Yes please share!
Elisabeth
-----Original Message-----
From: Karen Foard, IBCLC
Sent: Friday, May 09, 2014 7:21 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: hackles raised, questions asked
I just read an article in Clinical Pediatrics about a study comparing the
use of two different forms of formula (powdered and ready to feed). As I
read it, I felt my hackles raise as it SO felt like what we all know to be -
that the use of formula in human infants is an ongoing experiment. While the
premise of the article was to compare the growth patterns of babies using
the two products, there was NO feeling of what would they do if one of the
ways was shown to be discrepant? It was just a compilation of checkpoints
along the way to 4 months comparing growth patterns to each other- not to
the norm of breastfeeding or even breastmilkfeeding. I am sure some of you
will have other questions YOU would have asked, but here’s what I wrote to
the lead author, who appears to be an employee of Abbott:
***
Dear Marlene,
I had a few questions about your study recently published in Clinical
Pediatrics: Growth of Healthy Term Infants Fed
Ready-to-Feed and Powdered Forms of an Extensively Hydrolyzed Casein-Based
Infant Formula: A Randomized, Blinded, Controlled Trial.
It was mentioned in the article that infants were recruited in those early
days after birth (between 0 and 9 days). How were they recruited? Where and
when did potential participants in the study learn about your study? Were
they recruited by solely communicating with ONLY those mothers, who , in
hospital, had decided to formula feed exclusively from day one? Were any of
those babies, especially those recruited after the first few days, initially
breastfed? Did the participants need to pay for any of their formula? Were
there any educational materials about the normalcy of
breastmilk/breastfeeding shared with the participants as they expressed
interest in the study, and/or the risks of infant formula use? I saw no
demographics about the mothers age and education background in the article-
was this information collected? If yes, what was the average maternal age
and level of education? Was informed consent given re the potential issues
of Enterobacter sakazakii contamination of powdered infant formula as well
as was instruction given and followed up on the proper preparation of
powdered infant formula? Why is this study being published in 2014 when the
dates of the infant recruitment were in 2000- what took so long? How does
this relate to the powdered formulas of today? Were follow up studies done
on any of those now 13-14 year children?
Would love to know the answers to these questions.
*****
If any of you are interested in the responses I receive (if any) from the
study’s author, I will be happy to share. We know that research, especially
published research, can be used to show whatever you want to be shown….there
were just SO many ethical questions raised in my head about this study I
just had to respond!
Karen Foard, IBCLC
[log in to unmask]
Combining the Art and Science of Breastfeeding in Central Pennsylvania since
1988
***********************************************
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
***********************************************
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
|
