Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 4 Jan 1996 16:57:42 CET |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
The discussion on the suitability of the infant formula and
cigarette analogy has been lively, indeed. My preference is
to compare formula to accepted safeguards that surround us
when we travel, for example cars equipped with seat belts,
air bags and specially designed chairs for babies; big
boats with small boats on board and, in principle, enough
life jackets for all passengers; and airplanes with seat
belts, oxygen masks, life jackets and inflatable rafts.
Generally, as adults we are grateful that these devices are
there even if, with the exception of seat belts and child
seats, we are more grateful still for not having to use
them--*except* in case of emergency. We would doubtless have
a very different attitude if operators required that we
*routinely* don life jackets and oxygen masks, and keep one
foot in half-inflated rafts, as a pre-condition for travel.
Infant formula as a breast-milk substitute that satisfies
the main nutritional requirements of young infants qualifies
as a genuine life-saver when the "real thing" is
unavailable. And infant formula should be "standard
equipment"--for use *only* in case of emergency!
Jim Akre, Nutrition, WHO, Geneva
|
|
|