The 3/127 figure that was referred to  (Digest - 28 Aug 1995) actually
refers to the 130 oligiosaccarides (not essential fatty acids) which are
present in breastmilk but not in formula and was given by Patricia McVeagh
at the conference some of us were at in Melbourne recently.  One company has
added 3 oligiosaccarides to its formula - when it comes to your town be
ready to ask the reps about the other 127 that are missing!

There are already formulas on the market which contain long chain
polyunsaturates (LC-PUFAs), a german company has term and preterm formulas,
and one Australian preterm formula has them too.  I understand that some
capsules are about to come onto the market here which can be used to add
LC-PUFAs into formula (one capsule per day's mix of formula).

However, although the LC-PUFAs in formula are in the same amounts as
breastmilk, they are in a different form - how effective will they be?
LC-PUFAs seem to be important for optimal brain development, but what else
is necessary?  Breastmilk is a living fluid with thousands of ingredients,
with each ingredient facilitating others in ways we haven't even begun to
understand.  Adding an ingredient to formula is not just like altering a
recipe in the kitchen; it can potentially change the whole balance - eg it
might interfere with absorption of another ingredient essential for
something else.

Improving formula is an interesting ethical issue.  Should babies who are
not breastfed get the best science can poduce, or should they be punished
for their mothers' sins?  I believe we should not be threatened by all these
attempts because and the companies are light years away from "our product".
What is needed is full implementation of the WHO Code so that companies are
restricted to giving only "scientific and factual information" about their
products - this stops grandiose claims with the addition of each new change
of formulation.
Ros Escott    ( Tasmania, Australia)
[log in to unmask]