>Dear all:
>
>I went to Half Sigma and it took about 15 seconds of reading to 
>realize that far from
>debunking anything, they don't even know the first thing about 
>epidemiology.  The study
>showed no significant difference.  The IQ differences were 0.5 which 
>is not biologically
>significant either and there most certainly was a bias in sibling 
>order. In fact this was a
>negative RETROSPECTIVE study that proved nothing statistically at 
>all.  They then
>extrapolated their results with a lot of faulty assumptions.
>
>Not even worth the time to look at quite frankly.


Thanks, Susan :)

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/short/317/7171/1481 is the UK study 
you're after, I think. Rare, because it was randomised, but I have 
found in discussions with sceptics that the fact it was done with 
pre-term babies and not term babies does not go down well.  The study 
is also less than popular with bf supporters because of the way it 
was handled by the media at the time and because the research team 
were also looking at different formulations of formula, and were 
financed by the industry.

http://www.bmj.com/cgi/eletters/317/7171/1481#1395 is a rapid 
repsonse to this study that outlines the concerns - 10 years ago, but 
I remember the hoo-hah well.
>
>
>I can't even muster the energy to respond to them, nor to the 
>journal that published the
>article.


It was more of  a blog, not a journal, so no real respectability....

Heather Welford Neil
NCT bfc, tutor, UK

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome