Ruth Witters-Green brings to our attention an article criticizing BF
advocacy for its supposed lack of factual info on the hazards of artificial
feeding.

I always suspect such things of having a connection to the formula industry
until proven otherwise, and this is no exception.  The facts certainly exist
to refute the author's claims, though industry tries time and again to sow
doubts about that.

The article would also seem to be written as though the USA is the entire
universe, and not just one very aberrant (albeit very large and dominant)
nation in the rest of the world.
BF is not incompatible with paid employment everywhere.  It might be useful
for more N. Americans to look abroad every so often and remember there's a
whole world out here, and many parts of it are much more civilized than the
general area between the Rio Grande and the 49th parallel.
Many countries have protective legislation for BF mothers, and some even go
beyond that, such as Norway, where BF public employees can reduce daily work
hours from 8 to 6 with no loss of pay as long as they are BF.  If baby is
over 9 months, the employer may demand medical documentation but it is
unclear whether such documentation is meant to be proof of BF or proof that
mother has been advised to BF for medical reasons.
OK, so nobody lives here.  But if you put us together with other countries
who have protective legislation, we all add up!
This author could just try coming here and launching an argument that BF and
equality among the sexes are mutually exclusive.  He'd be laughed right back
to his cave.
Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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