (serious answer)

Greensleeves · 28/07/2006 18:38

Yes, HC, have read the article. It is actually IMO very informative and well-balanced, not loony at all although naturally it makes uncomfortable reading in places.

It's a shame if people are deciding not to bother reading the article because they don't like the trhead title. Seems a bit silly to me.

expatinscotland · 28/07/2006 18:39

Won't be reading this. I wish I had the luxury of being able to stay at home to bf exclusively until my baby was older than 6 months.

It doesn't always work that way for some of us. We have to go to jobs to feed our kids and not all workplaces have facilities for expressing.

That's just how it is, and yes, we could sue and blah blah blah.

And then damage our work relationship at jobs we desperately need.

Gimme a break!

1Baby1Bump · 28/07/2006 18:39

ive read the first line and im not reading anymore.

what an absolute load of crap.

now i feel even shitter than i already did about having to give formula.

cheers.

cataloguequeen · 28/07/2006 18:40

Have to say that all kinds of food is insulted quite readily on mn called Junk, Crap,Shit etc no one cares for how others feel before they knew this info.. is it because it's formula you can't insult it or tell the truth about it? not a sausage roll or fruit shit?

maybe we should all think before we pass judgement eh?....aahhhh it's too hot for this malarky... parp perty parp

harpsichordcarrier · 28/07/2006 18:40

well it is seventeen pages so I have printed it out so I don't give myself brainache.
I think I will refrain from discussing it until I have read it.
I may be some time....

LaDiDaDi · 28/07/2006 18:40

I understand that the word junk comes from the article itself but I think that using it as part of a thread title on mumsnet is placing it in an entirely different context to that in which it was originally written. Had the title of the thread been read this article about formula milk, or even read this shocking article about formula milk I suspect that no one or far fewer posters would have objected and far more of us would have read the article.

piglit · 28/07/2006 18:41

Because I chose to breastfeed until they were 7 and 8 months. TBH I thought I'd done really well to breastfeed for that long and I won't be made to feel guilty for stopping after achieving so much. Besides, when ds1 was 7 months I was 4 months pregnant with ds2 and very ill.

foundintranslation · 28/07/2006 18:42

The article is indeed grim reading, and makes a lot of very valid and useful points - I particularly agree with the parts about formula marketing () and lack of support ( ). I did find the whole tone rather militant and dramatic, though, and know that this article would have sent me to pieces if I'd read it in the first 4 weeks of ds' life where I was struggling to overcme bad advice I'd been given, come off mixed feeding and establish exclusive bf. Happily, we managed it. But I do think it could have been full-blown PND for me if we hadn't. I did a lot of googling and searching for info during those weeks. An article telling me in a measured tone 'formula feeding has risks, they are these and these' with precise information would hve been hard to read but OK, but this one - twice the risk of this, eight times the risk of that, without any figures on what the actual risk is (i.e. one in how many babies will suffer this condition) - would have absolutely done my head in.
Slightly OT: At ds' rather difficult birth I had more or less every intervention going, except forceps and CS, and very grateful I am for it too. While I would have adored a lovely natural labour and birth, it wasn't going to happen for me, and I'm not sure undifferentiated bashing of 'medicalised birth' helps the author's case.
As far as the thread title/reference to formula as junk food goes, I'm in absolute agreement with tiktok. Just what is the title upposed to achieve?

1Baby1Bump · 28/07/2006 18:43

how about
'read this article about formula milk and the damaging effects it supposedly has' ?

harpsichordcarrier · 28/07/2006 18:43

piglit, sorry I was just answering your question i.e. breastmilk is a (possible) alternative to formula. that's all.

piglit · 28/07/2006 18:44

No worries harpsi - wasn't meaning to have a go at you. Sorry if it sounded like I was.

spidermama · 28/07/2006 18:50

Moondog is to Mumsnet what Jamie Oliver is to school dinners. She's a passsionate and inspiring advocate of good nourishing food at every level.

I don't believe she should feel the need to curb her strength of feeling and creep around the issue because people are sensitive.

Many posters use headline-grabbing language because they want people to read their thread. There's a fair bit of competition after all.

It's good to hear forthright opinions and, who knows, maybe a wavering woman might be enticed to read the article and choose to BF her baby after all.

Every one of us is aware of the issues and people can choose not to look at the thread.

FGS every one of us could find something on MN to upset us if we looked hard enough, but that's the nature of an open forum.

stitch · 28/07/2006 18:54

fantastic title.
i could do with a good bust up right now.

FairyMum · 28/07/2006 19:02

Great article. IsThe Ecologist actually worth buying then?

Carmenere · 28/07/2006 19:06

Speaking as someone who had to give up breat feeding when my dd was 4 months old due to medical reasons, I couldn't give a flying xxxx whether people on the net think I did what was best for my child. I did my best, I know that. I also know that Moondog cares about nutrition issues deeply, so I am not offended by the thread title.

singersgirl · 28/07/2006 19:15

I am very much in favour of breastfeeding wherever possible, while acknowledging for some it is not possible, and breastfed both my boys (for 26 months).

I think many activities of formula-producing companies dubious and I think the low take-up rate of breastfeeding in this country is shocking.
BUT it is clearly misleading for the article to call formula 'junk' - it is a replacement food for human infants, which obviously won't be as suitable for babies as human milk.

Nevertheless, formula is clearly a pretty successful replacement, at least in developed countries, because MOST formula-fed babies (despite the unquantified statistics in the article - we don't know what the number of cases overall is) DON'T die in the first six weeks of life, DON'T develop all those horrible diseases in infancy, DON'T choke on broken glass from contaminated packaging, DON'T catch salmonella or aflatoxin from their milk, and DO grow up to be healthy children and adults.

And saying things like 'formula contains sugar' is also misleading - so does breastmilk. Breastmilk is extremely sweet, even if the sugar is potentially less harmful. But we don't know, because the article doesn't tell us what the sugar content of breastmilk is.

And, yes, there are undesirable things about the medicalisation of labour, but without it, mothers like me would have died and my son would also have died. So I wouldn't have been breastfeeding - but I guess at least I wouldn't have been formula feeding.

I guess "The Ecologist" is hardly going to be balanced, though, is it?