What to say to people who say "this formula is CLOSEST to breastmilk" -

[Lucy1977]

Hi

I don't want to cause offence to anyone, but in my mind an infant formula cannot be "closest" to breastmilk but I cant get my words together to explain this to people who say "I use "x" formula because it's supposed to be closest to breastmilk".

Anyone help?

Thanks
Lucy

thanks for all your replies, it has been an education to me reading them.

I'm off to bed

Lucy

It's lniguistic equivalent of effect of sticking a bird in a white coat doing summat with a testtubev and pipette inot ads for cosmetics.

'It's science ergo it is right.'

well you must have had great bf mentors

Yes indeed Something.
I feel physically sick every time I see that picture.

but my son is 13, v bright and a healthy chap

SEA, yep, me and mine ok, so no matter about any one else. thanks.

me and mine ARE ok. i mean.

ok i get the point..

Tiktok's about.
Am sure she will provide OP with her usual intelligent and eloquent contributions....

Lucy, I understood exactly what you meant, and you don't need to delete the thread in the face of people getting on their high horse, despite your repeated explanations and apologies

I think if you find yourself in an appropriate situation where it would feel ok to discuss this, you could simply point out that there has been no independent comparative evaluation of formulas on sale in the UK, and that just as with any other manufacturer's or marketeer's claims designed to sell, the grown up response is to be sceptical.

HTH.

Moondog...do you have a hotline to Tiktoks "Batphone"?

There's a special circle of hell for formula manufacturer copywriters, IMO.

I found Lucy's post, and the ensuing discussion, very interesting. I think this whole area is quite intriguing, for several reasons:

1. there are strict regulations on the composition of infant formula yet these are not made readily available to the general public;
2. the formula manufacturers have admitted themselves that women want more information on formula (composition and preparation) yet they do not provide it;
3. as far as I am aware, no independent body has made available a comparison of the composition of the various brands of formula with each other, or with breastmilk.

Point 2 was based on a position paper published by 'INFORM', "an Infant and Dietetic Foods Association (IDFA) initiative on behalf of the UK infant formula manufacturers. Member companies include SMA Nutrition, Cow & Gate, Milupa and Farley/Heinz." The paper says that the reason women are not given the information they would like to see is to do with the regulation of infant formula in the UK. I'm not sure about this as I haven't read the regulations myself. (There seems to be a relevant document on the HMSO site but it's not free!)

I would be very interested myself to see something published along the lines of point 3. I wonder if Which? magazine could be persuaded, based on their recent interest in hospital meals and school meals, and their regular reports on breakfast cereals.

The only research like this that I am aware of was carried out in Italy, by a researcher named Carlo Agostini in the San Paolo Hospital, Milan. The abstract of his paper is here and I have a PDF version saved if anyone wants to read it. I haven't read it all myself yet, and I suspect that a good training in nutrition would be necessary to understand it all. Yet I don't suppose it would be too difficult to provide an 'executive summary' for the general public.

Just to make it clear, I'm not a nutritional scientist (otherwise I might be able to provide a far better answer to the original post) but I am a breastfeeding mum with a scientific background. And I think that had I been better informed when feeding ds1 I would probably have made different choices.

Interesting! If I were ff I would go BESERK at not being allowed to know exactly what formula is made of.

Not that the ingredients would make much sense to me I suppose, but it's the principle of the thing.

As it is, I have little idea what's in dd2's milk, but I think the factory is in pretty good nick.......

let them think that - a lot of women are led to feel like failures for not being able or choosing to breastfeed their children - surely if this helps them emotionally come to terms with it then let them think that. If a mum said that to me - I would probably do as misdee said - nod and let it be.

When dd1 was born - formula fed baby for a number of reasons - was told a particular brand was better for her situation than others - perhaps as they did one for premie babies ( from dim distant memory) There were a number of brands available in the hospital and it was up to parents to decide which they wanted to us. Of course - breastmilk was best but when you are not able to express it under what are very stressful situations then taking on board all sorts of claims regarding the 'evils' of formula feeding are not going to help.

fwiw - breastfed dd2 up until 18 months when I had to stop due to a bad dose of food poisoning and very strong medication.

no3 - who knows - probably breastfeed if it works out - so be it - if not - formula will suffice.

Plenty will not agree with it - but what works best for you and yours is all that matters surely.

Hi

I haven't got the thread deleted because I don't know how to (there's a contact us facility but on my OS/browser it doesn't work unless I am doing something wrong).

Reading through the recent replies it has got me thinking, how many other newmums would reconsider using a certain brand of formula if they knew there hadn't been any comparative studies carried out? Lots of my ff friends (both those that ff from birth and those that stopped bfing before their baby was 1 yr old) have said they use Aptimil because it's supposed to be closer to breastmilk.
However, isn't Aptimil more expensive than say Farleys? Seems unfair to lead these mothers under a marketing strategy rather than actual proof that their produce is closer to bm than another formula.

This marketing makes me think that some formulas are better than others (obviously that's what they're trying to get me to think as well), but isn't it more of a case that some formulas suit different babies? (I've heard one girl say her little one didn't settle on C&G but when she moved to SMA she had a different baby).

Lucy

Mummy,the pints that you make are most interesting.Thanks for the link.

Ah, but is she making pints of formula or EBM, Moondog?

Message withdrawn

Is it true that weasel milk is the closest to breastmilk, or is that a joke?

Sorry, that is a serious question, I've been wondering.

Hope it's a joke!

No.it's not a joke!

Really????

So why hasn't a formula company come up with a way of using it?

Do they think it would be less marketable I wonder? Would women shudder at the thought of giving weasel milk to their infants? Would it be too difficult to make it hygienic? Would it be worth it profit-wise?

Sorry to go off on a weasel milk tangent, just musing on the possibilities...

Cal,I have taken part in b/feeding information workshops for schollchildren (as a b/feeding mother-a sort of living exhibit)

The point is made to the kids to get them to think a little bit about our unchallenged assumption that cows' milk is best for babies.

Hmmm,I think there is scope for intensive weasel dairy farming.Shall consult with dh.This is his line.

(Farming not weasels.)