Dear Lactnetters,

After reading the post about the Lancet study showing 5% transmission of HIV
from mom to baby after breastfeeding 6 months, I have the following questions:

1.  How did they determine that the moms were HIV-positive in the first place?
According to Celia Farber's articles "HIV Roulette" and "HIV and
Breastfeeding" in the Sept./Oct. 1998 issue of Mothering magazine, pregnancy
is one of several factors that elicit false positive results from the ELISA
and Western Blot tests.

2.  Supposing that their testing is perfectly accurate, and that all the
mothers and babies who had positive results did indeed have HIV antibodies,
why not say that breastfeeding up to 4 months is recommended, with appropriate
substitutes thereafter? (Like hand expressing and heating the mother's milk to
kill any virus?)

3.  And, of course, as has been said earlier, how does this 5% transmission
rate compare to rates of other causes of death in the baby's environment?
Also, have the researchers followed this 5% of babies to see if they developed
AIDS after all?

Inquiring minds want to know...
Lisa Mo
LLLL, Bowling Green, KY