I wrote a huge long essay on this, then decided not to send it.  Let me just
say this: Anyone who thinks that the source of funding for research has no
bearing on the types of questions asked, and the way results are presented
(or NOT presented), is incredibly naive.  One has only to look at the
tobacco industry to see numerous examples analogous to the situation we
currently face with the infant formula industry.  Researchers who benefit
financially from industry sponsors, and their research results, must
*always* be suspect.  Likewise, it is always useful to know the source of
funding of people who make statements that flatly contradict the current
research literature.  If we are to believe that Dr. Innis is totally above
reproach in terms of being influenced by her ties to the formula industry,
then we are left with the conclusion that she is an ignorant fool who
doesn't keep up with the research (for then she would know that
socioeconomic and educational status have been controlled for in studies of
IQ differences between breastfed and bottle-fed children).  If giving money
to people didn't influence what they said, then lobbyists would be out of work.



Katherine A. Dettwyler, Ph.D.
Texas A&M University