Got my stepladder ready for a trip to the soapbox for one more comment on Diane's dilemma- This is only partly about "morals" and mostly about money! The ABM companies "support" BF for one reason, and one reason only - because it's good business and sells more ABM. If their "BF promotion" actually worked and raised the rates of BF initiation and duration, the companies would sell less of their products which would reduce their bottom line and therefore be ILLEGAL. ABM companies are not benevolent trusts or charities. US trade law requires maximizing profit to the stockholders, and ABM companies are in business TO MAKE MONEY. Period. Face it - when a mom is breastfeeding, she ISN'T BOTTLEFEEDING. The more she breastfeeds, the less ABM she buys. This is called a market share, and the companies have analyzed this for decades. 1981, Public Advocacy Inc. in San Francisco prepared a petition for a US Marketing Code. In it, internal ABM sales documents are quoted. Market shares are measured against straight cow milk, other brands, and BREASTFEEDING. Every dollar spent on "promoting BF" raises the cost of ABM for those that purchase it - mothers and babies, and US taxpayers. Anyone who accepts ABM funding for their lunch, dinner, honorarium, etc is actually charging mothers and babies for that lunch, dinner, or honorarium. It's legitimate to request and accept speaking fees. However, these fees do not have to filter through an ABM company where they can redirect the funds and take their share off the top. Let's remember that it's not immoral for them to offer - it is a good sales strategy. It's up to us to not take the bribe/lunch/honorarium/etc. Linda Smith, climbing down again.