Since it was my post Jane answered, I'll answer a few of her points,
despite the many excellent replies that have been posted to the list
since then. I'll try not to repeat what others have said.

Jane said, <<" Medela is a business, not a person.  Businesses are in
the mode of survival.  They don't have feelings or ideas.  The OWNERS of
the business are the ones who decide.">>

Referring to Medela in that way is shorthand for referring to both
corporate policy (in this case as evidenced mostly by corporate
behavior) and the individuals in charge of setting that policy and
making the relevant decisions.  The company is not a person, but it IS a
reflection of the decisions of its owners and executives.


She also said, <<" When businesses see profits in obeying the code, THEN
they will obey the code.  When they see losses, they will not obey the
code.">>

Exactly. This is why, IMO, for most of their history Medela chose to
abide by the WHO Code - because they saw it as serving their financial
interest. Now they have freely chosen, by their own admittance, no
longer to abide by that Code. One can logically conclude that, as you
said, this is because they now see Code-compliance as putting them at
risk for profit loss.

My take on the topic is that, just as in its infancy the pediatric
profession was courted by formula manufacturers in order to help them
achieve public acceptance and market dominance, so pump manufacturers
have long courted our profession, still in its own infancy, for the same
purposes.  Once they achieved those goals, the formula industry started
going directly to hospitals and consumers more than it had previously
(over the objections of some in the pediatric profession). It seems to
me that Medela, as a matter of corporate policy, now sees themselves as
no longer "needing" us, hence their change in marketing tactics (from
Code-compliance to Code-violation, and such things as putting their pump
rentals in major retail chain stores with no breastfeeding expertise
like Babies R Us.)


<<" It is to their best interests to design the best products possible
to keep mothers breastfeeding and babies getting breast milk EVEN IF the
mother has to be away.  >>

No, it is not. It is not in their best interest to keep "babies getting
breast milk EVEN IF the mother has to be away." It is in their best
interest to keep babies getting breastmilk in BOTTLES, period. ONLY in
bottles, as OFTEN as possible, and regardless of the reason - whether or
not the mother is or "has to be" away.

It would also be in their best interest to develop a pump that can
reliably maintain a woman's milk supply without the woman ever having to
put her baby to breast at all. 

In other words, from the cynical-corporate point of view: why should
their profits be limited by whether or not a woman "has to be" away? Why
should their profits be limited by whether or not a woman can or wants
to put her baby to the breast? They will make much more money if women
DON'T put their babies to the breast any more frequently than is
absolutely necessary to maintain milk supply. 

I am reminded of the Medela television ad that Rachel told us about in
March of this year - the "smoking gun", as she referred to it. In the
ad, Medela clearly distinguished between breastfeeding as being best for
the BABY versus using their products, which according to the ad was best
for both MOM and baby.

Last little bit I wish to address is this:  <<" I WISH they marketed the
special needs feeder and that it was a bit cheaper and more
available.">>

If Medela thought that there was sufficient money in it, they would
market the special needs feeder, etc, as you wish.  Again: their goals -
the goals of any pump manufacturer - are not always in keeping with
those of our own profession. We will do well not ever to forget that,
IMO....



Regina M. Roig-Romero, BS IBCLC 
Senior Lactation Consultant 
Miami-Dade County Health Dept WIC/Nutrition 
Breastfeeding Program 
7785 NW 48 ST, Suite 300 
Miami FL 33166 

(786) 336-1333 x16219
(786) 336-1302 fax 
(786) 336-1336 Breastfeeding Helpline 

Please note: Florida has a very broad public record law. Most written
communications to or from State officials regarding State business are
public records available to the public and media upon request. Your
E-mail communications may therefore be subjected to public disclosure. 

Confidentiality Notice: This electronic message, including any
attachments, contains information that may be legally confidential
and/or privileged and is intended only for use by the individual and or
entity to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient,
any unauthorized disclosure, review, copying, distribution, or use of
the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful. If
you have received this electronic transmission in error, please notify
the sender immediately and proceed to delete it.


--

For up-to-date information about H1N1 Swine Flu visit http://www.myflusafety.com or call 877-352-3581

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

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