Jennifer,
You wrote, "But I think it did a good job, overall, of drawing attention to a 
significant concern about our world."

Exclusive breastfeeding (defined as no foods, no water, no dietary 
supplements) is very uncommon practice in the world today.  Most infants are "mixed fed" 
 (breastmilk and infant formula) and the rest formula fed.  Thus the 
significant concern in the world today should be toxins in infant formula not toxins 
in breast milk.  But the premise seems to be that infant formula is free of 
environmental toxins without testing or minimal testing of that assumption!  Thus 
infant formula is presumed to be safe.  Infant formula has to mixed with 
water at the factory or by the consumer.  This seems to be an unrecognized risk of 
additional contamination. The food that most infants ingest around the world 
(due to the heavy marketing tactics of the industry) is never part of the 
media blitz on environmental toxins, only breast milk.  I would think this should 
be a warning sign for breastfeeding advocates that something is amiss.

The prevalence of mixed feeding of infants means that studies done without 
defining breastfeeding will give an untrue picture of reality.  Exclusive 
breastfeeding (no foods, no water, no dietary supplements--I would even suggest no 
pacifiers due to plastic ingestion) must be the standard in which we discuss 
the risks of breastfeeding and toxins.

I question the use of human milk fat to predict toxin levels in the infant.  
Human milk fat is the most variable component in milk.  It varies from woman 
to woman, from hour to hour, changing constantly due to the mode of 
breastfeeding, time of day, and diet.  How will testing help the individual woman 
determine her real risk?

Seeing a toxin in human milk means what?  I would suggest that because human 
milk is a live substance, it means very little.  Particularly when the US and 
Canadian military along with a US company are investing in a human milk 
component (bile salt-activated lipase) that inactivates toxins.  Thus it is possible 
that mothers who have toxins in their milk also have the human milk component 
that deactivates those toxins.  

You wrote, "Propaganda technique or not, fear can motivate people into 
concern and action."

If that fear is based on fallacy, then what you have is the big lie.  If 
infant formula is the real risk (and I believe that is the case), then the focus 
on toxins in human milk is a smokescreen used by the infant formula industry to 
avoid the truth. 

Evidence based science should mean that we divorce ourselves from propaganda 
and its techniques.  I support the need for all of us to recognize the need to 
do something regarding the toxins in our environment.  I do not think that 
human milk is a pure substance and never have believed that.  But until we have 
vigorous testing of infant formula by independent companies and scientists 
with no ties to the food industry, I stand by my belief that these articles on 
toxins in human milk are detrimental to the promotion and support of 
breastfeeding.
Valerie W. McClain  

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

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