LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
"Valerie W. McClain" <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 2 Oct 2003 04:04:48 EDT
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (79 lines)
Sandra,
I do not doubt your support of breastfeeding.  But I believe that you have
placed enormous faith in the FDA and its regulation of infant formula.  You
state in your editorial:

"It's also true that breast milk commonly violates Food and Drug
Administration action levels for poisonous substances in food.  Were it regulated like
infant formula, the breast milk of many U.S. mothers would not be able to legally
sold on supermarket shelves."

Exactly how well is infant formula regulated?  The Food and Drug
Administraiton (FDA) depends on this industry to police itself.  Infant formula
manufacturers send the FDA reports on their compliance. I do not believe that the FDA is
monitoring at the manufacturing site unless there are reports of
contamination or questionable deaths.  As discussed previously on this list, the
designation of GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) to new infant formula ingredients,
is not FDA approval but a notification process.  Many novel ingredients (which
can include genetic engineering) have been given GRAS status without
independent testing.  The bottom line is human babies are the lab rats, the guinea pigs
to a new technology.

I need an explanation of how "breastmilk commonly violates the FDA action
levels for poisonous substances in food."  I need some data on this.  What do you
mean poisonous?  Do you mean toxic?  Or do you truly mean poisonous?  Would
you say that meat or dairy products are poisonous?  And why not?  What stops us
from saying these rather shocking words about foods?  Lawsuits.  With
breastfeeding, mothers aren't going to take someone to court for saying these
shocking words about their milk.  Instead they will abandon breastfeeding or have
deep regrets about giving their babies their "poisonous" milk.  I find it
fascinating that the breastfeeding community is accepting of these words in regard to
breastmilk.  But then we all have been so very accepting of the hiv/aids
research, too. We can now add poisonous to infectious and just continue to wonder
why women just don't breastfeed.

The undercurrent I feel is that infant formula is well-regulated therefore we
need to regulate breastmilk.  Testing must be done.  Sweden, who has very
high intiation and duration rates of breastfeeding, is in the forefront of
testing.  But Sweden is the only country (as far as I know) that has made it
"illegal" to breastfeed if a woman is hiv positive.  Likewise, you mention New York
which has declared that breastfeeding is a civil right, but those civil rights
go out the window if the mother is hiv-positive.  Testing of human milk will
mean that (like all testing) some mothers will "flunk" the test.  Seeing
pathogens or toxins in human milk means what?  Basicly it shows exactly what the
mother has been in contact with in her environment. Does it mean the infant
should be fed formula instead?  If toxins or hiv/aids for example mean that an
infant will be immune compromised, then how does discouraging or outlawing
breastfeeding make sense?  Infant health outcomes have to be the hallmark of infant
feeding decisions.  Human milk is an inexpensive and quick way to view our
environment.  But I do not believe that what you see in the microscope explains
the dynamics of breastmilk within the human body or whether seeing a toxin or a
pathogen within that milk will predict disease or death.

I find it interesting that there is this push to monitor human milk and  that
will mean regulation.  And frankly I believe it will be more regulated than
infant formula. Meanwhile, human milk component patenting is a thriving
business.  What regulations do we have in regard to this?

Shocking words about human milk may recruit environmental activism but it
will not encourage breastfeeding.  If the statements are based on fact not shock
value, then lets see the data on infant formula for a comparison.  I find it
faintly amusing that environmentalists believe that the FDA regulates infant
formula so well.  Yet have lots to say about the lack of governmental regulation
of toxins in the environment.  Maybe they believe that the FDA's monitoring
of infant formula is the exception to the rule?
Valerie W. McClain, IBCLC


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

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

ATOM RSS1 RSS2