How this has gotten through ethics committees is because they have a
breastfeeding support component and they have stated on websites that this
results in more breastfeeding amongst participants (than the general
population I presume). I think that it is for this reason that some LCs are
referring women. However, this can not "make up" for the inducement IMO
because if the inducement was not provided (ie if the infant formula was
paid for) then even more women would breastfeed more for longer and it does
not remove the fact that this is a trial testing infant formula. If I were
on any of the ethics committees I would have required the inducement to be
removed. Experimental design could have been improved greatly by the
inclusion of donor milk for those women who truly cannot exclusively
breastfeed (perhaps contributed to by having diabetes themselves)....how
many women do you reckon would "choose" infant formula if they had
breastmilk to fill the gap (and were given accurate info)....some would but
many would not and then we'd have real info on diabetes and diet and LCs
could refer women without facing an ethical dilemma.
Karleen Gribble
Australia

> Who was the IRB committee for this study? Did they raise concerns?
> Seems to me that, if they didn't, they were either asleep at the switch
> or so ill informed about this issue as to be unqualified to judge the
> ethics of the study.
>
> Naomi Bar-Yam

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

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