"Formula as good as breastmilk"

[GhoulsAreLoud]

www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/6942427/Breastmilk-no-better-for-baby-than-formula-scientist-c laims.html

I really wish this was true but doubt it. Seriously dreading b.fing DC2

Do you know what I think? The Telegraph and DM articles mentioned a metastudy done by one of the authors. I suspect this is NOT the article published today, as today's one is based on an empirical study of 63 'normal' pregnancies and 118 pre-terms. What's the betting this is some nonsense cooked up by him or his press officer to raise the profile of the publication. I'd like to see the clinical review article now - does anyone know where/if that has actually been published?

Piss off real world.

I've emailed Prof Carlsen asking for a copy of the review paper discussed. And enquiring what he thinks of UK news reporting of his work.

I expect he'll be too important male busy to reply.

Why is it that I feel FFing Mum's are more against BFing mums than the other way around?

Yes I think you have a point there CrosswordGeek!

Don't beat yourself up about choosing not to bf. I hated BFfing DD1 so switched to formula after a few weeks. I tried again with DD2 and again felt faint and extremely nauseus at each feed so didn't last long. Both my girls and big and healthy. We're lucky we have a choice so don't let anyone make you feel guilty about not BFing.

Mumsnet is one of the only places that I can come where I don't feel like an OUTCAST for breastfeeding. Upsets me to see posts that question the goodness of it here too.

Formula will never be on a par with breastmilk, ever. Yes, it works as a substitute, but will never be as perfectly tailor made to suit your baby as breastmilk is.

This is what really bugs me - who exactly is trying to make anyone feel guilty about not bfeeding??

How on earth does breastfeeding support and advice translate to making people feel guilty!?

In answer to who pays him, I can't see who funded this study. But, Carl Svensen also has another study on the web, in a different area, working with Novartis as a collaborator. Who has close ties with Novartis?

"Novartis has completed the sale of its Gerber baby foods business to Nestlé for USD 5.5 billion, the final step in a divestment program to focus the Group's strategy on healthcare with pharmaceuticals at the core."

Realworld, I used to wonder why shouldn't Nestle et al make money from selling formula, if people want to buy it. And fair enough, in developed countries where we all have a kettle to boil water, access to clean water, access to soap/sterlizers, and enough money so that you can buy enough formula such that you can use the correct dose and don't have to over-dilute it and starve your baby.

But when I found out how mothers in the developing world are "encouraged" via a variety of methods employed by infant formula manufacturers to bottle-feed, despite their world being the polar opposite of what I have just described, that is when I realised why it is important that someone tries to keep these companies in check.

Ah. OK. So perhaps the clinical review he's talking about is linked to other organisations? We need to know because that is VERY important. Of course, he wouldn't need to declare a conflict of interest about a paper that was about different research, yet how interesting that the press coverage is about something completely different.

clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00521300

Oh my god I don't know whether to get paranoid or not but when I re-googled the name to find it and it had dropped off google, along with the other Carl Svensen references I had seen. Thankfully Crome still had my history so I was able to retrieve it.

Would that be because it is Sven Carlsen perhaps, not Carl Svensen?

If you happen to be breastfeeding and look at your babies face...you know you are not doing wrong.

If you have not been able to breastfeed you appreciate the handy alternatives, from what I have read I think I would concoct my own, but thats easy for me to say.

I think it's so very different in developing countries, where education and choice are less, for companies to promote their products in the wrong languages so women can't make the formula safely...shocks and wracks me to the core. This is what is wrong with these companies.

I agree, too, that the aggressive marketing of formula in countries where there is a shortage of clean water/power for sterilising bottles, is very wrong. However, WRT the ongoing battles between FF and BF in the developed world I think what it boils down to is that all women feel that their choice (with this as with all aspects of motherhood) is unsupported, stigmatized, criticised and they MIGHT BE DOING IT WRONG hence all the screaming defensiveness of either position. AFAIK the best option is successful BF but FF is better than unsuccesful, painful, distressing-to-the-mother struggles with BF. Because BF is not always easy, and if it hurts constantly or doesn't work or isn't possible, that doesn't mean that the mother is either lazy and selfish or a witless dupe of the Fiendish Forumula Companies.

Whoops
must stop Mnetting so late at night.

"If you happen to be breastfeeding and look at your babies face...you know you are not doing wrong."

What an odd thing to say! Babies don't care whether they are bf or ff. It is us mums who beat ourselves up over it.

I read something interesting once about feelings of guilt, can't remember where - they got both men and women to run through a scenario where they were navigating a plane, and the pilot collapses. The plane crashes and a number of the passengers die. (The navigator survives) The researchers then asked both men and women whether they felt guilty about the crash. The men all said no, why should it be their fault, they didn't know how to fly a plane. But the women nearly all felt guilty and thought they should have done something to help despite having no flight training or knowledge (other than having watched the pilot previously)

Already posted on the other thread - statement from Unicef UK on this

"A number of newspaper articles have today reported on a Norwegian study which has found an association between higher levels of male hormones in pregnancy and the ability to breastfeed after birth. The authors are reported to have extrapolated from their findings that mothers? ability to breastfeed is entirely down to these hormone levels. They are also reported to have claimed that exposure to high levels of testosterone before birth account for the differences in health outcomes between breast and bottle fed babies. The findings of this small study are of interest and may warrant further investigation. However, the claims made in relation to these findings do not account for the large differences in breastfeeding rates between countries, with some having 99% of mothers successfully breastfeeding. They are also contradicted by the large body of evidence which shows that levels of successful breastfeeding can be increased by a range of improved support interventions.

The claims made relating to the health outcomes of breastfeeding do not account for the dose response found in many studies, which show that babies breastfed exclusively or for longer periods have the best overall outcomes.

The study does not account for or tally with the known mechanisms for how breastmilk protects against illness. For example, breastmilk contains a range of anti-infective properties including immunoglobulins, white cells, anti-inflammatory components, enzymes and non-antibody factors such as lactoferrin and the bifidus factor.

The body of evidence for the benefits of breastfeeding is very large and comes from a wide range of studies into many different illnesses, carried out by numerous researchers in many different universities."

Unicef response here:

bit.ly/4L48Kr

Correlation is not causation, and formula is not as good as breastmilk, although that is not to say that it is poison. It is fine.

I see no need for those who use formula to constantly get defensive about their decision every time this debate comes up.

While I agree that breast is best I find the passive aggressive nastiness these questions generate on MN quite sad.

"I see no need for those who use formula to constantly get defensive about their decision every time this debate comes up."

Surely this statement would read just as true with the word formula replaced with breastfeeding.

Where is the love?

GhoulsAreLoud ,

All our families are different. It might be best nutrionally to breastfeed, but if breastfeeding makes the mother so unhappy that she can not bond with her baby then formula may be the better option.

It might help if you read The Food of Love

The important thing is to get positioning right so you don't get sore. I can post you some links if you want.

Congratulations on your pregnancy and good luck with your baby whatever your feeding decisions are.

trouble is this 'research' is going to get a very wide audience- it popped up on my webmail home page where they have an annoying headlines thing - as 'breastmilk no better than formula, scientist says' and the trouble is people with no knowledge/insight will think, ah right, OK, so no need to bother then- and wome who choose to bf will again be portrayed as hippy earth mothers.
The UNICEF response is good, but who will read it?

Yep, headline "breast milk no better than formula" made it into Glasgow Herald today, will be read by lots of people who will take it as gospel.

Having read the original article now, I just cannot believe how what the study showed and how the researcher interpreted it, made it into that headline!

My ds is now FF (BF for first 5 weeks). I have had horrible comments from fairly random people about it. But breastfeeding nearly sent me to the nuthouse. I only started to bond with him when I stopped breastfeeding. I hated it.

I think that breast is best, but sometimes think FF mums are made to feel bad, and like Formula is poison or something.

If you want the pain, discomfort and general embarrassment of breast feeding, then go ahead. Similarly if you want the faff, expense and bloody hassle of formula feeding, then good for you.

Breast feeding is lovely and cuddly and traditional, when it doesn't hurt or you're trying to be discreet with huge milk-engorged boobs in a public place. Bottle feeding is so easy and quick and simple when you're not being judged by Joe Public.

YOU ARE NEVER GOING TO WIN! Society in general will judge you however you feed your baby and there is never going to be a conclusive study into the diet of every single baby that's ever existed that could prove anything one way or the other so WHY ARGUE ABOUT IT?

WHY DO WE HAVE TO JUSTIFY BABY MILK? Look at us - we all have body image and food hang ups and we transfer this onto our babies, worrying about their diet already. You only have two choices, breast or bottle. Pick one and get on with it. You don't have to explain yourself to anyone. It's just milk.