The article you talk about did not cover anything but the ‘nutritional’ value. I have read it.
It didn’t test for drug interaction or what drugs crossed over to the infant. It did NOT test for testosterone for instance.
So, by all means you can take that at face value. I choose not to. Because until that analysis is done, ‘nutritional’ value is pointless if you are secreting chemicals that have never been tested for safety in infants. I am very comfortable calling this substance a secretion.
Plus, all tests show that no male breast has yet made enough milk to sustain an infant past the first weeks. No matter how much drug they take or how much they pump. They simply cannot according to the recorded evidence. And amongst the links I posted , a transitioned male, Associate Professor, Family Community Medicine, is telling the world that this is not advisable until further research.
Deutsch, an expert in family medicine, would not do this for their child when the opportunity arose. Because Deutsch did not want to cause any harm to their child.
Why would you substitute the richness of the first milk formulas especially designed for first weeks, for the secretions of a male nipple?
A mother’s milk will be suitable because of the female reproductive system has made the modifications needed for each stage of that infant’s life. A male body cannot do this at all. And a donor milk supply will be matched to the child’s age. It is not just about ‘donor’ milk.
A growing infant has tiny amounts of milk at the start, why would any person feel it is acceptable for this substance to take the place of that first milk? A substance found be lacking in the nutrition needed for that child to develop properly from the first instance?