Thanks to those of you reporting on the NY Times article.  I have not seen
it, but - having had the privilege (??) of seeing the WHO/UNICEF/UNAIDS
drafts "HIV and Infant Feeding", "Guidelines for decision makers" and "A
Guide for Health Care Managers and Supervisors" I can take a good guess at
the gist of the NY Times article.

To precis, the Guidelines say  "The process of feeding a child who is not
receiving any breastmilk, with a diet that provides all the nutrients the
child needs is called replacement feeding.... Support for adequate
replacement feeding is needed ... until a child is at least two years old
... milk in some form is essential ... Options include: Commercial infant
formula... may be made from cow's milk or vegetable products such as soy
bean or a mixture of these... Home prepared formula, which can be made from
animal milks, typically from cows, goats, buffaloes or sheep.. "  Then
follows a recipe for "Modification of cow's milk:  100 ml of milk, 50 ml
water, 10g sugar, also give micronutrient supplement."

I'm about to search the Archives on Goat's milk (am a little fearful of
doing this for cow's milk because of the sheer volume!).  I know there have
been some good informative posts on this in the past.  Your comments on the
suitability of buffalo or sheep milk for human babies - or on the guidelines
in general - would be much appreciated.  While formulating your opinions
imagine a woman living in a little hut somewhere who cooks on a wood fire,
with no electricity, no running water, no fridge.    Or she may live in a
little one-roomed wooden/tin shack in a city and she might have the water
and electricity, but the least expensive ABM may cost 63% of the minimum
wage, so modified animal milks may seem attractive, both to families and to
governments ...

Thanks for any thoughts.

Pamela Morrison IBCLC, Zimbabwe