> If this proves to be a better choice for artificially fed babies, promoting
> this method will point out to parents that ABM has actual risks, is not
> "gentle" or "complete" .

You know, I hate to say this, but I'm not sure I would not want to
encourage the thinking that by varying the formulas and introducing
early solids we can get the message across that formula feeding is
risky. WE can easily see this, but given the general lack of critical
thinking skills we see nowadays, I believe what will happen is that
people will take the message "Oh good, there's a better way to feed-
early solids will make formula feeding a BETTER method. (thereby giving
them less reason to feel guilty for choosing not to BF in the first
place?) "  And they will continue to formula feed, anyway.

As Diane W. has pointed out, many parents are already perfectly willing
to settle for less than optimal feeding for their ofspring, partly
because they themselves don't have a perfect diet.  They may be very
happy to have an excuse to feel they are doing a just little bit more,
by offering early solids, or varying the brands.

This is one place I think I'm going to stay away from mixing causes.
Sue Jacoby, IBCLC