How awful that someone should say all of those dreadful things in your guest book.  They seem to be forgetting that they are the guest in your home, a discussion we've had a few times on Lactnet, and if they don't like what you have to say, they can leave.  You did not force them to come over and play.   

These are things I would say to her, or even to all people who come to your site as a place to vent their own anger, frustration and/or hatred -- can you have a disclaimer corner in your site?

 No where have we espoused taking a way every formula, bottle and nipple on earth.  

If there is no way on god's green earth a mother could provide milk for her baby, certainly we would encourage use of alternatives.   We do, in fact, accept that there will always be mothers who, for whatever reasons, will choose not to breast feed, short of "impossible situations.  We just want to change the percentages. 
 
But the fact is that only one in 10 mothers, if that many, absolutely can't feed their babies, either due to maternal or infant causes.  Yet many moms choose not to breastfeed, and a lot of them make that choice without every bringing the infant to breast to see if it could work.


We want the choices to be made knowingly and from a basis of understanding, not from a basis of fear, loathing, misunderstanding or lack of education as to the benefits of breastfeeding and the harms of bottlefeeding.  Bottlefeeding certainly has some benefits -- the question must be answered in each and every family situation, "Do the benefits outweigh the risks."

Humans are indeed members of the animal kingdom, mammals to be precise, so named because they provide food for their infants from glands of  their own bodies.  There are always stories of unique survivals -- a dog raising a kitten litter, or animals in the wild raising a non-species orphan, etc.  Perhaps our statement should have been that "(wo)mankind is the only animal that ROUTINELY uses another animal's milk for her babies,"
who are fortunate to survive in "good enough" fashion.  

Of course we survive on cow's milk -- no-one denies that.  We argue that cow's milk, however, is not the best food, and we do our babies and our civilization a disservice when we bottle feed without weighing the alternatives, the benefits and the riskis. 

It is not just this particular website that advocates a return to mainly breastfeeding for infant nutrition.  It is  WHO, the AAP, and countries all over the world who are working to promote a breastfeeding rate of 75% or better for at least the first year of life. 

As for " hate-filled, prejudiced, one-sided, closed-minded, anal opinions [being shoved] down people's throats,"  the writer ought to read her own letter, before she calls the kettle black.

Denise, I am still working on learning how to surf and use the WWW. 
I'm sure it's not that hard, I just have enough to do without it.  But I would be happy to post my original letter about those who  choose not breast feed, with modifiactions as to length, according to your need, to your website -- or you are welcome to edit it and use it as you will.  The same with my comments above.

Sincerely, and Love, Chanita, San Francisco