Rachel Myr wrote: > Heather Neil raises pertinent questions in the matter of the influence > of maternal diet on the quality of her milk. > One thing that has never, ever been demonstrated to my knowledge is > whether milk produced by a mother on a sub-optimal diet gives poorer > nutrition to her child than any breastmilk substitute would. It's > hard to imagine a maternal diet that would cause ANY breastmilk > substitute to surpass the mother's own milk in suitability for her child. > Of course there are extreme circumstances with environmental pollution > disasters but that isn't maternal diet, either. > Rachel Myr > Kristiansand, Norway I think we'd be pretty safe in saying, that if the mother is managing to produce milk at all, it's going to be better quality than any substitute. Notwithstanding the hygiene issues, it's clear the biology will protect the infant at the cost of the mother. Just looking at how maternal milk containing HIV retrovirus, is still healthier for the baby than substitute, just about says it all. The mammalian tenancy, if the situation is so threatening that the offspring are not going to survive, is for the mother to kill and eat the offspring, in order to fuel her flight. There comes a moment where having a fertile escapee, is more important than allowing her to die with the young: if the calories gone into producing the young are to be lost (the young will die no matter what happens) then the calories have to recycled. Nothing in the biology of such dire situations, is about the mother's milk suddenly not being enough - as it's a response to extreme danger from predators etc Thankfully, one of the patterns that the human mammal has evolved _not_ to do. There must be a point where milk will not be produced, as the maternal body is ravaged - but look at the Auschwitz - Birkenau </url?sa=L&ai=BfY9qXPJjRoXzEoqQ0gT6kqndBYCNmxS4sp3eArbIgc4C4MUICAAQARgBIMeY-AUoAjgBUJXS1lxgu76ug9AKmAGShwGqATRjb20ubWljcm9zb2Z0OmVuLWdiOklFLVNlYXJjaEJveCtHR0lDYitHR0lDYUk3K0dHSUNsyAEBgAIBqQL2fyna0KHAPtkDF4OooHXFCqPgAxA&q=http://www.escape2poland.co.uk/auschwitz.html&usg=AFQjCNHGq874d4TDLhuf1sOFnrr8BSVtRA> mothers who managed even in the most extreme of deprivations, or Cecily William's little band in the Japanese camps. The ability of the human mammal, to continue producing intelligent and physically alert offspring, in face of extreme nutritional deprivation, is probably why we've survived as a species- along with our ability to store all those fat cells for the raw energy required to get us to the next time of plenty. Times of plenty have buoyed up the baseline, and off we go into the future, hoping the next generation will get optimum, as opposed to survival, nutrition. Ironic then, in the extreme, that it's this very resilience, that masks the damage being done by artificial feeds - whether it be karo syrup, ground almond milk or commercial formula. Just like it's also extremely ironic, that in our first sustained time of plenty, we are relentlessly filling up all those fat cells, whilst continuing to be malnourished. Morgan *********************************************** 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]