Just a couple of comments on the thread regarding research on infant formula. Almost all of the research done on infant formulas when new ingredients are being tested are funded and conducted by the formula manufacturer. Most studies funded by a manufacturer report outcomes favorable to the sponsoring company. Much of the formula research has flaws in the methodology. Some of the studies have high attrition rates of subjects, i.e., babies who did not tolerate the study formula are dropped from the study but not accounted for. These could be the babies who experience explosive diarrhea from the high DHA levels in the formula, are dropped from the study, and the final conclusion states that all babies tolerated the new formula well. Of course they did--- the babies who did not were dropped from the study!!! Many of these studies do not have an exclusively breastfed control group or do not define breastfeeding. Some of the studies claiming that health and cognitive outcomes are the same as breastfed babies could include breastfed babies who had as little as one breastfeeding a day. Many studies do not use newborns but wait until babies are a month old before feeding them the experimental formula, so we do not know how a newborn reacts to the stuff. The studies feed babies the formula for a limited time such as 180 days, not for a full year.

One of the best references that explains how poorly new ingredients are studied is:

"Infant formula: evaluating the safety of new ingredients" from the Institute of Medicine which can be obtained at http://www.iom.edu/CMS/3788/4583/19034.aspx

"Although existing federal guidelines and regulations for evaluating the safety of food ingredients have worked well for conventional substances (e.g., vitamins, minerals), they are not sufficient to address the diversity of potential new ingredients proposed by manufacturers to develop formulas that mimic human milk, says a report from the IOM. In the report, the committee provides guidelines that clarify the types and extent of safety testing necessary for new formula ingredients, particularly unconventional substances derived from novel sources or technologies. To help formula manufacturers and their outside expert reviewers determine what safety data are needed on a proposed ingredient and how they should be gathered, the report also offers a set of "decision trees" -- hierarchical series of questions leading to specific action steps -- to guide the level and extent of safety testing needed at various stages."
 
NABA will soon have its second US Code monitoring results available entitled, "Still Selling Out Mothers and Babies" that looks at the massive Code violations still rampant in the US. The marketing of these products remains deceptive and misleading no matter what miracle they claim will happen when babies are fed these products.

Marsha Walker, RN, IBCLC
Weston, MA
________________________________________________________________________
AOL now offers free email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com.

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

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
Mail all commands to [log in to unmask]
To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or [log in to unmask])
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet or ([log in to unmask])
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]