Oh what fun. I did a practice paper for my a-level the other day (human biology). It included the following question:
'The table below shows the nutrient composition of human milk and a dried milk formula used for bottle feeding babies.
[table of nutrients]
a. Compare the protein carbohydrate and fat content of the milks
b. Using the information in the table, suggest possible nutritional advantages and disadvantages of feeding a baby with human milk as compared with feeding a baby with a dried milk formula.'
Sorry to give all that. What got me was the mark scheme. A mark for saying it would be better to feed formula because it is lower in sodium. A mark for saying that it would be better to feed formula bedause it contains more protein. [Lots of other stuff positive about bf].
Surely both those are fairly irrelevant? There was no defined mark for suggesting that a species is likely to evolve the milk that suits it best, and that therefore it is possible to hypothesise that babies may need a higher-sodium milk. No mark for suggesting that the formula milk is likely to come from another species and therefore may not contain amino acids in the right proportions for humans.
What a bf-friendly culture we do live in, eh.