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

[moondog]

From The Ecologist magazine.

Here.....

Grim reading.

At least you lot can compose posts quickly. By the time I have struggled through and pressed "post message" the thread has moved on about 50 yards or so

is moondog back yet?

nice thread title, not really the best way to get people to read the link tho.

arent they lucky?

1baby1bump, dont get into breast v bottle debate. its seriously not worth it.

In my mind it comes down to the use of words both in the thread title and within the article itself. There is a difference between presenting the facts to inform and educate people and using deliberately inflammatory phrases such as "peddling this junk".

NQC, I wasn't talking about this thread in particular, just about statistics.

I was merely pointing out that stats refer to likelyhood not an absolute.

'Evil Vested Interests'. What are you on about?

I really don't think many people "choose" to bottlefeed.

I think some (very very few) try their damndest but are physically incapable.

I think many try their damndest, but without proper support (medical, social and familial), don't manage it. They're not helped by a lot of silly ideas, like the urgent need to put babies on schedules from the first week.

I think many think they ought to want to breastfeed, but deep down, don't want to, aren't comfortable with the idea, or whatever. (Life is complicated. Choices are complicated.) They try a bit, but not that hard, or maybe even sabotage their own efforts.

And I think a small number honestly decide they don't want to. And you know what? Their boobs, their choice.

Oh, and of course real life isn't just a bunch of buckets - it's a continuum between all these different "categories" I listed.

i dont want to. im just saying theyre lucky!

You mentioned bias from research sponsorers. I was just suggesting that if there is bias, it's likely to be the other way, as the formula companies have a lot more ££ to throw around than any of the people who are fighting for more bf.

Some of them may be determined B1B1. Others brave, some lucky, some tall, some short .... do you see what I'm saying? It's not a them and us situatiom. Some women overcome massive odds to BF, others have an easy time of it.

The thread is moving pretty quickly F&Z and unless I leave it now my dinner will be burnt mush but I think my feelings boil down to what squarer said, clear factual, well researched and referenced information I have no problem with, even if I may not like what it says but the inflammatory tone of the thread title is for me and many others offensive.

I think it's interesting how the % of women breast feeding varies so much from area to area in the UK and that the number of women bf in the UK is so much lower than in many other countries.

And once again someone else has said what I was thinking faster and more clearly than me (COV)! I must get better at this typing business.

sorry if i sounded like i was saying them and us. i dont feel hostile towards peep that can or did, just those that come across as if they are totally ace because they can.
i had a natural delivery but i dont think im any better than those who had an epidural for whatever reason for example.

parp

Well exactly COV. But I suspect the thread title was designed to wind people up. It's OK to wind up bottle feeders, they're inferior (in the world according to Moondog).

what does parp mean? its bad isnt it?!

So many of these messages are saying what amounts to the same thing... don't say anything bad about formula because it may make mothers who didn't/don't bf feel guilty.

Yet whose interests does this form of self-imposed censorship serve? Mothers? I don't think so - information , both good and bad should be widely and freely available if they are able to make a truly informed decision about how to feed their babies. (And of course, this needs practical advice and support to be available too).
No - I think this censorship is advantageous only to formula manufacturers and allows them to keep peddling the now widely-accepted idea that formula is just as good as breast milk.

BTW, does anyone know of a single piece of research that show that formula is actually better for babies than cows' milk? (I'm genuinely interested to know.) It is my understanding that such research has never been done - but which GP/HV would not try to make a mother feel guilty if she were giving her baby simple cows' milk rather than formula? Yet when a mother gives her baby formula rather than BM, then no-one ever says anything... (Not saying they should, BTW. I firmly believe that the vast majority of mothers try to do their best for their babies in their circumstances, and although I am fiercly pro-BF, I would never presume to judge anyone who doesn't bf because I know that there can be a miriad of reasons behind that decision).

God, I hope that last bit doesn't sound too pompous...

Parp means 'I feel too strongly about this subject so will resist posting in case I upset myself or others'. Or something similar.

I don't see anyone saying don't say anything bad about fomula. I see plenty of posts saying that it is possible to state the facts/argument without being quite so inflammatory.

Agree with everything Jimjams has said.

Am trying to stay away and not get involved but it's just drawing me back in.

thanks spidey....

PARP
PARP

P..P..Parp!!

agree with jimjams.