I am going to post this directly and through another listmember, as I cannot
seem to find out why my posts come garbled to some members and perfectly
finer to others (and are clear in the Archives).

I have read the thread on trans-fats with great interest. This has been an
area of great interest to me for a long time. The fats in our bodies and in
human milk are of the utmost importance to human health. I think our own lack of
education both as consumers and as LC's is problematic here.

One person (Laurie, I believe) asked what is the big deal if there are
trans-fats in human milk. This is not to chastise anyone, but I wonder how anyone
cannot know that trans-fats are a very big deal? Thanks to marketing and a
public school education (in nutrition) funded by industry, we do not even know what
we are doing to our own bodies with the foods we eat. Even most nutritionists
and RD's have no idea what trans-fats are--they are still out there promoting
a "balanced" diet as if a balanced diet means a balance between good food and
bad food. A balanced diet is balanced between a variety of good foods.

Trans fats are not okay in moderation. There are foods that are beneficial to
us and "foods" that harm--trans-fats do only harm. The more trans-fats you
consume, the more EFA's you need. People consuming trans-fats aren''t consuming
EFA's--they are not found in the same foods. The more depleted you are in
EFA's, the more malnourished you are, no matter how overfed you are. We already
know that infants need EFA's in huge amounts (we forget that we need them, too),
so if a mom is eating trans-fats, it is not a huge leap to realize that she
is depleted in EFA's. I would contend that the avg. American is quite
malnourished while still greatly overfed.

We like to make the argument that undernourished mothers make good milk and
we have stuck with this argument for a long time. The thing is that we are
really talking about poor women in developing countries when we make this
argument--we have no foundation for saying that this is true of Western mothers who
live on processed foods. I would contend that it is not true at all. I would
contend that they make a milk that is superior in all ways to artificial milk,
but not by a long stretch the "perfect food" that is designed to optimize human
potential.

Another issue that I think comes into play here is that even as the avg.
American has a very poor diet, so too does the avg. HCP. It is very difficult when
you yourself are poorly educated about nutrition to educate others in a
meaningful way. We are the country where the term "all things in moderation" rules.
Again, I would contend that this is a terribly dangerous mantra. Trans-fats
are not harmless in moderation, nor are many other toxins in our heavily
processed food supply. But, it is very difficult to advocate for something we
ourselves do not do. I would venture to guess that even on this list (even among
those who believe we have a healthy diet), most of us from North America eat an
immense amount of trans-fats every day. How do we make this an issue, when we
ourselves don't understand it? It would be much easier if it went away--if we
could discredit the source (probably justified) or if we could just go back to
our tried-and-true tactic that assumes any concern about breastmilk risks our
work in promoting breastfeeding, so we had better pretend it isn't there.

When we find someone as a source for this kind of information like Mary Enig,
we run into the problem that she herself is not an advocate for breastfeeding
(even her own personal mothering stories bias her against breastfeeding) and
we run the risk of dismissing the whole problem by dismissing her. The fact is
that those who have the money to investigate human milk are the AIM
companies, and I don't doubt that they are pleased to discover "potential problems"
with human milk. This does not mean that we should ignore the information. If we
do, we are very poor strategists indeed.

I don't think it serves us, or mothers to look for ways to minimize or refute
this information. I think we need to ask ourselves what role we as LC's have
in educating mothers about the quality of their milk. I routinely tell mothers
who are having supply problems to increase their EFA's and the results are
remarkable, not only in supply, but in the relief of many other symptoms in mom
and babe.

When we talk about infants, we have to remember that they have no hardwiring
to handle trans-fats, as they do not occur in nature. So, a milk supply high
in trans-fats and low in EFA's is indeed an unknown risk. The infant's body
does not know what to do with these fats!!  Just as we would not say it is okay
to feed an infant AIM in moderation, I think we should realize that many of the
foods that mothers consume have no place in the human diet and certainly not
in their breastmilk.

There is so much really good information on fats available. Read Udo Erasmus'
book, "Fats That Heal, Fats That Kill" for a great education. I would also
like to urge everyone who really wants to understand the foundation of dietary
health to read "Eat to Live" by Joel Fuhrman, MD.

We aren't risking breastfeeding by telling the truth. There will always be
trans-fats in AIM (and all of the added DHA in the world isn't going to make up
for it), but they don't have to be present in human milk at all.
Jennifer Tow, IBCLC, CT, USA

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

To temporarily stop your subscription: set lactnet nomail
To start it again: set lactnet mail (or digest)
To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
All commands go to [log in to unmask]

The LACTNET mailing list is powered by L-Soft's renowned
LISTSERV(R) list management software together with L-Soft's LSMTP(TM)
mailer for lightning fast mail delivery. For more information, go to:
http://www.lsoft.com/LISTSERV-powered.html