Dear Sharon,

Obviously two people can read the same study and come up with opposing views
despite our common belief in the need for support of breastfeeding.  I am
hoping this discussion will encourage others on this list to read this study.
http://www.ub.rug.nl/eldoc/dis/medicine/c.i.lanting/c3.pdf

You state, "I do see that the level of the cord blood was used as one the
variables when they did their regression analysis.  So I believe that this
was taken into account by the researchers."

In order to show exposure to PCBs by "full" breastfeeding, PCB levels were
multipled by the number of weeks of full breastfeeding called FBF in the
analysis.  In the case of bottle-feeding the FBF is zero.  Zero times
anything is zero.  Thus bottlefeeding wins hands down because the assumption
is that infant formula has no detectable PCBs over time.  Yet in reality is
no detectable levels of PCBs equal to zero?

Under Methods in this study the researchers state that they measured the PCB
levels in cord plasma, breast milk, and plasma from 42-month-old children .
No where does it state that the researchers measured the PCB levels of infant
formula.
They say in regard to measurements that "the same measurements were done in
samples of the formula milk," not that they did the measurements.  I believe
from reading this document that measurements were then given to TNO-nutrition
labs in Zeist to determine levels of PCBs.  Yes, TNO-nutrition labs is quite
the interesting lab.  According to their web site, they state that their key
objective is "to achieve the right fit between its products and services and
the demands of the market and society at large."  They do over 30% of their
business with the food and beverage industries.  They also do business with
the chemical and pharmaceutical industries and the smallest percentage with
governments.  Interestingly they state, " scientific sound studies to
substantiate claims are a critical means for gaining consumer acceptance,
formulating a structure/function claim properly for regulatory purposes, and
developing patentable products."  I thought scientific studies were needed to
determine the truth not consumer acceptance, nor gaining regulatory
acceptance for a product or developing patents?  But I guess I bow to their
clear understanding of the issues.  It certainly works regarding infant
formula.   to see TNO-nutrition web site
http;//www.voeding.tno.nl/Productsheet.cfm?PNR=ff_start

Under subjects and methods it is stated that "the mothers were provisionally
assigned to one of the two feeding groups on the basis of their intention to
breast- or formula-feed their infant.  In the breastfeeding group, we only
included mothers who were able to sustain full breast-feeding for at least
six weeks.  (is full breastfeeding equal to exclusive breastfeeding?) [page
26]  Clear studies define such terms as breastfeeding.  I see nothing in this
paper that says exclusive breastfeeding, only the terms full and partial.
These studies were done in the early 90's.  I have been told that exclusive
breastfeeding in the Netherlands is/was rare.

Sharon, you skipped a couple of important words in this research paper.  It
says, "10% aliquots were pooled and stored at -20 degrees C." [page27] The
milk was pooled.

What other studies do we have that tell us that there are no PCPs or Dioxins
in infant formula?  And what independent lab did the test?  I recently ran
across an interesting environmental site that was measuring dioxin
levels--breastmilk was lower than the water samples.  Since formula has
substantial amounts of water, I am suspicious of studies that suggest that
infant formula has no PCPs of Dioxins.

I was always under the assumption that the food chain was about how
contaminants work their way up from algae/plant life to fish/meat to man.
The way the food chain is currently being described I would have to assume
that infants are of some different species than human.  Are infants eating
food of another species? Receiving nutrition through the breast does not seem
to me to be about the end of the food chain. Contaminants are certainly
passed from the human mother to her human infant--mostly prenatally and
through lactation. But I have never seen a food chain described in a textbook
where the breastfed infant is at the end.  I view this as a distorted
description of the food chain/web designed to create an emotional
reaction--in short good propaganda.

I certainly agree that effectively dealing with breastmilk contamination
means that we have to be clear and fact-based. But is this study about
clarity and fact?  I don't think so.  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