"Further we can read that "the authors declare that none of them own stock
or shares in any organization that could benefit from this study. "

Based on her LinkedIn page (a professional networking website, for those who
may be unfamiliar), Jimi Francis lists her prior employment as:

-Research Consultant for Handi-Craft:  2005-2006
-Clinical Director at Simplisse:  2006-present

Perhaps she doesn't own stock outright, but I'd say it's fair to assume she
has a vested interest in the performance of the companies writing her
paychecks; companies that definitely stand to benefit from her research (why
else would they employ her?).  Additionally, I find the phrase "'served as a
resource regarding breastfeeding issues for Handi-craft Company'" to be a
little deceptive:  she was not a mere resource, she was their employee.

Given that she does not disclose her Clinical Director status at Simplisse
as a competing interest, but she does mention Handi-Craft, I find this to be
furhter evidence that the two companies are actually one and the same (or
Ms. Francis made a massive omission in her disclosures).

To answer Karleen's "How can this be?? How did this get past the reviewers?"
 - It appears that the people at Handi-Craft/Simplisse are VERY savvy at
creating appearances which cover the true nature of their business structure
and purposes.

Amy
(who is training to be an IBCLC and is particularly offended by WHO Code
violators with goals more focused on making money than helping babies and
their mothers)


On Wed, Apr 28, 2010 at 12:10 PM, Rachel Myr <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> My fellow listmother Karleen Gribble writes: "So a paper published in the
> International Breastfeeding Journal, funded by the company that owns Br
> Brown's is being used to market bottles in breach of the International Code
> of Marketing of Breastmilk Substitutes. How can this be?? How did this get
> past the reviewers?"
>
> The study was published in the journal in 2008.  The marketing is happening
> now.  We know nothing about the ownership structures of Dr Brown's and
> Handi-Craft at the time, but even if Handi-Craft did own Dr Brown's then,
> the declaration of competing interests should be sufficient to satisfy
> reviewers that the research could be evaluated on its own merits. The
> authors' disclosure of competing interests at the time includes the
> information, published with the article, that Jimi Francis had "served as a
> resource regarding breastfeeding issues for Handi-craft Company" and the
> others declare no competing interests.  Further we can read that "the
> authors declare that none of them own stock or shares in any organization
> that could benefit from this study. Nor do any of the authors hold or are
> applying for any patents relating to the content of this manuscript."
>  Handi-Craft provided the grant to fund the research but it was carried out
> by scientists without a vested interest in the findings.  Can we ask for
> more transparency than that?  (Yes, we can ask that public, independent
> institutions act as stewards for research funding, so even this degree of
> competing interest would be unnecessary - but while we wait for that day,
> this is likely the best we can expect.)
>
> Once an article is published, a company that stands to benefit from its
> findings would be foolish not to flaunt it.  I don't think there is any
> reason to criticize the reviewers in International Breastfeeding Journal.
>  They can not control who cites articles published in the journal, after the
> fact.
>
> I heard Jimi speak last year at a breastfeeding conference in England, a
> conference absolutely free of industry sponsorship with the exception of
> Blackwell Publishing.  She did not mention specific bottle brands or even
> obliquely refer to 'vented' bottles.  In fact, the emphasis of her talk was
> on the importance of keeping babies fed at the breast.  Her research shows
> that the more expressed milk comes in contact with air, the more the content
> of oxidation-labile nutrients is diminished.  This is something we should be
> informed and concerned about, especially in places where maternity leave has
> not progressed to the point of allowing mothers to breastfeed their children
> full time for more than a few weeks.  Like much research funded by Medela
> and research funded by formula industry, this research has relevance for us.
>  The reason that good journals require authors to disclose competing
> interests is so that in cases where the competing interests do not
> completely disqualify the research, the readers can judge the findings in
> light of those interests.
>
> If Jimi Francis has now become clinical director of Simplisse, I hope for
> her sake the financial compensation is enough to make up for the loss of
> respect any of her future research will get as long as that connection
> remains.  I could not find anything on the Simplisse site to show who is
> involved in the company.
>
> Rachel Myr
> Kristiansand, Norway
>
>             ***********************************************
>
> 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
>

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

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