At 01:16 AM 4/1/97 EST, you wrote:

>I have an extremely close friend who both breast & bottle-fed her six
>babies.  She saw absolutely nothing wrong with using abm and still
>doesn't (she is very intelligent, just not regarding abm).  She made it
>very clear that she is highly offended with abm because of the word
>artificial.  She wants to know what is artificial in the formula or the
>feeding method.  There are not plastic ingredients as she says, I

Um, how about the plastic bottle it comes from?  I always call it
'artificial feeding methods' actually, and abm is my term of choice for
writing and speaking in polite circles (it is called 'swill' among
friends...)

>countered what about "artificial" ingredients found in mass produced
>foods, flavorings, etc.  Needless to say, this is a taboo subject between
>us, because we just don't agree on the long-term effects of abm in the
>diet of an infant.

Ask her why she feels 'formula' is an appropriate term?  I mean, geez, I
can make a cake and it is a set amount of ingredients all mixed together,
but I call it a 'recipe' not a 'formula.'   "Formula"  implies a specific
chemical mixture, not a food recipe that isn't even standardized between
types (cow, soy, hydrolysate) or brands (MJ, AR).

>As a LLL Leader, I do believe the public at large (including myself prior
>to my first pregnancy) believes that formula is equal to or better than
>breastmilk.  The word "formula" conjures up the idea of "scientific"
>meaning modern or   "truly miraculous"  meaning "look what man has
>created".  The public, in general, believes that abm is actually better

::haha:: I should read all of the message before responding eh?  "Great
minds think alike" and all of that? ;)


>HIV & AIDS, I think it is too complicated to have thriving milk banks as
>in years past.  People are too scared, as I believe I would be, to use
>this as an option before resorting to abm.

Phew!! Not me!! I'd use banked human milk any day before using ABM for any
of my children (barring galactosemia.)  Just as I wouldn't opt for
artificial blood because of the small risk (it is not zero risk folks) of
HIV from a blood transfusion.   Along with this, someone correct me if I am
wrong, but isn't it pasteurized?  Doesn't that kill the HIV virus?  Heck,
there isn't even enough research to know if the *milk itself* can destroy
that virus.  Human milk (my term of choice) can destroy cancer cells, so
you never know.

>I don't like the term Human Milk Substitute.  I believe it makes it sound
>equal still to mother's milk.  The Substitute Infant Nourishment is too

I totally agree with you on this one!

I probably will stick with 'artificial baby milk.'  I also like Synthetic
Infant Nutrition Substitute coined by Jonathan Kramer.  ;)


Heidi Murphy
Peer Counselor, BSN Student