Arly you wrote,

"But these safeguards are what keeps our 6,000 deaths from infant
formula/year from being 600,000 or 6 million."

The data of 6,000 deaths is dependent on the questions that are asked.  Take
for example E. sakazakii infant deaths.  This particular pathogen causes
meningitis, septicemia, necrotizing enterocolitis, brain abscesses, cerebral
infarctions, etc in infants.  I believe the reason that the particular case in
Tennessee came to the awareness of the CDC was that the hospital in which this
occurred was one of some 30 sentinel hospitals in the USA that was monitoring such
things.  If infants have died from these various problems in smaller or less
equipped hospitals, would infant formula be a suspected cause of the problem?
Of course, now there maybe a thorough investigation but prior to that event
how many cases slipped by without notice? The supposition is that infant
formula is safe in developed nations.  What does it take to question that
assumption?  In Florida where I live, the state puts out a book of vital statistics for
a given year.  Under infant mortality, I do not see method of feeding factored
in to mortality statistics.  What I see is death from septicemia, NEC,
pnemonia, gastritis, respiratory infections, etc. How many of these deaths could
have been prevented by exclusive breastfeeding?  Don't know and won't know
because we believe that infant formula is safe in developed nations.

Arly you wrote, "In other words, infant deaths are kept at a level the
American public will accept."

I respectfully disagree with your assessment.  I don't think the American
public knows that death is one of the risks of infant formula.  They have only
been educated about the benefits of breastfeeding.  No one tells them that they
might be risking their child's life by bottlefeeding.  On this list I have
heard over and over again from various IBCLCs that they cannot present the risks
of infant formula feeding to parents because the institutions they work for
won't allow it.   So I believe it is not the American public that accepts this
level of deaths, it is health care policy makers and health care professionals.
 Parents have no clue and they have no clue because policies in various
medical institutions discourage health care professionals from speaking about risks
of infant formula. And why do health care professionals/instititutions know
infant formula is safe in developed nations? Because they have been told so by
the reps from the industry.  I believe that the assumption that poorly
prepared infant formula is the only reason there is a risk in developed nations is
erronous.  One only need look at the patents on human milk components to know
how coveted and treasured these components are by the pharmacetical and infant
formula industries. Death by a disease that could have been prevented by
breastfeeding is called what?  The government may call it pnemonia, diarrhea, or NEC
but I call it an infant formula death.  The questions one asks and the
perspective you have creates the kind of science-based evidence you accept.
Valerie W. McClain, IBCLC



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

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(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html