> ... When their babies get colicky or sick they stop all BF and give goats
>milk...<

Out of the frying pan and into the fire...why would anyone take a sick baby
and deny it the only exogenous source of immunoglobulins and antibodies
available, substituting a nutritionally inferior and less digestible
product when the baby is already suffering?

In addition, goat's milk lacks sufficient folacin to sustain infant health
and development in the long term,  it may provoke an allergic response in
susceptible individuals,  raw goat's milk (if this is what they are using)
poses a considerable health risk to babies, and the composition of any
animal milk is sufficiently different from (read: inferior to) human's milk
as to make it a poor substitute for the real thing.

In general there is no product which should be substituted for breastmilk
in a sick baby.

There are exceptions, such as the infant who cannot be fed orally at all,
the infant with an inborn error of metabolism such as galactosemia, and
those whose mother's milk has been dangerously contaminated.  In none of
these cases would goat's milk be recommended.

Arly Helm

[log in to unmask] (Arly Helm, LC)