"it is important that, in preparation for and during breastfeeding, you eat a healthy, balanced diet"

[harpsichordcarrier]

or so it says on the "important information" on some HCP stuff Cow and Gate sent me to give out to parents.
but that's VERY misleading isn't it? it might imply that if you haven't eaten a healthy diet during pregnancy, you shouldn't bf? that formula would be better alternative?
it just seems a weird thing to have on a formula notice.
I am thinking of complaining - what do you think?

Well I tend to believe scientific reports and unless they can strip out every other influence on a child's development, from parental intelligence, socio-economic level, home environment, peer group pressure, educational establishment, eye colour and inside leg measurement and prove that breastfeeding makes a difference regardless of any other factor, then I will believe the Edinburgh research.

It stands to reason that it is going to be the more informed mothers, by and large, who are going to give b/fing a go. Just like they are going to make an effort to wean later, go to toddler groups, avoid aspartame, McDonalds, Fruit Shoot and , encourage their child to do its homework, and all the rest. It may not be PC to say this but it's self-evident to me.

Tiktok, some of the most creative advertising and marketing (and I say this from a professinal, not personal, POV) comes when your product has restrictions placed on its marketing. Look at cigarettes, cigars and alcohol adverts before they were eventually banned. I don't see the same creativity in formula marketing, but maybe that's just me. And I agree, it's criminal that there isn't more funding to promote breastfeeding to people who really need it, before they actually give birth, but that doesn't mean the formula companies should not be allowed to creatively market thier product.

I still fail to see why the message about healthy eating undermines breastfeeding, despite your valiant attempts to convince me otherwise.

Do you really, honestly not see that quite a lot of women might feel, having read that, that unless they eat five portions of fruit and veg a day, protein, wholemeal bread, oily fish blah blah they might produce inferior milk so formula might be better? Really? Honestly? Even given the huge number of Mumsnet threads from women saying, 'I don't eat a very good diet at the moment because I'm so tired so would formula be better for my baby?'? YOu don't think that maybe the formula companies might not be absolutely and entirely altruistic when they say that - not the use of the word 'important' as opposed to, say, 'ideal' or 'preferable', when really it isn't 'important' at all, just, probably, 'preferable'? And you a wordsmith and all?

Wordsmith, the reason I don't believe the study, is because it is heavily ethno-centric. I have lived in several poor, undeveloped countries where bf is the norm. These mothers are undereducated and poor, i.e the REASON they bf is not because they are educated and happen to go to middle-class playgroups in North London, but because it is the norm to feed your baby with your boobs.

We can debate this until the cows come home - but one study in a stream of studies saying the opposite just isn't very convincing, IMO. Until someone produces formula that exactly replicates the LIVING cells in human milk, I am just not going to be convinced that it is just the mother's intelligence that is a factor.

Let's agree to differ then. I have a nice bottle of wine and a good DVD awaiting me.

Oh and I am glad you used the word "informed". Better "informed" does not necessarily correlate with higher IQ and better education. Also a degree from University X does not equal high intelligence, hence the number of stupid people who have university degrees !!

It means simply that, better informed. It is good information and bf support that helps a mother to bf, not her IQ level or the fact that she has a degree.

wordsmith - enjoy ! I am taking DS to bed and then having a nice shot of Vodka and chat with DH to relax. Good night

Oh, everyone's gone to bed - it's late morning here - and the thread's moved on, but I did want to say something to Wordsmith because I think she has misinterpreted something I said and I want to clarify:

WS, I don't think anyone here, least of all me, is saying that breast is always and in all circumstances best. Nor am I criticising someone like your friend who had a terrible, but sadly not uncommon, experience of breastfeeding.

I'm clearly not expressing myself well but will try again! I said that babies need the best start in life, and that using that yardstick, "the vast majority of babies would be bf, because bf is better for most. Some would be ff, because ff is best for some. " Your friend would clearly fit into the latter category.

What I'm getting at is that the decision to bf or ff is a very important one for the baby, and the mother too of course. It needs to be made for good, sound reasons.

So it makes me cross when the formula companies make up all sorts of bad reasons for ff - eg the breastfeeding diet one of the original post.

welliemum - good points.

There is very little information for mothers to base their decision on about which formula, too. It is absolutely not in the manufacturers' interests to make things clear in their marketing - they don't ever give the full story. Instead, they try to lure buyers with leaflets or with packing with the cutest baby animals on it. It's insulting. Most formula is more or less the same, apart from the speciality ones, and the speciality ones (the 'comfort' ones) are marketed with such vague claims it's a scandal. Do you ever hear that soya formula could be a health hazard, for instance (over and above the risk of formula generally)?

Threads on mumsnet asking 'which formula?' show the massive gaps in knowledge among mothers, who really don't know what they are buying. If you asked most people what's in 'baby milk', I bet most of the population would not even know the main ingredient is cows milk.

Wordsmith - I take it you agree with me that leaflets, helplines, cute packaging and other 'stuff' is unethical marketing, yes?

Crikey this thread is still going.

Tiktok - no I don't agree, which is why I said let's agree to differ.