The researcher S. Carlsen may have been quoted as saying that formula is as good as breastmilk, but that is certainly not what his research shows, or even what the research was about. If he was quoted correctly however, it certainly suggests a bias. After reading the original article, I can say that the newspaper articles are a good example of why you shouldn't believe everything you read, and why it's always important to go back to the original research. 
The research was done to investigate a possible association between second trimester maternal androgen levels, and breastfeeding. Their conclusion was that maternal androgen levels in mid-pregnancy are negatively associated with breastfeeding. Considering the fact that Diana West and Lisa Marasco talk about the possible association between low milk production and maternal androgen levels in their book “Making More Milk”, this not a new idea. In the conclusion of the original article, the researchers admit that there are some weakness to their study, and then go on to say the following:

“Recent data from a well-conducted cluster randomized trial of breastfeeding seem to question many of the positive health effects for the child shown in observational studies. This raises the possibility that the statistical association between breastfeeding and offspring health depends on a common factor. We hypothesize that maternal gestational androgen levels may be this factor. If confirmed in future studies, one implication may be that the association between breastfeeding and offspring health is not purely an effect of breastfeeding, but is influenced by the intra-uterine endocrine milieu presented to the fetus.”

The randomized trial that they are referring to is the PROBIT trial, which was studying the effect of breastfeeding promotion, and both the intervention and the control group had (relatively) high breastfeeding levels. With a control group and an intervention group that include breastfed babies, naturally the results are bound to be weaker than if breastfed babies are being compared to formula fed babies, which was not the intent of the PROBIT trial. In other words, the researchers have a hypothesis based on a study that was not designed to look at the health of breastfed babies versus formula fed babies.

The newspaper articles suggest that the journalists either didn't read the actual research article, or they have no understanding of research. Either that or they're just looking to stir up controversy and sell more papers as usual. How sad that it is at the expense of mothers and babies.

Fleur Bickford BSc., RN, IBCLC, LLLL
Ontario, Canada

             ***********************************************

Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome