LACTNET Archives

Lactation Information and Discussion

LACTNET@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 15 Oct 1997 10:40:28 +1000
Reply-To:
Lactation Information and Discussion <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From:
Johnston <[log in to unmask]>
Comments:
To: Bev Walker <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (4 lines)
Bev, my comment on your suggestion to < call cows milk cows milk> and < Why use respectable monikers for something that was meant for calves?> is that the powdered white stuff that is fed to babies would not be good for calves either.  Farmers have a commercial formula called "milk replacer" or such, and it has been shown that calves denied access to the cows' colostrum (fresh, biologically active), and fed milk replacer instead are more likely to develop septicaemia from scours (calf gastro-enteritis) and die.  Also calves fed fresh cows milk (from their own mother or another cow) grow better than those fed milk replacer.
Makes sense, doesn't it?
Joy Johnston

ATOM RSS1 RSS2