Several people have written about their thoughts that raising the dollar
cost of donor milk to the users will raise the value of human milk in the
public's mind and that this will lead to more babies getting breastmilk in
the US.
This seems to me a specifically US-American line of reasoning.  There are
places on earth, believe it or not, where reason speaks almost as loudly as
a fat wallet, especially when reason has an economic argument on its side,
namely that the entire society benefits from making the society amenable to
babies getting breastfed.  In many of these places, again, believe it or
not, unless a healthy product has a cost that is within reach of the health
services' budget, it will not be valued, it will be rejected.  It will be
suspected that the price is inflated for the sake of profit alone, and a
cheaper product that is perceived to be equivalent will be chosen instead.
The notion that taking something and inflating its cost will somehow make it
seem more worthwhile, is nothing short of bizarre from the standpoint of a
welfare state resident.  I know most Lactnetters don't live in a welfare
state, and that is why I am presenting the viewpoint of someone who happens
to live in one.  I'm not doing it to try and convince anyone that it's
better, I just want you to know that there are different ways of looking at
how we value things.  Personally I feel grateful to live where I do, for
lots of reasons, among them being the safety net that is woven so finely
that even a person of less than 2 pounds will not slip through its holes.
Perhaps one reason that donor milk banks in the US haven't managed to break
through the immense cultural barriers to seeing human milk as a necessity
for human babies is that there has not been a large corporation driving such
a campaign who stand to make big bucks off it - on the contrary, the very
powerful industry (formula) that stands to lose the most has been in
collusion with the very powerful group (doctors) that profits off the ill
health caused by formula use.  Please note I am talking about industry and
groups, and I am well aware that there are many admirable individual doctors
who don't buy any of that hooey, but to date they have not managed to take
control of their organizations.
Maybe it is true that in the medical model, people will not recognize the
value of normal food for babies as long as you call it normal food.  Maybe
you have to call it a drug for them to get it.  It seems an ultimate
admission of failure and powerlessness on our part to go along with such a
radical notion.
Jacquie Nutt wonders why we look askance at mothers selling their own
product.  The company in question is not facilitating the sale of breastmilk
by mothers, it is about that company selling the mothers' product, in a
business model that involves profit rather than simply meeting operating
costs.  That is a new development with the advent of Prolacta, and not one
that all of us welcome so warmly.  Mothers have been donating their milk out
of the goodness of their hearts all along.

I would be most interested to hear what is happening in Australia with milk
banking and the production of human milk fortifier.  To date I have only
heard rumors that efforts are underway.  Does anyone here have current info
on it?
Rachel Myr
Kristiansand, Norway

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

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(R)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html