I have to say that in the short time I have been exploring this site, I have found it intensely vibrant and interesting. I LOVE the differing points of view, ESPECIALLY those which may differ from mine. The entire passionate discussion on supplementation was not only helpful to me personally while learning about these issues, but spurred discussion amongst my supervisors as well about how to really investigate further what makes the difference for "graduating" off supplementation and the gray areas where its not clearcut as to whether or not supplementation is needed. While not nearly as offensive as "breastfeeding Nazi", I must say that I found the term "Zealot" to describe the sometimes passionate discourse on Lactnet to be extremely insulting. Moreover, I am sure that breastfeeding is not the only thing that people think about in their daily lives. I thought this site was supposed to be for discussion about breastfeeding and other topics were to be kept to a minimum. I have to say that I have received far more private emails from people who feared that they would be "judged" or "flamed" by others for holding differing viewpoints or not having the same backgrounds. While I also think it is important to do background research, I know that I find it difficult to delve into a new area of research without guidance and it can often be helpful when others more knowledgeable have the patience to guide me in the right direction rather than inefficiently flailing around on my own. I also hope that speculation on LACTNET, which leads to hypotheses, which leads to research is never stiffled. I do think it would be helpful to be clear about what is speculation and what is grounded in research and what is derived from clinical observations. Each has its place and none is complete without the other. So, if there are any of you who felt as insulted as I did about the use of the term "ZEALOT", I'd like to share how passionate discourse by a bunch of ZEALOTS led to significant progress in a field that I do know something about. In 1982, a study was published in the Lancet that vitamin A supplements reduced childhood mortality by 34% among a deficient population in Indonesia. This research was met with vehement disbelief by those who implement public health programs that worked on more "wholistic issues" and by some notable scientist. It was just too incredible to believe and it threatened current thinking on the best approaches to public health nutrition interventions. The controversy spurred researchers to prove that these results were wrong. In the process, they found out that, indeed, vitamin A supplements reduced mortality by 25-34% in deficient populations. Not only that, they elucidated the mechanisms for this. The severity of diarrhea, measles and other infectious diseases were markedly reduced. As this research was being conducted, there was also vehement controversies over whether supplements or food-based approaches were better. The camps were extremely divided. Supplements were seen as a quick fix by the food camp, and the supplement camp pointed out that there was no evidence to show that food-based approaches worked. This stimulated intervention research that has increased understanding of how best to use these interventions. The field has reached a stage where many people recognize that a mix of interventions actually works better than trying to get one intervention to fit all populations and conditions. During that time interval, there was, of course, scientific debate, but also much posturing as well. The battles were emotional because people genuinely cared about the outcome. Some of these influential people would clearly have beeen defined as "zealots". So please continue to be thoughtful about your replies and when or if you can do your homework, but don't be intimidated into silence if you're not in the majority on a particular position or don't have letters after your name. I, for one, would really hate to see this site change. Susan Burger *********************************************** The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM) mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to: http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html