Just got my latest issue of American Baby and was reading the (very) fine
print on an advertisement for Similac Advance.  There is a little "table"
that compares Similac Advance w/ iron to Similac w/ iron.  These are the
things it compares:

Brain (mental)development like breastmilk -- yes for both.  Visual
development like breastmilk -- yes for both.  Significantly greater calcium
absorption & bone density than the other leading brand -- yes for both.  Has
DHA and ARA, special nutrients present in breastmilk.  Yes for Advance, no
for Similac w/ iron -- BUT a footnote that says:

"Babies can make their own DHA and ARA naturally from other nutrients found
in Similac w/ Iron.  DHA and ARA are complex fatty acids available from
breastmilk, newly supplemented infant formulas, and from the natural
conversion of simple fats found in breasmilk, infant formulas and other foods
in the diet."

Well, this is totally news to me.....and I guess IF the allegations are true
(about babies making their own DHA & ARA from the ingredients in formula,
then WHY put more in?  Which may or may not be bioavailable to infants?  And
which may cause more problems than not?

I'm flummoxed.  THis looks like major marketing hype, of course -- but why?
Because Mead Johnson now has the major share of the market?

Marsha Walker -- what do you think?

Jan Barger, RN, MA, IBCLC, RLC
Lactation Education Consultants
www.lactationeducationconsultants.com

             ***********************************************

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

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