Any research paper, any article from any source needs critical appraisal.
Just because an article is published in a peer reviewed journal does not mean
that it speaks the truth.  It certainly means that more "expert" eyes and minds
have looked at it and considered it worthy of publication.

 I have looked at a number of articles in various peer reviewed journals in
which I believe those articles should not have been accepted for publication.
Why?  Because the researcher had a financial interest in the research (often a
patent) and never stated it.  He or she may have stated funding sources but
not that he or she had a patent.  This occurred in our very own JHL (and yes I
wrote a letter to the editor and it was published).

How does one publish something that is controversial (this paper states that
the use of infant formula doubles the risk of infant death for American
babies) in the USA?  I would suggest that it is difficult and next to impossible.
Whether this paper would stand up because of its research methodology and
statistics, I don't know.  But the wealth of information packed into this paper is
worth having (105 references), listing of why US babies die, US breastfeeding
rates (Ross vs. National Immunization Survey).
It may not be an article to use as a reference in the medical community but
it certainly is worth looking at.  In fact I would very much enjoy seeing a
review done on Lactnet on this paper.  Dr. Wight has some important points to
consider in regard to this paper.  How authors pull data from other studies and
interpret them are important.  Misquoting other research papers is a serious
offense.

While the article is obviously provocative to others, I find it tame reading
after looking at the patents on human milk components.  I think the truth is
we don't know how many infants die in the USA because they were not breastfeed
or breastfeed exclusively or long enough.  Palmer gives the US National Vital
Statistic Report in which it states that there were 28,000 infant deaths for
the year 1999.  There was 1,750 infant deaths due to respiratory distress:
lung collapse, influenza, pnemonia.  How many of these might have been prevented
by exclusive breastfeeding?  Don't know--impossible to know absolutely.  Yet
it is interesting that the infant formula industry has "borrowed" the human
milk component to treat and prevent RSV.  And the infant formula industry has
borrowed other human milk components to treat the very diseases listed as causes
of death for infants in the USA.  It would seem that the infant formula
industry has alot of respect for the power of human milk.
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