Excuse me for not remembering which digest the post was in or who posted it, I
have just read 21 Lactnet digests instead of preparing for my final exam in
statistics and epidemiology.
In the latest issue of JHL, Ted Greiner has some comments about the issue of
industry financing and industry influence.  (His comments were solicited by
the journal editor because of his high profile of advocacy for independence in
research.)  He recounts 3 true stories of how the artificial baby food
industry influenced publication or dissemination of research articles to its
own benefit.  One example is as follows:
"In 1980, Judith Gussler of Ross Laboratories (mfr. of Similac) and Linda
Briesmeister published a review of 43 articles supporting their view that the
main cause for the decline in breastfeeding was "the insufficient milk
syndrome" (IMS) stemming from mothers' failure to have constant body contact
with their babies.
"Colleagues and I published a response reviewing an additional 49 studies
suggesting that IMS was not quite this common.  We pointed out that "baby
weaned itself" was the predominant explanation given by mothers in some places
where IMS hardly was mentioned.  We hypothesized that both are often simple
explanations for complex decisions, the one that local norms expect as an
explanation for stopping breastfeeding.  We doubted that biology was a major
determinant.  Time has proven us correct, as breastfeeding rates have
skyrocketed in areas where it is adequately supported (much of Scandinavia and
Canada), though even today I think that carrying your baby around on your body
is a good idea whenever possible!
"I asked if I could order a couple hundred reprints, but the editor would not
take such small orders.  'Do you know how many were ordered by Ross Labs of
the one you commented on?  Several thousand.  Now they have sent us a second
order.'
"I later heard that Ross sent it to every pediatrician in the United States.
Since then I often see their article cited but not ours (which would strike me
as the fair thing to do, especially since Gussler and Briesmeister were given
the opportunity to publish a rebuttal immediately after it).  The reason is of
course that more have the Ross reprint handy than read the journal."
(J Hum Lact 19(4),2003, pp. 363-364)
This is probably part of the reason that the belief in IMS as a major obstacle
to breastfeeding persists.  The rest of Ted's commentary is worth reading if
you haven't done so already, but this post is long enough as it is.
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(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html