The Baby Food Scandal - The Weston A. Price Foundation (2023)

The Baby Food Scandal - The Weston A. Price Foundation (1)

Read this at:Español

🖨️ Print publication

A poor substitute for breast milk.

• Infant formula lacks many essential substances for development and growth. When an essential nutrient is missing or unavailable, the body cannot do its job properly.
• Infant formulas are mainly made up of sugar or lactose, skimmed milk powder and refined vegetable oil, which may contain genetically modified components. The organic formula consists of essentially the same ingredients but is not genetically modified. The soy-based formula consists of soy protein, sugar, and refined oils.
• Breast milk from a well-nourished mother contains hundreds of substances, more than a hundred fats alone.
• Infant formula contains twice the protein of breast milk, which promotes insulin resistance and obesity.
• Since 1980, there have been more than twenty infant formula recalls related to ingredients, contamination by pathogens, adulteration with foreign materials such as glass, lack of necessary nutrients, bad odors, etc.
• Rocket fuel, phthalates, melamine, and high levels of heavy metals have been found in infant formula.
• There are no FDA regulations for infant formula; The safety test is left to the manufacturers.
• Additives in infant formulas such as iron, DHA, ARA, and laboratory-produced folic acid are problematic.
• Heat damages the proteins in formulas, creating advanced glycation end products and compromising nutritional value.

Modern infant formula is the ultimate in refined foods, a product of science made with highly processed ingredients like sugar, skim milk powder, vegetable oils, and a host of synthetic nutrients. But it's practical: just open it up, mix it with water, heat it up and serve it. And it can all be done at home, like making a can of condensed soup. An added dubious bonus is that there is no work or worry about the "science" of infant formula. You don't have to think about it. One size.

Infant formula can be convenient, but it has a very dark side. Although some pediatricians believe that commercial infant formula is the same as breast milk, they are dead wrong. A simple review of the medical literature highlights the inadequacy of infant formula in infant feeding. Formulas are much higher in protein than breast milk, a fact that has been significantly linked to childhood obesity. The formula is high in calories and increases insulin levels.

Trends in infant formula use over the past century have seen an increase in allergic reactions, type 1 and type 2 diabetes, and other chronic illnesses in infants fed infant formula.1 Commercial infant formula contains GMO (genetically modified) ingredients. and synthetically derived nutrients; They lack essential cholesterol, but they mostly contain polyunsaturated fats, which can include trans fats, toxic byproducts of heating and chemical additives, and many other substances not found in breast milk. “Formula-fed babies get sicker, more often, and are more likely to die in infancy or childhood. Studies of a white American population show that bottle-fed babies are fourteen times more likely to be hospitalized than breastfed babies. Compared with breastfed babies, formula-fed babies have twice the overall risk of infant death syndrome and four times the risk of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). , pneumonia and flu. They have more diarrhoea, more gastrointestinal infections and constipation.2

Formula-fed babies are more prone to jaw misalignment and more likely to need orthodontic treatment as they age. Speech problems are more likely to develop due to weak facial muscles and tongue pressing problems that develop in bottle-fed babies. Formula-fed babies tend to mouth breathe, snore, and develop sleep apnea.2

Formula-fed babies are also more likely to develop tooth decay, known as "bottle tooth decay" if they habitually go to bed with a bottle, along with periodontitis and temporomandibular joint problems.3-4Most babies in the United States today rely on formula as part of their nutrition. An estimated one million babies in the United States are formula-fed from birth each year.5Today, infant formula is made by pharmaceutical companies, not by mothers. Pharmaceutical companies hold patents on their products and strongly protect many "trade secrets."

But unlike medicines, infant formula is considered food by law, and food is considered intrinsically safe. There are few regulations for infant formula, and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the government agency responsible for overseeing infant formula, has left the burden of proving its safety to manufacturers.5

The FDA does not approve infant formula before it can be marketed. Surprisingly, no government agency is charged with this responsibility. However, all formulas marketed in the United States must meet federal nutritional requirements. Manufacturers of infant formula must register with and notify the FDA before marketing a new formula or adding a new ingredient. But those weren't always the rules.5

In her book Breastfeeding: A Guide for the Medical Profession, now in its seventh edition, noted pediatrician Dr. Ruth Lawrence called infant formula "one of the greatest human experiments in history." Formulas were invented, ingredients came and went, and there were no randomized clinical trials or experiments of any kind before formulas were tested on real babies. Not much has changed today. The "scientific" formula label she sees today is the result of years of guesswork.6

Infant formula and breast milk are unique compared to almost all other foods in that they often provide the only source of nutrition for the rapidly growing and developing vulnerable infant. "Inadequate nutrition during childhood can cause serious and irreversible side effects."7Unlike breast milk, the composition of formulas does not change according to the changing needs of the baby.6

Food is a programming system: The new science of epigenetics and nutrigenomics has taught us that food contains information that speaks to our genes, not just provides calories for energy, and what we eat programs our bodies with messages that lead to health or cause disease. Leading neurologist Dr. David Perlmutter and functional medicine specialist Dr. Mark Hyman believe that “every time you eat something, you are talking to your genes. The food you eat is changing your DNA right now."8If so, what are nonfat, dry, devitalized milk, genetically modified sugars, and glucose solids in infant formula telling your baby's genes every day? In the 19th century, infant breastfeeding was considered the "gold standard" of nutrition, and a bottle-fed baby was viewed with pity due to the high mortality rate associated with this inferior method. But ideas were already changing: by 1883 there were twenty-seven patented brands of powdered infant formula added to cow's milk, including the first formula marketed by the supposed genius Justus von Liebig in 1869. Henry Nestlé's formula, introduced in 1870, it was made of "good Swiss milk", sugar, wheat flour and malt. The use of these formulas was associated with a high mortality rate during the summer months, when the milk spoiled easily. Public health movements for better cow care have improved milk quality, while infant milk clinics have been established. In 1912, many families had a refrigerator.9


Many formula-fed babies developed vitamin deficiency diseases, such as rickets and scurvy, before doctors and manufacturers discovered that the baby's diet needed to be supplemented with orange juice and cod liver oil. Experts at the time believed that boiled or sterilized milk caused scurvy and should be avoided. But doctors have shown that cooking can reduce the buildup of casein in the baby's stomach, which apparently makes cow's milk more digestible, justifying the practice. Cow's milk for use in infant formulas was typically boiled in Europe.9

In the early 1920s, sugarcane became scarce and expensive. Dr. William M. Mariott introduced Karo Corn Syrup, which has been the carbohydrate of choice for over twenty years. The Evaporated Milk Association financed Mariott's work and, not surprisingly, in 1929 he published the first study that claimed to demonstrate the superiority of this product over cow's milk and even human milk. Other unreliable researchers followed up with the same fraudulent results.

In 1934, Carnation irradiated his milk using a process patented by Henry Steenbock to develop vitamin D in the product. Powdered milk was also considered an excellent source of infant formula.Mothers and medicine: a social history of infant feeding, 1890-1950 by Rima D. Apple offers a fascinating and well-researched account of the murky history of the infant formula industry.10

Although powdered milk formulas have been around for nearly a century, they became widely available during World War II and the postwar years. In the 1950s and 1960s, formula feeding was considered normal and lactation rates plummeted.

Infant formula in the 1950s was fraught with problems, including excessive amounts of substances that required elimination by the kidneys and excess sodium in the blood serum, leading to dehydration in some babies. Low iron levels and high intake of iron inhibitors caused iron deficiency and increased blood loss in the intestine. Fatty acid intake was low. The formulas lacked vitamin C, so scurvy was a constant problem, even though leading pediatricians recommended using orange juice.11

The two types of commercially manufactured concentrated liquid formulas used primarily in the 1960s resembled evaporated milk formulas with added vitamins (Lactum, Mead Johnston) and a low protein product with added vegetable oils and vitamins (Similac and SMA). .12

By 1970, almost all of the local commercial formula services had disappeared. Few hospitals manufactured their own formulas in-house, as used to be the norm, and most neonatal nurseries used ready-to-use commercial formulas.13

The 1970s saw a marked revival of breastfeeding around the world. The move toward increased breastfeeding appeared to be driven by the general public rather than health professionals and may have been partly related to negative publicity directed against the infant formula industry. In addition, new scientific evidence has shed light on the benefits of breastfeeding and has triggered campaigns to promote the practice.14

Ironically, the increased use of powdered infant formula after 1971 coincided with the increase in breastfeeding, as pediatricians at the time advocated introducing cow's milk later and feeding older infants formula. The percentage of formula-fed infants after four months of life continued to increase. About 20 percent of six-month-olds were formula-fed in 1971, and 50 percent were formula-fed in 1980.10

Despite adamant claims by infant formula manufacturers that there was sound "science" behind the development of infant formulas, the actual "science" was not well developed and many experiments were done by trial and error. When babies became ill, did not develop properly, or even died from ingesting formula, the problem was isolated and the "Band-Aid" applied: the missing ingredient was added or the offending substance was removed.10

Manufacturers often add new ingredients to infant formulas to mimic the composition or performance of human milk. However, the addition of these ingredients is difficult due to a number of complex issues, including: B. bioavailability, potential for toxicity, and the practice of feeding formula and human milk at the same feeding or on the same day is not without risk . .15

Surprisingly, a review of the data and regulatory reviews of infant formulas shows that the FDA has been hesitant for many years to implement the recommendations of the professional working group. The FDA, until September 2014, when the agency published the final rule on standards for infant formula manufacturers, took action on the recommendations. These establish nationally applicable requirements for the safety and quality of infant formula. The requirements include current good manufacturing practices designed specifically for infant formulas, including mandatory testing for the harmful pathogens Salmonella, Cronobacter, andE. sakazakii. In addition, manufacturers must demonstrate that the infant formulas they make support normal physical growth, and formulas must be tested for nutritional content in the final stages of the product, before being placed on the market, and at the end of the product's shelf life. . .

However, the new rules are rudimentary and ultimately "toothless" as they do not apply to formulas made for babies with unusual medical conditions, special nutritional needs such as galactosemia, and for premature babies. This oversight excludes many infant formula products that are not covered by this regulation, such as: B. Soy-based formulas.19

These new standards are based on the first Infant Formula Act (1980), which was passed after more than 20,000 to 50,000 infants were exposed to low-chloride soy formula and 30 infants were diagnosed with hypochloremic metabolic acidosis due to to calcium chloride deficiency. These babies developed anorexia, weight gain, muscle weakness, vomiting, severe metabolic alkalosis, and slow head circumference growth. Brain growth is vulnerable to chloride deficiency. A follow-up study of this group of infants from four to nine years later revealed marked cognitive impairments, including "slurred speech, word-finding problems, visual disturbances, attention deficit disorder with repetitive behaviors and withdrawal and excessive concentration, such as in autism."20

By law, the FDA requires that all formulas contain the following nutritional ingredients: protein; fat; Vitamins C, A, D, E, K, B1, B2, B3, B6, mi B12; niacin; folic acid; pantothenic acid; Calcium; Match; Magnesium; Iron; Zinc; Manganese; Copper; Iodine; Sodium; Potassium; and chloride.21Selenium, an essential mineral for brain growth and thyroid health, was added to this list late in 2015.22

Most formulas use cow's milk as the base ingredient, but some adjustment is necessary to approximate the composition of human milk. Human breast milk contains 3.8% fat, 1.0% protein, and 7.0% lactose, while cow's milk contains 3.7% fat, 3.4% protein, and 4.8 % lactose.

Cow's milk also has higher levels of phosphorus and calcium and lower levels of iron, zinc, niacin, and ascorbic acid than human milk.23Goat milk-based formulas (Kabrita) and other animal milks are also commercially available, as is a vegan formula (Coopers), along with soy milk and other formulas.24

All infant formulas, organic and conventional, contain essentially the same highly processed ingredients, such as sugars, vegetable fats, processed proteins, synthetic vitamins, minerals, nucleotides, and DHA and ARA (see Table 1). The main ingredients include:

1. Carbohydrates in the form of lactose, corn
maltodextrin, maltodextrin (-osa), sugar;
2. Proteins such as skimmed milk, casein hydrolyzate, whey protein concentrate, soy protein isolate;
3. Fats such as soybean oil, coconut oil, palm olein, high oleic safflower oil, high oleic sunflower oil, “other medium chain fatty acids”;
4. Synthetic arachidonic acid (ARA) and doxahexanoic acid (DHA);
5. Synthetic vitamins A, E, D, K, B1-B3, B5, B6, C, folic acid, biotin, choline; the carotenoids lycopene, lutein;
6. Minerals in inorganic form: potassium, calcium, iron, magnesium, chloride, zinc, copper, manganese, selenium;
7. Synthetic preservatives: beta-carotene and ascorbyl palmitate to prevent rancidity of DHA and ARA oils;
8. Synthetic amino acids: Taurine, L-Carnitine and L-Methionine (in soy formula);
9. Nucleótido: citidina-5'-monofosfato, dinatriumguanosina-5'-monofosfato, dinatriumuridin-5'-monofosfato, adenosina-5'-monofosfato;
10. Probiotic or prebiotic substances such as oligosaccharides, fructooligosaccharides (fos), polydextrose.

Other common additives are carrageenan and salt.27

The Baby Food Scandal - The Weston A. Price Foundation (3)

The synthetic ingredients in infant formula are made with toxic chemicals. Lutein is a hexane extract from marigolds; Lycopene is made from toxic toluene; Taurine is processed with sulfuric acid and aziridine; L-carnitine and L-methionine are discussed in detail below; The nucleotides are obtained from chemically treated yeast; The fatty acids ARA and DHA are present in the synthetic forms of ARASCO and DHASCO which are discussed below.28

Taurine is an abundant amino acid in breast milk in its free form to facilitate its absorption. It plays an important role in the development of the central nervous system and is believed to be responsible for brain growth, as it is necessary for myelination. It also protects brain and eye cells from toxins or oxidants. Unlike adults, human infants cannot synthesize taurine from cysteine ​​and methionine precursors. Even adults are somewhat dependent on dietary sources of taurine. Taurine, which is low in cow's milk, was added to infant formula in 1984. However, the taurine in infant formula is produced synthetically; One processing method involves the use of sulfuric acid, a toxic and carcinogenic substance, and another technique involves aziridine, which is listed as a hazardous air pollutant by the Environmental Protection Agency.29

The production of L-carnitine involves epichlorohydrin, which is listed as a 2-B material (possibly carcinogenic to humans) by the International Agency for Research on Cancer. Because of this, it was rejected by the National Organic Standards Board for use in organic foods. The bioavailability of oral carnitine supplements is only 14 to 18 percent of the administered dose. By contrast, the bioavailability of dietary L-carnitine in omnivores is around 54-72 percent.30

The FDA nutritional requirements for infant formulas (21 CFR 107.100(a)) do not require the addition of L-carnitine.31L-methionine is needed in soy-based infant formulas to meet the need for basic amino acids. Due to bioincompatibility, synthetic L-methionine has been banned from European organic foods. For this reason, there is no organic soy-based infant formula in Europe. The synthetic version of L-methionine used in infant formula is made with materials such as acrolein, a dangerous EPA air pollutant, and hydrocyanic acid, which the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has classified as "asphyxiant systemic chemical" and "chemical warfare agent". ." " is described. . . It is used commercially for fumigation, electroplating, mining, chemical synthesis, and the manufacture of synthetic fibers, plastics, dyes, and pesticides.32

Nucleotides, the building blocks of nucleic acids like DNA and RNA, are made from hydrolyzed yeast. Yeast undergoes several chemical changes to allow nucleotide extraction, including heating to denature proteins, cell wall proteolysis, enzymatic hydrolysis, and dehydration. A Chinese biotech company (Dalian Zhen-Ao Bio-Tech) and a Japanese company supply most of the nucleotides for infant formulas.33

Martek Bioscience Corporation, a Dutch conglomerate, produces the fatty acids DHA and ARA from a strain of algae genetically modified by mutation induced by radiation and harsh chemicals. The seaweed is fermented in tanks containing corn syrup, ethanol and other ingredients, then submerged in a bath of hexane, a petrochemical solvent that the CDC says is a known neurotoxin. When used in infant formulas, it is microencapsulated, which is also prohibited under organic standards. It is also preserved with synthetic ingredients prohibited by organic standards, such as mannitol, modified starch, solid glucose syrups, ascorbyl palmitate, and beta-carotene. DHASCO, the synthetic DHA, is widely used in omega-3 foods and supplements. The natural source of DHA is fish or fish liver oil.34

Actual protein concentrations in infant formula are twice as high as in breast milk. Too much protein leads to high levels of urea and ammonia in the blood, which must be excreted in the urine, and higher levels of minerals and ash than are needed by the baby. Therefore, the formula-fed infant has a renal solute load and urinary specific gravity two-thirds greater than the breastfed infant. The kidneys of formula-fed babies are overloaded with extra work to remove solutes.35

Infant formula for humans and rhesus monkeys accelerates weight gain in early infancy and leads to elevated serum concentrations of branched-chain amino acids (BCAAs). Milk-derived BCAAs stimulate the secretion of insulin and the growth factor IGF-1. The European Childhood Obesity Trial Study Group confirmed that an early protein-rich diet predicts obesity. Fat mass is greater in formula-fed infants than in breastfed infants at 12 months.35

Serum alpha-lactalbumin is the major breast milk protein important for lactose formation and is rich in tryptophan (TRP), the essential amino acid that serves as a precursor for the neurotransmitters serotonin and melatonin. These regulate many neurobehavioral effects such as appetite, satiety, mood, pain perception, and the sleep-wake cycle. Breast milk does not contain beta-lactoglobulin, the dominant whey protein in cow's milk and therefore infant formula.36

The daily need for TRP for infants is relatively high compared to children 10-12 years of age and adults. To meet the baby's needs, the protein concentration in formula must be higher than in breast milk: more than 15 grams per liter in formula versus 9-11 grams per liter in breast milk. Despite these higher added amounts, studies report that TRP levels are still low in formula-fed babies. Low TRP levels in childhood may be related to the development of behavioral disorders such as ADHD.36

The critical importance of adequate amounts of this amino acid in infant nutrition is highlighted by the fact that TRP metabolites are unique among amino acids. TRP with tetrabiopterin (BH4) and dioxygen as cofactors is converted to 5-hydroxytryptophan (5-HTP), which readily crosses the blood-brain barrier. 5-HTP is then converted to serotonin, which is then metabolized to melatonin in the pineal gland.

The TRP pathway that leads to the formation of B3 (niacin) requires B1 (thiamine), B2 (riboflavin) and B6 (pyridoxine). Niacin is necessary to prevent pellagra.36With unfortified whey in the formula, babies are at risk of having insufficient TRP for serotonin synthesis in the brain.

Excessive protein intake imposes an unnecessary metabolic burden on the infant, but reducing the amount of protein in the formula beyond the standard value for breast milk results in reduced serum tryptophan and taurine concentrations in formula-fed infants. even if they contain excess whey protein. Recently, whey sources with high levels of alpha-lactalbumin have become available, allowing the development of formulas with high levels of this protein and reduced levels of beta-lactoglobulin. Breast milk is rich in TRP and provides the ideal conditions for the availability of serotonin, the body's feel-good chemical.36

The US Dietary Guidelines recommend low-fat or skim milk for children two years and older. In 2013, Mark DeBoer, an associate professor of pediatrics at the University of Virginia, and his colleagues fed infants and toddlers between the ages of two and four 1% skim milk and found that children who drank milk had protein levels higher than those who drank whole milk. , gained more weight and had a higher body mass index than those who drank whole milk or even 2 percent milk. "Children who drank skim or 1% milk between ages two and four were more likely to be overweight/obese between those points." In fact, it was the higher protein content in the milk that caused the weight gain, not the fat.37

Casein- or whey-based protein hydrosylate formulas are considered hypoallergenic. They were first introduced in the 1940s and are recommended for babies suffering from food allergies and colic due to their supposed protein sensitivity. Similac Alimentum, Enfamil Nutramigen and Enfamil Pregestimil are specific brands. These formulas are more expensive than others on the market.49 These formulas are extensively processed using heat and chemicals to break down the protein to some degree. The result is a product with “a very sour, bitter taste and an unpleasant sulfur smell.”49 Despite this, these formulas contain some intact proteins that can trigger an allergic reaction; 10-30 percent of allergic babies cannot tolerate these formulas.49

In studies of infants using this formula compared to breastfed infants, the iron level was lower and the amino acid levels were very high. Infants had significantly higher serum urea nitrogen levels than all other groups. Plasma threonine, valine, phenylalanine, methionine, and tryptophan were significantly higher in the hydrolyzate-formulated groups than in the breastfed group. Plasma tyrosine was significantly lower.50

Atopic dermatitis continues to be a problem in formula-fed infants, and rates have been steadily increasing. The FDA recently stated that "partially hydrolyzed infant formulas should not be given to infants who are allergic to milk or have established symptoms of milk allergy."51

Higher sodium concentrations in infant formula require greater water intake for excretion and produce greater thirst. Increased thirst in the formula-fed baby is often interpreted by the mother as hunger, and the baby receives more formula. The formula requires a higher intake of water to eliminate the greatest amount of substances produced by the metabolizing formula. However, in the past, formula-feeding mothers did not give them supplemental water and the babies' kidneys were affected.63Could this early exposure to high levels of sodium set the stage for hypertension later in life?

Popular infant and toddler care books and scientific articles from the last sixty years state that the fats necessary for brain growth are long-chain polyunsaturated fats, such as DHA, and that saturated fats should be avoided at all times. All coast. This catastrophic misinformation is based on the sea change in federal dietary policy enacted by Ancel Keys, a scientist who became a leading authority on heart disease, cholesterol, and saturated fat in the 1950s. all homes. ., while researchers, nutritionists and health professionals jumped on the anti-fat saturation bandwagon.64Babies were harmed by this saturated fat restriction, as the same dangerous theories found their way into commercial infant formula recipes.Sixty-five

In keeping with this low-fat theme, babies were also the subject of experimental research when pediatricians and researchers recommended skim milk for four- to six-month-olds in the 1960s and 1970s. A small amount of safflower oil and fat soluble vitamins were added. The children drank huge amounts of milk and ate too much cereal. They gained length normally but had little or no weight gain. They also lost fat, as shown by skinfold thickness, because they used stored fat to make up for dietary fat loss. The researchers concluded that this diet "is likely to be seriously harmful to infants."Sixty-five

Saturated fats are essential for newborns and children during periods of rapid growth. They provide a variety of molecular functions and effects in cells and tissues that go beyond simply providing energy. Fatty acids are required for membrane synthesis, protein and carbohydrate modification, assembly of various structural elements in cells and tissues, production of signaling compounds, and as oxidative fuel. Saturated fats are so important that the body has a mechanism to synthesize them from acetate when there is not enough fat in the diet. A low-fat diet leads to membrane fragility, which can disrupt cell signaling and many cellular functions. This condition can be corrected with a high-fat diet. The body has a control mechanism for the production of saturated fatty acids: if they are found in abundance in the diet, their new synthesis is inhibited.66

In fact, under certain conditions, cells produce a remarkable variety of saturated fatty acids, and although not all of their functions are known, they are clearly not easily interchangeable. Saturated fatty acids have been suggested to be the preferred energy source for the heart.66

Today's baby foods are high in polyunsaturated oils, which can quickly go rancid. They may also contain trans fats from the deodorizing process. GM crops may be sources of the oils. Fats are further processed when they are turned into powder. Therefore, some infant formulas contain the preservatives ascorbyl palmitate and beta-carotene to prevent fat oxidation.

High oleic safflower or sunflower oil is commonly used in infant formula. Safflower oil itself is a relatively inexpensive oil made primarily by Cargill, Archer Daniels Midland, and BASF (a German chemical company), but it is high in polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA) linoleic acid, constituting about 55-77 percent of the oil. Safflower oil has been linked to the development of heart disease. But hybridized high oleic safflower oil contains only 12-16 percent linoleic acid with 70-80 percent as oleic acid, a monounsaturated fat (MUFA). Hybrids are not genetically modified, but radiation and toxic chemicals are used to create them. PUFAs are very rancid and have historically been partially hydrogenated to preserve shelf life. The current infant formula label does not indicate whether the PUFAs in the product are hydrogenated. Since PUFAs are so prone to oxidation, increasing the MUFA would give the product a longer shelf life.68

Coconut oil is another fat used in infant formula. It's a unique vegetable fat, high in saturated fat, that babies desperately need to grow and develop. Saturated fats, such as coconut oil, are not normally subject to oxidation. However, infant formula lacks animal sources of saturated fat, which provide a broader spectrum of the various saturated fats that are abundant in the breast milk of a well-nourished mother.66

Soybean oil, another common oil used in infant formulas, contains 34% PUFA with 24% MUFA. Most soybean oil in the US is a product made from genetically modified soybeans. It is extracted from the beans using high heat and hexane, and the deodorization process can lead to trans fats in the oil. In the past, most soybean oils were partially hydrogenated to preserve their shelf life. But recently, the US government has recognized trans fats as harmful substances that are particularly bad for the heart. Soybean oil is said to contain omega-3 fatty acids, but these fats are very sensitive to heat and quickly become rancid and harmful.69

Another well-known fat used in formulas is palm olein, which is not the same as saturated palm oil. It is added to provide palmitic acid at a level similar to that found in breast milk. However, the palmitic acid in palm olein is chemically different from that in breast milk and is poorly absorbed. The fat reacts with calcium to form insoluble soaps and causes constipation.70

In prospective, randomized, double-blind studies, palm olein was found to prevent bone mineralization and development in infants by reducing calcium absorption. Formulas that use palm olein and most of the calcium is added as calcium salts, such as soy-based formulas and casein hydrolysates, increase the occurrence of hard stools and constipation.70

For many years, the FDA did not allow canola oil in infant formulas, but today the FDA considers canola oil GRAS (generally considered safe) for use in infant formulas. In 2013, the multinational Danone applied to the FDA for the use of canola as a source of fat in infant formulas to be sold in the United States. In a letter responding to Danone's request, the FDA had no qualms about including canola oil as a fat source in infant formula at levels up to 31% of the total fat mixture. Danone claimed in its petition that canola oil has higher levels of alpha-linolenic acid (ALA) than soybeans (11 percent vs. 8 percent) and less saturated fat (7 percent vs. 15 percent) than soybean than soybean oil, and offers a " "healthier fat profile."71Canola oil is made primarily from genetically modified seeds, processed at high temperatures, extracted with the neurotoxin hexane, and contains trans fats and other rancid products.72

DHA (decosahexanoic acid) is the focus of infant formula advertising, and almost all infant formulas contain this synthetic ingredient. Abbott Laboratories now uses OptiGRO™, a blend of DHA, lutein and vitamin E, as its main calling card, while Mead Johnston offers "Choline and DHA" for its importance in "Brain and Eye Development".74

DHA is the most abundant omega-3 fatty acid in the brain, constituting 40-50% of polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs). Additionally, 50 percent of the weight of a neuron's plasma membrane is made up of DHA. About 40 percent of the retina is made up of DHA. It is also a very important component in the skin, sperm and testicles. It can be obtained directly from breast milk, but amounts vary widely based on dietary intake. Babies cannot synthesize it from plant-derived alpha-linoleic acid (ALA), and this response is slow or absent in humans for various reasons. Experts recommend 300 mg of DHA per day for pregnant and lactating women. The average intake of DHA in American and Canadian women ranges from 45 mg to 115 mg per day, with Japanese women consuming the highest amounts. DHA is mainly found in fish and fish oil. Synthetic DHA is now added to infant formula for purported health benefits.74

ARA (arachdonic acid) is a polyunsaturated fatty acid synthesized naturally by the body from linoleic acid. The work of Susan Carlson and her colleagues has shown the importance of ARA levels in infant growth. He also found that infants supplemented with fish oil, but not ARA, had a slower rate of growth than those conventionally formulated, and that when DHA was added to infant formula, ARA levels increased due to a decrease in the competition with the available enzyme necessary for both. conversions75

In 2004, the FDA granted Martek Biosciences Corp's request to include ARASCO and DHASCO in infant formulas. ARASCO is an artificial ARA from Mortierella alpina oil and DHASCO is made from Crypthecodinium cohnii oil. These ingredients are extracted from soil algae and fungi using hexane, a neurotoxic petroleum-based solvent. The National Organic Standards Board has said hexane-extracted algal oil and mushroom oil should not be allowed in organic foods, but the USDA hasn't acted, and hexane-extracted DHA and ARA remain in formulas organic for babies76

When C. cohnii and M. alpina oils first appeared in infant formula, the FDA received dozens of reports from physicians and parents noting diarrhea, vomiting, and other gastrointestinal symptoms in infants fed infant formula containing these oils, symptoms that disappeared when the child had switched to the exact same formula without these new additives.77

Three of the most prominent and respected independent scientists in the field of infant formula stated in 2010 that the scientific evidence supporting the addition of DHA and ARA to infant formula was "considered weak by most researchers and industry leaders." key opinion in the field" and that "this area of ​​research was, to some extent, driven by enthusiasm and self-interest."76The World Health Organization's Director of Nutrition for Health and Development wrote a letter to members of the European Parliament in 2011 informing them that there was no strong evidence that adding DHA to infant formula had any significant clinical benefits.76

Oligosaccharides are the third major component of breast milk. In an attempt to mimic the properties of breast milk, formula manufacturers add specific prebiotics such as galactooligosaccharides (GOS) to some of their products to stimulate the growth of beneficial bacteria. Polydextrose, made from glucose, is a common GOS. A 2008 Chinese study found that supplementation with low levels of GOS "may improve stool frequency, reduce stool pH, and stimulate bifidobacteria and lactobacilli in the intestine to levels found in breastfed infants." . Fructooligosaccharides (FOS), inulin, and pectin hydrosylate have also been tested as prebiotics in infant formula studies.

Another potential property of prebiotics is the potential to prevent allergic reactions or food sensitivities. A 2007 review of the Cochrane database found that "there is insufficient evidence to determine the role of prebiotic supplementation in infant formula in preventing allergic disease and reducing food intake in eczema in infants." ".78

A 2014 study in the UK found that aluminum levels in infant formula were too high. Researchers from Keele University in England published two papers on aluminum contamination in powdered and ready-to-drink formulas and found that some brands contain more than 100 times more aluminum than breast milk. Aluminum was higher in products that contained an aluminum seal between the lid and the product. "Soy is a major source of aluminum contamination in infant formula," the authors said. Other sources of aluminum are additives, such as calcium and phosphorus salts, and the infant formula manufacturing process itself. "81

In 2013, two children with kidney problems died from aluminum poisoning, and powdered milk was the source. “Brain and bone disorders caused by high levels of aluminum in the body have been observed in children with kidney disease. Bone disorders have also been seen in children taking some aluminum-containing medicines. In these children, the bone damage is caused by aluminum in the stomach preventing the absorption of phosphate, a chemical necessary for healthy bones."82

The CDC has not determined whether aluminum causes birth defects in humans. Significant amounts of aluminum are found in drinking water in the United States. Babies get a double dose of aluminum when they are fed soy formula made with tap water.

Aluminum is also found in vaccines. According to the researchers, “experimental research. . . . clearly demonstrates that aluminum adjuvants have the potential to induce severe immune disorders in humans. In particular, aluminum in the adjuvant form carries a risk of autoimmunity, long-term brain inflammation, and associated neurological complications, and thus may have profound and widespread adverse health consequences. In our opinion, the possibility that the benefits of the vaccine have been exaggerated and the risk of potential side effects underestimated has not been rigorously evaluated in the medical and scientific community."83

In the first US study of arsenic in infants' urine, Dartmouth College researchers found that formula-fed infants had higher levels of arsenic than breastfed infants and that breast milk contained very low levels of arsenic. Arsenic is found in rice products such as rice syrup, rice milk, and rice flakes, as well as apple and grape juice.84

The European Safety Agency (EFSA) found that commercially available canned foods are a significant source of the chemical Bisphenol A (BPA). Formula cans are lined with BPA. It is also part of the composition of polycarbonate baby bottles. BPA is a hormone disruptor and has been linked to precocious puberty in girls, attention deficit disorder, ADHD, and urogenital abnormalities in boys. BPA has also been found in breast milk.87

Formula-fed babies have high levels of the pathogenIt's hardin your gut bacteria.It's hardIt is a bacterium whose growth is associated with the use of antibiotics. The substance p-cresol, formed by anaerobic metabolism of the essential amino acid tyrosine by bacteria such asIt's hard, is a highly toxic carcinogen that also has adverse effects on the central nervous system, cardiovascular system, lungs, kidneys, and liver.It's hardit is a well-established causative factor in colitis and inflammatory bowel disease.88

A recent case-control study found that children with autism were significantly more likely to be bottle-fed than breastfed. The study did not differentiate between whether the children were fed organic or conventional formula, but we do know that non-organic soy formula is contaminated with glyphosate and this could be a contributing factor in the development of autism and autism.It's hardsupergrowth.88According to Dr. David Perlmutter, children with autism have higher blood levels of propionic acid (PPA), which is toxic to the brain. Clostridia species produce large amounts of APP, which also weakens the tight junctions in the intestine and allows access to the bloodstream. PPA directly alters the brain's ability to use energy and deprives the brain of antioxidants, neurotransmitters, and omega-3 fats.89

Throughout human history, women who cannot breastfeed their babies have turned to other methods of infant feeding, such as animal milk and pre-chewed foods. Rural women worked outdoors during certain times of the year and the portable baby was brought along, as the milk source was also portable and readily available. However, when the Industrial Revolution required women to work en masse in urban factories, this natural and sensible arrangement was no longer possible and early weaning or feeding alternative foods became a harsh reality.10

In rural areas, breast milk substitutes were made with whole milk or "top milk" (cream), which represented a more digestible offering. A 1908 home recipe included instructions to express the milk morning and night and let it sit for several hours to extract the top cream. This recipe included more heavy cream, cow's milk, lemon water (a calcium supplement), brown sugar, and boiled water.90

Beginning in the 1930s or early 1940s, most homemade infant formula in the United States was made with evaporated milk. A typical evaporated milk formula from around 1949 contained one can (13 fl oz) of evaporated milk, 19 fl oz of water, and 1 oz of corn (karo) syrup or sucrose. If cow's milk was used, it was pasteurized and homogenized. The bottles and teats have been completely sterilized.91

raw milk and infant nutrition
In the 1920s and 1930s, Dr. Weston Price demonstrated her use of raw milk to improve the diets of sick children during the Great Depression, proving that it was indeed safe, wholesome, and wholesome. Dr. Francis Pottenger, Jr. demonstrated the benefits of raw milk in his research with cats. Her raw milk-fed cats thrived, while those fed warm milk suffered from underdeveloped breasts; they were infected with ticks, fleas and lice; and had irregularly crowded teeth with prominent faces and narrower, smaller skulls. Mother cats fed warm milk had difficult deliveries. The resulting offspring were sterile. Dr. Pottenger also noted differences in jaw and facial muscle development between formula-fed and breastfed babies.92

May 1945CoronaThe magazine ran "Raw Milk Can Kill," a seemingly practical article about a town called Crossroads, USA, where many were dying of undulant fever contracted from eating raw milk. The article was entirely made up - there was no town called Encruzilhada - but it caused a stir because it claimed to pasteurize all the milk. To add fuel to the fire, August 1946Readers Digestthe reprinted story. This carefully planned campaign played a role in the compulsory pasteurization laws that were introduced in 1948, shortly after these articles were published.93

Despite this deliberate scandal about the supposed dangers of raw milk, Adele Davis, the most popular nutritionist of the 1940s and 1970s, championed "certified raw milk" as the best milk to use in formula for babies who could not breast-feed. In his bestselling bookLet's raise healthy childrenpublished several infant formulas with raw milk. Lady. Davis also recommended supplemental cod liver oil drops.94

He despised commercial formulas and labeled formula-fed children "fat-in-training." Apparently, she was right, as current research strongly links commercial formulas to obesity and diabetes risk.94

During her career as a nutritionist, Ms. Davis worked in public schools and for midwives. She has appeared on many top television shows, as a guest speaker, and as a guest speaker on many college campuses. She supported free speech on food safety and food freedom. In 1972, Time magazine called her "the high priestess of a new food religion" and "the oracle." Her books have sold more than a million copies. Adele was a huge fan of Dr. Ponger and Dr. Price, and she spoke extensively about her work and praised her in her book on childcare.95

Circa 1999, Dr. Mary Enig and Sally Fallon Morell of the Weston A. Price Foundation developed a raw infant formula made with fresh cow's or goat's milk and a liver-based formula for milk-intolerant babies. animal.96These formulas are still widely used today and are a boon to parents determined not to feed their babies commercial formula. You will be guided by the well-known health expert Dr. He promoted and supported Joseph Mercola.97

For a full description of the three formulas, seeThe Nourishing Traditional Baby and Toddler Care Book, is innutritious traditions. Healthy home economist Sarah Pope features a comprehensive video on how to make these formulas on the WAPF website ( and on YouTube.98

Unlike infant formula, where every drop is equal, a well-nourished mother's breast milk is an intricate and ever-changing composition of ingredients prepared by the mother herself for her developing baby – individual nutrition at its finest. Scientists have not yet discovered all the many substances in breast milk, they have barely scratched the surface. Human milk is not just food, but "represents an extremely sophisticated signaling system from mammalian evolution that provides a regulatory network for species-specific postnatal growth and metabolic programming." Scientists who study the "message" of breast milk see it as nothing less than a blueprint for life.99

Research shows that "specific microcomponents of milk, alone and together, contribute to the neurobiological, cognitive, somatic, metabolic, and immune development of infants among mothers within the same species."100

Known for their work deciphering the components of mammalian breast milk, Dr. Katie Hinde and J. Bruce German, in their 2012 article titled Human Milk, "reflected the Rosetta stone of food and nutrition. . that is to say... the most elegant and attractive". example... of 200 million years reflects the symbiotic coevolution between producer and consumer".

The authors highlight one of the many peculiarities of breast milk: “Breast milk contains highly selective oligosaccharides that support the growth of only a very exclusive group of intestinal bacteria (Bifidobacterium longumv.childish) that coevolved with mammals" that direct "the development and phenotype of a bacterial ecosystem" that supports "the digestive, metabolic, and immune functions of infants." These oligosaccharides are not digested by infants or simple bacteria, but are the main food source forB. lunge, which are essential for health and nutrition, since they modulate immune responses in the intestine and participate in the bioconversion of digested nutrients. They also act as competitive inhibitors to the establishment of pathogenic bacteria implicated in chronic childhood diarrhea, one of the leading causes of infant mortality worldwide.100

Lactoferrin and lysozyme are unique immune components with antibacterial properties that are found in higher concentrations in breast milk than in cow's milk, suggesting that these substances are very important for the baby. In an attempt to replicate these immunological components, Chinese researchers inserted human DNA into cloned transgenic cows that produced human-like lactoferrin and lysozyme in milk. The implications of such genetic grotesques are unknown.100

Food preferences can be learned from mother's milk, and appetite is shaped in part by foods eaten during early development. For example, when mothers eat garlic, babies drink more breast milk.101

Dr. Hinde and Dr. German believe that “the lactation period, through the formation of healthy food preferences and healthy growth trajectories, is a potentially critical time to combat future obesity and cope with our changing environment. Lifestyle changes in adulthood, once neurobiological and metabolic pathways are well established, are likely to have a much smaller and more transient effect on phenotype."100When this is the case, the formula-fed infant's appetite and food preferences are based on conventional agricultural products such as sugars, vegetable oils, damaged proteins, GMOs, and synthetic ingredients and are associated with the development of inflammation, obesity, and chronic disease. . . disease and premature death.

Lactose, a disaccharide of glucose and galactose, is the main carbohydrate in breast milk and is found only in the mammary gland. The amount of lactose in breast milk is independent of maternal lactose intake and appears to be fixed. Cow's milk has much less lactose and to approximate breast milk it must be added to the formula, although some formulas use maltodextrin (made from solids of rice, corn, potatoes, sugar, or glucose syrup) instead of lactose. . Lactose is a natural component of whey.102

Lactose plays an important role in the synthesis of milk and draws water into the milk, creating a liquid. It is needed to absorb calcium and increase innate immunity, which results in the protection of the baby's intestine against pathogens.103

Fats are the main source of energy and carriers of fat-soluble vitamins that provide omega-3 and omega-6 essential fatty acids. In breast milk and in most formulas, 50% of the calories are provided by fat, most of which is in the form of triglycerides of saturated and unsaturated origin. Although two hundred fatty acids have been identified in human milk lipids, fifty of which are metabolically active, the major fatty acids are palmitic, stearic, oleic, and linoleic, with medium chain fatty acids also present. Palmitic acid, the main saturated fat in breast milk, makes up 17 to 25 percent of the fatty acids.

The fatty acid composition of breast milk fat varies depending on the mother's diet, particularly omega-6 (linoleic acid) and omega-3 (alpha-linolenic acid and DHA) fatty acids. It also varies greatly within and between different populations. Linoleic acid levels have risen over the past century, following the rise of omega-6-rich processed vegetable oils in the diet.104

Breastfeeding women on a high-carbohydrate, low-fat diet, malnourished women, and women with infections or metabolic disorders may experience reduced levels of milk fat.105

In addition to DHA and ARA, human milk contains another long-chain fatty acid, eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), which is found in about the same amount as ARA, "giving some legitimacy to the idea that mammals of big brains need it." Dietary DHA and EPA reduce plasma ARA acid concentrations. Infant formula manufacturers have chosen not to add EPA to infant formulas.106

In 2010, Du Pont developed "a clean, sustainable source of EPA" through fermentation using metabolically modified (i.e., genetically modified) strains of the oil yeast Yarrowia lipolytica, sold as New Harvest EPA Oil in GM Nutrition stores. . The New Harvest website is no longer active and the project seems to be being abandoned as an afterthought, but we will see this EPA genetically modified product sooner rather than later. In 2011, the FDA had no problem with DuPont's application to obtain GRAS status for the genetically modified yeast used to make EPA for use in a variety of foods, including chewing gum, but thankfully not yet in formula. childish.107

Breastfed babies obtain large amounts of cholesterol from the milk of well-nourished mothers, which supports healthy brain growth. Cholesterol requirements for growth alone are 36 to 64 mg/day, not including requirements for the brain, nervous system, and skin. This component is quite low or absent in both formula and formula-fed babies, particularly those fed soy formula, and these babies must make their own cholesterol for use in the brain and body.

In a study by Dr. Charles Wong, breastfed infants who received a higher intake of cholesterol from breast milk had 3.3 times less cholesterol turnover; This means that their bodies produced less cholesterol than babies fed cow's milk and soy. Babies fed soy formula had the highest cholesterol synthesis because they did not consume it in their diet, so their bodies had to regulate the process to supply it. Dr. Wong concluded that children and adults who were breastfed by a well-nourished mother may not need to make as much cholesterol as children and adults who did not have it when they were young.108

Cholesterol is an essential component of cell membranes and is required for growth, replication, and maintenance. The central nervous system (CNS) contains 23% of the total cholesterol in the body. There are two stores of cholesterol in the brain: 70 percent is in the myelin sheath and 30 percent is in neurons and glial cells.109This sterol is important for brain function in several ways: it forms nerve synapses; enables signaling of neurotransmitters, opioids, and receptors; helps transport amino acids; and performs many other tasks. Cholesterol also plays an important role in the function of the dopamine transporter (DAT), a key regulatory component in maintaining dopamine homeostasis in the brain, which is the primary target of drugs such as Ritalin (methylphenidate), prescribed for ADHD. Dopamine is an important neurotransmitter in the brain responsible for the reward mechanism and many other important functions.110Low cholesterol levels in the nerve cell membrane directly lead to a decrease in the number of serotonin receptors, resulting in a general reduction in serotonergic transmission in the brain.111Cholesterol is also the activator of the oxytocin receptor in the brain, and in the absence of cholesterol, this receptor is inactivated. The lack of oxytocin in autistic children is related to the inability to recognize voices, faces and other visual cues. Many children on the autistic spectrum have low cholesterol. Oxytocin is also responsible for the "letting go" response to allow milk to flow from the breast and for the new mother's bonding with her baby.112

Is this lack of cholesterol in infant formula linked to poor brain development and behavior problems in infancy? If babies need to make cholesterol at such a young age, can they make enough to adequately support brain function? Does this process program the baby for higher cholesterol levels in adulthood?

Lipases are enzymes necessary for the breakdown and digestion of fats. Pancreatic lipase is not fully developed in newborns, but a specific breast milk lipase is available for the breastfed infant. Bile salt-dependent lipase (BSDL), also known as carboxylester lipase (CEL), is an enzyme in the mammary gland that can completely hydrolyze triglycerides, phospholipids, cholesterol, and fat-soluble vitamins and release polyunsaturated fatty acids. long-chain, resulting in BSDL, which is highly desirable for neonatal digestion. Breastfed babies absorb fat better than formula-fed babies because breast milk contains BSDL that is not present in soy formula or processed cow's milk. Studies show that BSDL remains active in the infant's gastrointestinal tract and therefore makes an important contribution to fat digestion and vitamin A (retinol ester) digestion.113

Lipase activity is lost during pasteurization and milk fat absorption is reduced by up to a third in premature babies. When premature babies were fed human milk, they gained significantly more length and weight than those fed pasteurized milk.114

In the 19th and early 20th centuries, when the mother of a baby could not give her child milk, the preferred alternative was the old and honorable tradition of wet-nursing. However, over time, a campaign was launched to discredit hygiene in general. The singleness of some of these mothers went against the morality of influential social groups. Rumors circulated that the women were of low morals and carriers of venereal diseases. Furthermore, most modern families have neither the means nor the inclination to allow a strange woman to move into their home. Through persuasive advertising and other clever tactics, the infant formula industry has gradually captured the attention of mothers around the world.10

The main slogan of formula manufacturers at the time was that their formulas were "scientific" and therefore would certainly contain all the ingredients a baby needed to grow and be healthy. At the time, infant mortality was high, and breast milk and cow's milk were cited as the culprits. In addition, alleged experts claimed that breast milk was not enough to feed the child.

Sigmund Freud theorized that babies found sucking sexually pleasing. The mothers were outraged and, to counteract the development of the child's incestuous desire, nursing, hugging, caressing and cuddling were abandoned. Instead, virtuous mothers held their bottle-fed babies in high chairs.

Until the development of obstetrics and pediatrics in the early 20th century, physicians had little interest in childbirth and lactation. Initially, formula manufacturers sold their products directly to the public. Later, however, pediatricians became deeply involved in artificial infant feeding, developing and selling their own formulas and writing their own recipes. In the 1920s and 1930s, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) even pressured infant formula manufacturers to sell their products without instructions and instructed buyers to get instructions from their doctors. If it didn't, companies wouldn't be able to earn the coveted seal of approval from the AAP, which had a huge impact on the new-mom customer base. Over time, writing the prescription became so complicated that it was done in the hospital pharmacy.10

The women who grew up in these times were acculturated to the infallibility of the new science and technology. They witnessed medical pregnancies and hospital deliveries where medical technology was showcased through monitoring, measurement and evaluation. Bottle feeding became an integral part of this process. More and more women giving birth in hospitals are given a bottle of formula when they deliver their babies. "Medical knowledge has excluded and delegitimized other sources of knowledge that arose from women's physical experiences."117

While it's certainly the best convenience food for babies, breastfeeding isn't an exact science. Milk goes directly from the mother's nipple to the baby's mouth. There is no observable milk level that gradually decreases as there is when a baby drinks from a bottle. Is milk enough? Is it nutritious enough? With lactation there was no way to tell; with the bottle everything was measurable.

Even for nursing mothers, the bottle was not far away. Fiona Dykes explains that the most common reason given by women for stopping breastfeeding was that there was not enough breast milk to exclusively feed the baby and that mothers "didn't have enough milk" because "the baby seemed hungry." In fact, doctors have contributed to this reasoning by advising mothers to bottle-feed their babies from time to time and to educate them from an early age.117

Furthermore, lactation failure has been a growing phenomenon in the United States since the turn of the last century, when women claimed they had no milk. Journalists were declaring an "epidemic of lactation failure," which fit well with the growing success of commercially available formulas.118

About five percent of women are unable to produce enough milk due to conditions such as hypothyroidism or underdevelopment of breast tissue, exposure to toxins at a critical stage of development, medication use, low prolactin levels, and other reasons.119

Mothers cite a lack of interest and support from front-line professionals (medical staff, midwives, home visitors, and lactation consultants) as reasons for not continuing to breastfeed early in the process.117

For mothers, weight gain has been the ultimate measure of milk quality and the central focus of infant progress, and indeed is the focus of medical consultations. Weight gain was chosen as the primary indicator of growth because it is easier to measure. However, the length is considered a better standard.120

The growth of breastfed babies in affluent populations differs from that of formula-fed babies. Babies generally lose a small amount of weight after birth: 5% from formula and 7% from nursing, with a maximum of 10% in the first week of life before they start to gain weight. Most formula-fed babies, but not most breastfed ones, are over their birth weight by eight days of age. With lactation, this weight loss appears to be slower. Breastfed babies are generally thinner than formula-fed babies after four months of age and gain less weight than formula-fed babies during the first year of life.120

The physiological reason for the slower weight gain is that breastfed babies self-regulate their energy intake at levels lower than those seen in formula-fed babies. This less activity may be related to the lower body temperature and metabolic rate of breastfed infants. It may also be related to the different endocrine environment of breastfed versus formula-fed infants, which may be influenced by marked differences in protein content of human milk and formula.120As normal as it may be, this weight loss is alarming to mothers who want to have a healthy and thriving baby, especially when weight is believed to be the most important measure of progress and these mothers are easily persuaded by family or staff doctor. able to make this bottle.120

I discussed this issue with a 60-year-old European woman, mother of two adult children, who breastfed her babies for over a year, without bottles. She told me that she learned about early baby weight loss from her and what it meant from her mother and her neighbors, who shared her knowledge and her experiences with her. Therefore, she was not concerned when her baby was slowly losing weight and gaining weight, and she continued to breastfeed without any question or concern.121But today's mothers have no reference group to turn to because their own mothers are unlikely to have breastfed them.

A family member recounted her disappointing experience with breastfeeding in 1990. She was determined to breastfeed, and despite a good supply of breast milk, her baby was not thriving; at the first visit to the doctor, she was not gaining weight according to her expectations. growth charts She also had cramps. Her mother said that her milk was "not good" and that she needed to be bottle-fed. This did not go well as she tried one formula after another. The child, now an adult, continues to have gastrointestinal problems.122

Until 2006, the only growth charts used in the US were based on the growth of formula-fed babies, thus ignoring the different growth patterns of the normally breastfed baby. Formula-fed babies are heavier and weigh earlier in life than breastfed babies. At that time, the World Health Organization (WHO) growth standards for breastfed infants were introduced and are now recommended for children ages one to two years. The WHO standards establish the growth of the breastfed child as the growth norm and breastfeeding as the recommended standard of infant nutrition.120

Generations of breastfed babies and mothers trying to breastfeed were subjected to bottle-based growth charts. Consequently, clinicians, unfamiliar with normal patterns of weight gain in breastfed infants, have evaluated an infant's physical growth relative to patterns established by bottle-fed infants. Who knows how many mothers were needlessly distressed when their babies were misdiagnosed as having growth problems and given a bottle because their baby was not heavy enough compared to bottle-fed babies?120

Researchers have discovered that ineffective feeding practices can lead to a lack of breast milk. The mother's lack of confidence in the efficacy of the lactation process can lead to a self-fulfilling prophecy, impairing milk flow and transmission to the baby. The mother may then interpret this as an indication that she does not have enough milk, so it is very likely that she will resort to formula, resulting in decreased milk volume.123

Scientific issues, not enough milk, a hungry baby, and low weight gain have provided a solid foundation on which the infant nutrition industry continues to build. Particularly powerful were the messages suggesting that when breast milk is insufficient, infant formula would provide optimal growth and health.124

The science myth has been reinforced by doctors who generally do not support breastfeeding. There is a well-documented history of collusion between physicians and the infant formula industry. Formulation companies openly give hundreds of thousands of dollars to medical professionals. Doctors and nurses in the United States routinely receive gifts, stationery, meals, an annual supply of free baby food for themselves or a relative, and even expensive vacations from baby food marketers. They also provide large amounts of free baby food to hospitals. Companies sponsor medical seminars and research studies. Some large medical centers use more than a quarter of a million dollars worth of "free" formula each year. What these hospitals don't realize is that they are essentially offering free advertising to the formula companies. In fact, some pediatric continuing education programs are widely adopted by infant formula manufacturers, a claim supported by the National Association for Breastfeeding Advocacy and the International Association of Lactation Consultants.10

This strategy works. More than 70 percent of pediatricians surveyed recently told the AAP that they recommend a particular brand of infant formula for their patients. Many medical professionals do not educate their patients about the effects these infant feeding options can have, "due in large part to their own ignorance of the facts." Physicians and nurses have little contact with recent literature or clinical practice in this area. And, of course, with successful lactation, the involvement of the doctor is minimal.125

A recent AAP survey found that about 45% of pediatricians consider bottle-feeding and breastfeeding to be equally acceptable methods of feeding a baby, and that "almost the same proportion of pediatricians agree and disagree on whether bottle-fed babies are… long-term breastfed babies (34 percent vs. 38 percent), 27 percent are undecided.”125

Maternity leave in the first few months after the baby is born is crucial to support breastfeeding, but the time a working woman is allowed in the US is embarrassingly short compared to other countries. The United States is one of only three countries in the world that does not guarantee paid maternity leave. American women must take vacation or sick leave to cover maternity leave. Only 60% of all workers are covered by the Sick and Family Leave Act, which allows employees of companies with more than fifty employees to take unpaid leave of up to 12 weeks, but this requires at least one year of employment (twenty-five hours). or more) per week).126

Four states have publicly funded paid maternity leave: California, New Jersey, Massachusetts, and Rhode Island. California offers six weeks paid at 55% of salary. New Jersey offers six weeks at two-thirds of salary and Rhode Island pays four weeks at 60 percent. Tech companies offering paid maternity leave include Google, Facebook, Apple, Yahoo, Instagram, Reddit, and Twitter.127

In contrast, Slovenia, Germany, Austria, and more than 170 other countries offer generous maternity and childbirth benefits not available to mothers in the United States. Payments up to age five and an “extended family” benefit payment. Maternity leave can be from 28 to 50 daysBeforeBirth with parental leave from four months to two years after birth. A midwife or nurse makes home visits at least once a day to help with baby care and lactation for at least one week after birth and at least once a week for the next six weeks.125

More and more women are selling their breast milk online to other mothers who are unable to breastfeed. About 55,000 women sold excess breast milk online last year, up from 13,000 in 2011. No contamination issues were reported. The FDA does not regulate the sale of breast milk online, but recommends caution when buying milk from strangers. Four major websites sell human milk, Human Milk 4 Human Babies, Eats on Feet, Only the Breast and Milk Share.128

Joseph A. Ladapo, assistant professor of medicine at New York University School of Medicine, supports this form of sharing: "Some parents (including this author) make significant efforts to provide breast milk for their infants because of extensive evidence which supports its health benefits. . ”128

Donating breast milk to milk banks is not an option. It is pasteurized and reserved for premature and sick babies.128

The health and well-being of generations of Americans have been greatly affected by the use of infant formula. Autism rates are widespread and increasing annually. Rates of diabetes, obesity, and heart disease have skyrocketed. Many American children develop ADHD, OCD, and other behavioral "diseases" and take dangerous medications. Some breastfeeding mothers have followed SAD (Standard American Diet) advice and their children are deprived of vital nutrients needed for brain and body growth. Advances in infant formula technology over the years as a result of research, new insights, the needs of mothers and babies, and the "band-aid" approach have improved the quality of infant formula. , but these formulas are still woefully lacking in nutrients and nutrition. compared with numerous cofactors in breast milk from a well-nourished mother.

Lack of support for breastfeeding is often cited as the main reason why more mothers do not breastfeed. Most women with children exercise outside the home. With a newborn baby, mothers need a lot of help just to manage day-to-day things, especially when there are other children in the family. Continuing to breastfeed requires a lot of planning, and most mothers need to return to work in a short period of time.

Instead of building financial and social support for breastfeeding mothers, providing extended paid pregnancy and maternity leave, and investing in our common future by improving nutrition for young families, governments and institutions are funding transgenic research to try to finding the unique replication components of commercial breast milk formulas, developing GMOs, and finding new ways to market surplus GM soybeans and corn.

The social and economic support of the mother and the family is important, as well as the early inculcation of the basic knowledge that the nursing mother needs to know how to produce the milk that nourishes her child. That means a healthy omnivorous diet before pregnancy and while breastfeeding with access to clean, healthy grass-fed foods, knowledge of cooking techniques, and avoiding sugar, artificial sweeteners, unhealthy, and refined foods.

Programs like Cooking Kids in Slovenia, where all young students can learn the value of cooking techniques, reading recipes, traditional food and gardening, are one way to offer this path. The 'Cooking Kids' model could easily be adapted to cultures willing to recognize the value of basic nutritional principles, traditional foods and their preparation. The Weston A. Price Foundation financially supports this program.129

Families who want to breastfeed are building their own community networks to share breast milk. WAPF chapter leaders are taking the lead across the county to bring this vital information to families in diverse communities. There is still work to be done to educate mothers, families, grandmothers and neighbors everywhere about the right to breastfeed their children and to produce the best possible human milk for our children.


Infant Formula Retreats

There have been over twenty recalls of infant formulas since 1982. Hazards discovered in infant formulas include:

1. Lack of protein, iron, vitamins A, D, C, B6, folate, copper, linoleic acid;
2. Contamination with metal, glass, polyvinyl chloride, chlorine, insect parts, hard plastic, perchlorate (rocket fuel);
3. E. sakazakii contamination;
4. Elevated levels of lead and arsenic;
5. Excess magnesium, vitamins A, D;
6. Incorrect preparation instructions, no label, no instructions, mislabeled;
7. Improper processing, peeling of can liner, curdling, bad odor;
8. Soy concentrate liquid formula. Class I Remember: Life Threatening, June 1990.

In 2000, CDC researchers found perchlorate in fifteen brands of powdered infant formula, including Similac and Enfamil, two manufacturers that controlled 87% of the infant formula market. E. sakazakii is a bacterium that can cause necrotizing enterocolitis in infected babies. E. sakazakii groups
In recent years, infections in infants fed milk-based powdered infant formula have been reported in several settings.16 Melamine and phthalates have also been found in infant formula.17


Three leading brands dominate the infant formula market:
• The most popular formula in the US is the Similac brand, made by Abbott Laboratories, which accounts for about 43% of the market.25Similac was the first major brand to launch a non-GMO product in 2015.
• Enfamil, made by Mead Johnson Nutrition, has a 40% market share.
• The Gerber Good Start product line is manufactured by Nestlé and has a 15% share of the formula market.26

All of these companies contributed significant sums to the campaign in California (Proposition 37) to stop the measure that would require GMO labeling. Abbot: $334,500; Mead Johnson: $800,000 and Nestlé: $1,461,600.26What are they hiding?

Carrageenan, an extract from red algae, is found in some organic infant formulas, although the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) voted to ban it. The Secretary of Agriculture's decision to overturn the NOSB decision reveals the lobbying power and influence of the infant formula industry. Carrageenan is banned in the European Union in both conventional and organic formulations. The science linking carrageenan to intestinal inflammation is worrying enough, but what makes the injury worse is that adding it to infant formula is completely unnecessary. Carrageenan does not contribute to the nutritional value or flavor of the formula or any other food, it is only added to stabilize the ready-to-eat formula. The addition of carrageenan means that parents or caregivers do not need to shake the product before feeding the baby. The easiest alternative to adding carrageenan is to put a "shake well" label on the bottle. Earth's Best and Similac Organic Ready-to-Feed formulas, the only organic liquid formulas on the market, contain carrageenan.28

A mother can give her child the gift of immunity in two ways. The first is through lactation, when the mother passes specific antibodies, secretory immunoglobulin A (sIgA), to the baby. These antibodies are the first line of defense of the epithelial tissue that lines the cavities and surfaces of blood vessels and organs throughout the body. As part of the immune system, sIgA blocks the binding of pathogens to intestinal epithelial cells, preventing them and antigens such as toxins from entering the intestinal epithelium and even controlling the formation of bacterial colonies. It may also be involved in establishing the newborn's microbiome. In studies, sIgA at concentrations equal to or less than that found in human milk inhibited the binding of Clostridium difficile toxin A to the brush border of intestinal cells.1

The production of sIgA is very important because the baby does not start its own production of sIgA until several months of age and after one year it is only 20 percent of adult levels.2Production of sIgA occurs exclusively in breastfed infants; Formula-fed babies do not get this protection from formula.

Maternal nutrition, at least in the animal kingdom, can help to "increase" the secretory levels of sIgA that are passed into milk. In studies, the milk of lactating mice given fermented milk kefir showed elevated levels of IgA antibodies.1

Through these processes, the baby learns to communicate with the environment based on the information transmitted by breast milk. Breastfeeding can be seen as an important part of the maturation process of the immune system.1

The second way a mother transmits immunity to her child is through maternal antibodies called immunoglobulin G (IgG) that cross the placenta. IgG is the main antibody in blood and extracellular fluids and binds to viruses, bacteria and fungi to protect the body against infection.3

Beneficial bifidobacteria and the DNA of many other bacteria present in the mother's intestine also find their way into breast milk via a specific compound. For this reason, it is important for pre-pregnancy mothers to have a healthy microbiome, consume plenty of fermented milk products, and avoid antibiotics, artificial sweeteners, oral contraceptives, and other substances that harm beneficial bacteria.4For those who are lactose intolerant and cannot consume yogurt, kefir, and other dairy products, raw sauerkraut, pickles, and other mixes can be consumed, as well as kombucha, water kefir, and other products that contain probiotic bacteria.5

Surprisingly, the baby's antibodies are stronger than those of an adult. Antibodies that mothers pass on to babies can inhibit the formation of vaccine reactions in the first year of life. "This effect is generally offset by side reactions to the booster shot," the researchers say.6In fact, published research shows that science is working to suppress this response. Dr. Stefan Niewiesk of The Ohio State University suggests that the baby's response to the mother's natural antibodies “can be partially overcome by injection of a vaccine-specific IgM monoclonal antibody. IgM stimulates the B cell directly by cross-linking the BCR through the complement protein C3d and the antigen with the complement receptor 2 (CR2) signaling complex.7

Studies have shown long-term protection against diseases in breastfed babies, including:

• Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib), infection increases with lactation up to ten years after lactation;
• diarrhea, even if solid foods were introduced during lactation;
• Respiratory infections for almost seven years compared to non-breastfed.
• Otitis media up to three years of age.8

Colostrum is the first milk produced immediately after birth for up to four days until normal breast milk begins. It is a source of fats, proteins, sugars and micronutrients in the form of vitamins and minerals and a very rich source of secretory IgA, IgG, lactoferrin and other immunological substances that provide protection to the newborn. Colostrum strengthens the immune system and provides growth and protective factors. It is full of leukocytes, macrophages, polymorphonuclear neutrophils, and lymphocytes, which help strengthen the immune system of the immature baby.9

Macrophages are scavenger cells that are an important part of the immune system. Their number increases in response to infection. These cells recognize, engulf, and destroy pathogens, cancer cells, and foreign substances, release cytokines, help remove cellular debris, and eliminate cells that have undergone apoptosis (cell death).10

GcMAF, glycoprotein macrophage activating factor, a protein produced by T cells and B cells and released into the bloodstream, is important in activating macrophage activity. It has other important physiological functions, including involvement in vitamin D transport and storage, other immune functions, and communication and brain development. GcMAF binds to macrophage surface receptors to activate them.11

The precursor for the formation of GcMAF is vitamin D-binding protein (DBP), which is a glycoprotein (containing sugars). The production of GcMAF from vitamin D-binding protein requires two steps, each catalyzed by a specific enzyme (beta-galactosidase and sialidase) that removes these sugars from the molecule. Sialidases interact with sialic acid in various natural substances, including glycoproteins.11

Breast milk, including the breast milk of premature babies, is a rich source of sugar-bound sialic acid. Relatively small amounts, if any, are found in infant formula. Sialic acid is highest in colostrum and decreases over time. In animal studies, sialic acid supplementation has been linked to increases in brain gangliosides and improved learning ability.12The role of sialic acid in breast milk is currently unknown, but it may play a role in GcMAF activity.

Nagalase, an enzyme produced by viruses and cancer cells to hide their activities from the immune system, deactivates GcMAF in vivo, leading to immunosuppression. In the absence of GcMAF, cancer, HIV, and other viruses can grow freely.11

In 1990, Dr. Nabuto Yamamoto reported that GcMAF administration bypasses Nagalase blockade and reactivates macrophages, and that it is involved in killing cancer cells, inhibiting their further growth and returning the cancerous state to normal. . GcMAF administration rebuilds a weakened immune system, activates white blood cells, and increases neural activity in the brain. It also leads to increased energy production at the mitochondrial level, reduces the symptoms of chronic fatigue syndrome, and improves the metabolic activity of human neurons.13

Dr. Marco Ruggiero, MD, Professor of Molecular Biology, and Scientific Director of Immuno Biotech, discovered that colostrum contains GcMAF. Together with his team from the University of Florence, he researches and claims cures to reverse cancer, autism, autoimmune diseases and other diseases based on this specific molecule. Immuno Biotech scientists published sixteen peer-reviewed research articles in 2013 alone, providing evidence that GcMAF restores a compromised immune system.13

Ruggiero worked on creating a food product, starting with a yogurt-like product enriched with colostrum that is inoculated with probiotic bacteria and vitamin D. He says that when yogurt reaches the intestine, there are the highest number of microphages in the GALT (lymphoid ). tissue associated with the intestine), the immune system of the gastrointestinal tract, which activates macrophages. Dr. Ruggerio explains that with colostrum and other substances like vitamin D, oleic acid, and probiotic bacteria, you can basically recreate the original mammalian microbiome.14

In 2013, Immuno Biotech introduced "GOleic", which combines colostrum containing the GcMAF molecule with oleic acid, which can be taken orally in yogurt and also under the tongue, proving to be an effective way to deliver GcMAF to older children. little ones with autism Dr. Ruggerio emphasized that dietary and lifestyle changes are a very important part of treatment: "Daily vitamin D3Eliminating sugar and carbohydrates from the diet, reducing stress, exercising, eating meat and fish are essential ingredients to beat cancer.13-14Once again we see the importance of adequate levels of vitamin D3in the body.

Doctors like Dr. Thomas Cowan discussed the fact that vaccines and other factors can weaken and weaken the cell-mediated immune system, eventually leading to the development of cancer. Dr. Cowan described the use of GcMAF in cancer therapy at the 2013 Weston A. Price Lecture in his presentation, The Holistic Care of Cancer, Part II, available on Fleetwood MP3 CD-ROM.15

1. Lambert B, Koblilner V. An engaged generation. 2010 Boulder CO: First Senient releases. 181-183; Mantis NJ et al. The complex roles of secretory IgA in immunity and intestinal mucosal homeostasis.mucosal immunology2011; 6:630.
2. Stoop JW, Zegers BJ, Sander PC, Ballieux RE. Serum immunoglobulin levels in healthy children and adults.klin. one acre immune. 4(1), 101–112 (1969).
3. Coico R. et al.Immunology: a short course. 2009. Hoboken, Nueva Jersey: Wiley-Blackwell.
4. Perlmutter D. Brainmaker. 2015. New York: Little, Brown and Society.
5. Fallon S., Enig M.nutritious traditions. 2003. Washington DC: New Trends.
6. Lambert PH et al. Can successful vaccines teach us how to induce effective protective immune responses?naturopathy2005; 11: S54-S62.
7. Niewiesk S. Maternal antibodies: clinical importance, mechanism of interference in immune responses and possible vaccination strategies.frontiers of immunology. September 2014.
8.Hanson LA. Breastfeeding provides passive and probably long-lasting active immunity. Annals of Allergy, Asthma and Immunology 1998; 81:523-537.
9. Cerini C, Aldrovandi GM. Breast milk: proactive immune modulation and protection of mucous membranes against viruses and other pathogens. medscape. Virology of the future. 2013;8(11):1127-1134.
10. Ovchinnikov DA. Macrophages in the embryo and beyond: much more than cleaning up giant cells.Genesis. Joint 2008. 46(9): 441.
11. Yamamoto N, Urade M. Pathogenic significance of alpha-N-acetylgalactosaminidase activity found in the hemagglutinin of influenza virus. infect microbes. 2005 April; 7(4):674-81. PMID: 15848273; and Nagasawa H. et al. Gc protein (vitamin D binding protein): Gc genotyping and GcMAF precursor activity. Cancer Research 2005; 25:3689-3696; and SchmidtT.The GCMaf bookThe GC Maf book. 2014 gcmaf.timsmithmd.
12. Wang B. et al. Concentration and distribution of sialic acid in breast milk and infant formula.Bin J Clin Nutrition2001;74:510–5.
13. Costello B. The blood protein with multiple benefits. Med Lab 2014;
14. Interview with Marco Ruggerio.; #sthash.kowRTkEK.dpuf; or; and Inui T. Oral activation of colostrum macrophages
Factor in major infections and chronic fatigue syndrome: reports of three cases. Cancer research. 2015; 35:4545-4550.
15. Cowan T. "Cancer Treatment, Part II," MP3 CD-ROM; wooden fleet. 22061;

The proteins in infant formula are prone to glycation reactions during processing. To ensure safety and extend shelf life, ingredients are blended, pasteurized, homogenized, concentrated, heat sterilized, spray dried, and canned up to 130-140oC, leading to major changes in infant formula compositions.39Glycation is the reaction of sugars with amines, amino acids, peptides and proteins at high temperatures, initially forming Amadori products, the first stage of a process called the Maillard reaction (MR). Amadori products are broken down through a variety of pathways that eventually lead to advanced glycation end products (AGEs). Breast milk contains small amounts of these products compared to infant formula.38

Heating leads to a reduction in the availability of amino acids, mainly lysine, by up to 50%. Lysine and lactose react to form lactulosilysine (LL), an early-stage AGE that blocks the absorption of the essential amino acid lysine, resulting in loss of absorption, digestibility, and nutritional value. LL can be broken down into furosine (FUR) and the two EFAs N-carboxymethyllysine (CML) and oxalic acid monoalkylamide (OMA), which can also be produced with omega-3 DHA
reacts with lysine. Infant formula can contain levels of CML hundreds of times higher than breast milk. Studies have shown furosin levels of 932 to 1,550 milligrams per 100 grams of protein in infant formula compared to no furosin in breast milk.39

Both high lactose content and whey protein supplementation promote RMs. Powdered whey supplements can already be badly damaged before they are added to the formula. Whey protein used in infant formulas, protein powders, and other products also undergoes heat processing. During heating, many chemical reactions take place that can drastically reduce the beneficial nutritional properties of whey.40

In formulas with whey, lysine is further broken down. Liquid formulas have six times more lysine loss than powder formulas. To make up for this loss, formula manufacturers add higher concentrations of protein to the formula, about twice that of human milk. But increasing protein leads to more AGE production.41

Iron and ascorbic acid increase the formation of hydroxyl radicals, the glycation of lysine, and the oxidation of tryptophan. Vitamin C itself can be oxidized to dehydroascorbic acid. Important minerals such as zinc, iron and copper can form complexes with MRPs.42

Many MRPs are toxic substances that accumulate in the liver, kidneys, and pancreas and cause pathological changes in these organs in laboratory animals. Arginine, methionine, tryptophan, and histidine are also similarly affected. MRPs also limit protein digestibility by blocking the availability of a peptide bond for trypsin and carboxypeptidase and are inhibitors of digestive enzymes.39

The most common protein oxidation product formed during milk processing is methionine sulfoxide, formed by the oxidation of methionine. Methionine sulfoxide levels can be as high as 64% of total methionine in whey protein concentrate and calcium caseinate. Methionine is an essential amino acid and a source of methyl groups for various methylation reactions, as well as being a source of cysteine, necessary for the synthesis of glutathione, the body's main antioxidant. When most of the methionine is oxidized, it is not available to the baby.43

Cysteine ​​and tryptophan can also be oxidized. Tryptophan is oxidized to N-formylkynurenine (NFK). NFK is a metabolite of tryptophan that has been linked to tics.44

What about these products? With the exception of LL and fructosilysine, which are peptide-bound, most other MRPs are probably fermented by the gut microbiota.45 It is not known what changes these substances induce in the microbiota.

A diet rich in AGE demonstrates the development of inflammatory mediators and decreased insulin sensitivity in animals and humans. Experimental studies show that the same AGEs can trigger the process of insulin resistance in the muscles and reduce insulin levels in the pancreas. The higher levels of protein, the lower concentrations of long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, and presumably the absence of insulin-sensitizing hormones, as well as several other biologically active substances in infant formula compared with breast milk, play a pathophysiological role in infant formula-related decreased insulin sensitivity. Recently, it has been suggested that dietary AGEs in AGE-rich infant formulas may prime infants for insulin resistance by inducing inflammation and oxidative stress.46

Recognized as dangerous by the EPA and FDA, acrylamide, identified in 2002, is a known human carcinogen and neurotoxin that forms in food as a result of a heat-induced reaction between two natural ingredients, the amino acid asparagine and sugars. The FDA detected acrylamide in two of the twelve brands of infant formula tested: Enfamil milk-based infant formula with iron (powder) and Similac infant formula with iron. Babies may be more sensitive to the neurotoxic effects of acrylamide due to their immature nervous systems. The first epidemiological studies found an association between the intake of acrylamide and the appearance of tumors.47

MRP consumption has increased in recent decades, along with evidence that these substances may be involved in pathological processes such as cataract formation, diabetes, degenerative diseases, atherosclerosis, and chronic renal failure. The amount of AGES in infant formula can be up to 670 times higher than in breast milk. In addition to toxic AGES and MRP, "during their manufacture there is a significant decrease in the nutritional value of infant formulas compared to the nutritional value declared by the manufacturers." . Thermal processing greatly affects the nutritional value of formulas and creates harmful substances that are not present prior to production.48

The most harmful and experimental artificial formula on the market is a soy-based formula. About 20-25 percent of American children now receive some soy-based formula in their first year, but there is no data on how many are exclusively fed soy-based formula.52The current position of the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is that "there is no conclusive evidence from animal, adult human, or infant populations that dietary soy isoflavones can affect human development, reproduction or endocrine function". On the other hand, the AAP also makes it clear that breast milk is the best food for babies and that soy-based infant formulas should only be used in cases of galactosemia, a life-threatening condition in which the baby is intolerant of milk. lactose.52

In 2014, the Center for Food Safety, a national advocacy group, purchased soy-based infant formula to test for the presence of GMO (genetically modified) ingredients. Similac Soy Isomil and Enfamil Prosobee Powder Soy Infant Formula tested positive for genetically modified soybeans that are resistant to Monsanto's herbicide Roundup and its active ingredient glyphosate. "I think most mothers who buy infant formula have no idea that they are giving their babies a product that is genetically modified to survive exposure to high levels of chemical pesticides," said Aurora Paulsen of the Central US Office USA in Portland. Farmers spray Roundup on their soybean fields multiple times during the growing season. Glyphosate is a systemic herbicide, that is, it is absorbed by the foliage and transferred internally throughout the entire structure of the plant, including soybeans. Therefore, it cannot be "washed".53

Soy-fed babies receive high levels of phytoestrogens, which are estrogen-like compounds. Soy infant formula has blood levels of these compounds 13,000 to 22,000 times higher than milk-fed infants, or, according to toxicologist Michael Fitzpatrick, the equivalent of five to six birth control pills a day. Animal studies show many hormonal abnormalities in those fed soy-based formulas.54

The late Dr. Mary Enig, former president of the Maryland Nutritionists Association and co-founder of the Weston A. Price Foundation, reviewed the literature and found that high levels of phytoestrogens in soyfoods were associated with increased sexual maturation. early in girls and women and late. or delayed sexual development in children.55

Problems with infant nutritional deficiencies caused by soy formula feeding were never predicted, but only resolved after the infants were harmed. The first soy recipes were made in 1929 and later made with soy flour and caused major digestive problems. In 1960, a formula containing soy protein isolate was introduced.54

Soy protein isolate is 90 percent protein; it is rich in arginine, aspartic acid, glutamic acid and leucine and low in methionine, tryptophan and cysteine.56Contains no lactose and only polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFA) in the form of linoleic acid and a small amount of linolenic acid. It is rich in sodium, phosphorus and manganese and low in magnesium and iron.56High manganese levels have been linked to behavioral problems in children. Soy protein isolate is also contaminated with high levels of fluoride, aluminum, and cadmium.54

Soy protein is low in tryptophan and heat processing also further destroys and/or degrades tryptophan. Neither the brain nor the body can produce this essential amino acid, it must be obtained from food. The brains of soy-fed babies lack tryptophan, which is needed to make the neurotransmitter serotonin. This pattern of low serotonin levels can show up years later. In many studies, people who exhibit aggressive behavior, attempt violent suicide, commit impulsive murder, people with ADHD, and people with depression have low serotonin levels.57-58

Soy proteins contain antinutrients that are not completely removed by processing. The following contaminants can be found in soy-based formulas:

• Lectins are sugar-binding proteins that bind to intestinal cells and cause inflammation and toxicity. They are resistant to digestive enzymes and the cooking process. Associated with Leaky Gut, they invade the blood and are suspected of causing disease. Many lectins are strong allergens. They may also inhibit leptin, a hormone produced by fat cells that inhibits hunger, and this dysregulation could be one way infant formula feeding promotes obesity and weight gain in infants and later in life. life.59
• Protease inhibitors are substances that inactivate some important digestive enzymes, such as trypsin and chymotrypsin, and have been associated with pancreatitis and an enlarged pancreas.
• Phytic acid compounds in plants bind strongly to minerals and are a leading cause of poor growth, immune system dysfunction, iron and zinc deficiencies, and other problems. Soy contains more phytates than other plants.
• Saponins are associated with leaky gut and inhibit important enzymes such as trypsin and chymotrypsin. They cause enlargement of the thyroid and can also be goitrogenic, which inhibits the production of thyroid hormones.
• Oxalates are compounds in food that prevent adequate calcium absorption and are linked to kidney stones and vulvodynia.
• Goitrogens are substances that block the synthesis of thyroid hormones and cause goiter, enlargement of the thyroid gland, or thyroid dysfunction. They are potent endocrine disruptors. Soy phytoestrogens are goitrogenic.54

Higher levels of fluoride are reported in soy-based foods than cow's milk-based foods, but it is difficult to reduce levels because fluoride binds to phytate and tricalcium phosphate in the mix. The CDC recently reported a higher prevalence of dental fluorosis (damage to tooth enamel that is a sign of excessive fluoride intake) in the teeth of children in fluoridated and non-fluoridated communities, noting that American children were consuming too much fluoride. Breast milk contains virtually no fluoride, only four parts per billion, about two hundred and fifty times less fluoride than is added to water in fluoridation programs.60 Infant formula made with fluoridated water absorbs the highest dose of fluoride from water of any age group in the population. In 2007, the American Dental Association warned that parents of children under one year of age "should consider using low- or no-fluoride water" when mixing infant formula due to concerns about fluorosis.60

Growth and bone development may become problematic in infants fed soy-based infant formula
the consequent low methionine levels and poor calcium and/or phosphate retention in the infant and the absence of lactose in the formula, which is a stimulator of calcium absorption. Phytates bind to minerals and make them inaccessible for bone formation.61

A 2013 study by Cara J. Westmark of the University of Wisconsin linked soy-based infant formula to specific behaviors, specifically language, communication, social advancement, and hypersensitivity to environmental cues in autistic children. In 2014, she also found evidence that a soy-based formula was associated with increased susceptibility to seizures and the occurrence of neuronal diseases in mouse and human models.62

Although many animals have used whole milk as a substitute for human milk for centuries, there was a strong trend away from the early introduction of cow's milk between 1971 and 1998, which is in line with a number of studies from the decade. 1960s. The 1980s supporting the consumption of pasteurized cow's milk showed that milk can lead to gastrointestinal blood loss in infants with iron deficiency anemia.1In 1971, a policy statement recommended the use of an iron-fortified formula for the first year of life. In 1976, iron-fortified infant formula or muesli was also recommended for young children because of the feared blood loss. In 1983, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended the use of cow's milk in infants older than six months, which could replace iron-fortified formula if they consumed one-third of the calories from supplements. But in 1992, the Academy changed its mind and recommended that cow's milk be used after one year of age because of the reported risk of massive fecal blood loss and anemia associated with pasteurized cow's milk. Blood loss does not appear to occur in infants fed cow's formula, only in those fed pasteurized cow's milk.2Studies conducted by George Fuchs in 1993 at the Louisiana State University School of Medicine found that babies fed whole cow's milk were at increased risk of developing iron deficiency, but the iron deficiency was not due to loss of iron. gastrointestinal blood.3

Because of the AAP recommendation, many more babies than ever received iron-fortified formula. From 1971 to 1991, much of this was due to increased enrollment in the USDA Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program and the provision of free formula that began in the early 1970s. Breast milk or formula fortified with iron for the first year of life, WIC only sells low-iron formula for babies with serious medical conditions. Otherwise, many of these babies would have been fed cow's milk.4

In addition to feeding infants older than six months iron-fortified formula, the AAP advocated feeding infants high-iron (12 milligrams/L) versus low-iron (2.3 mg/L) formula for one year. after six months of age. further increase the use of infant formula.5Iron-fortified infant formula can have twenty times the iron content of human milk and even more in soy formula compared to cow-based formula. During storage, the iron content can increase by two milligrams per liter, reaching 20 mg/l of total iron. The more iron added, the less absorbed: 6 percent ferrous sulfate per liter is absorbed when 6 mg is added; when 12 mg/L is added, only 4% is absorbed. Due to these effects, European manufacturers switched to lower levels of iron.6It is unknown what happens to the unabsorbed iron.

Babies need iron primarily for growth. At birth, babies of well-nourished mothers have adequate iron stores up to four months of age. Breastfed babies can develop iron deficiency after six months, depending on the mother's diet.7At this point solids are introduced and the liver and egg yolk can provide enough iron to feed the baby. Current medical advice to give rice porridge as a first food is unfortunate, as the iron in infant porridge is not well absorbed and extra iron can cause constipation.8-9

When the AAP made its recommendations, it did not consider the effects of iron supplementation in children's diets. A 10-year randomized follow-up study of nearly 500 infants found that healthy, well-nourished infants who were fed high-iron-fortified formula scored an average of 11 points lower on IQ tests at age 10 than infants. children of the same age who were fed with low iron content. iron. -fed formulas -iron formula, according to the joint meeting of the Academic Societies of Pediatrics and the Asian Society for Pediatric Research. The low-iron group scored higher "on all outcomes" at 10 years. Results were significant for spatial memory and visuomotor integration and are indicative of IQ, visual perception, and motor coordination compared with the high-iron group, which scored lower on all of these measures. "The results indicate the possibility of impaired long-term development in iron-adequate infants receiving iron-fortified formula at US levels."10

“Breast milk is very low in iron, and infant formula manufacturers have taken advantage of this fact to promote iron-fortified infant formulas as an improvement over Mother Nature,” says Dr. Naomi Baumslag, clinical professor. Pediatrics at Georgetown University Medical College and President of the International Women's Public Health Network. She notes that breast milk is low in iron for at least two reasons: low levels of iron in breast milk contribute to its antiviral effects, and iron competes with zinc for absorption. The human baby requires an ample supply of zinc for brain and nervous system development.11Iron also interferes with the absorption of calcium and copper. Iron-fortified soy-based formulas are particularly problematic because they contain low levels of bioavailable zinc.12

Breast milk also contains lactoferrin, an anti-infective that prevents iron from becoming bioavailable to pathogenic microbes in the infant's intestine. Iron in infant formula can cause lactoferrin in breast milk to become saturated, affecting its antibacterial activity.13

Ascorbic acid (vitamin C) is usually added to infant formula to increase iron absorption in the intestine. However, ascorbic acid is a very powerful glycating agent.14Iron and ascorbic acid promote the formation of advanced glycation end products (AGEs) and the breakdown of tryptophan in infant formula.14 AGEs induce inflammation, increase oxidative stress, insulin resistance, kidney damage, and promote atherosclerosis.15

In the late 1960s and early 1970s, iron administration for vitamin E deficiency in low birth weight infants was found to cause hemolytic anemia, particularly when infant formula rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids was consumed. . Under these conditions, iron in the amount present in iron-fortified infant formula catalyzed oxidative damage to the red blood cell membrane. Despite the addition of vitamin E, iron accumulation in low birth weight infants still results in decreased serum vitamin E.sixteen

"Iron in the diet can lead to important changes in the intestinal flora, with consequences that have important implications for health." In studies, infants fed iron-fortified formulas had high levels of E.coli and Clostridia, but low levels of bifidobacteria, the main beneficial microorganism in the infant gut.17Despite these conflicting results, the AAP recommendation stands, resulting in older infants who would normally have received cow's milk are more likely to use iron-fortified infant formula and infant formula.18


1. Zlotkin SH. Another look at cow's milk in the second 6 months of life,J Pediatr Gastroenter Nutr1993; 16:1-3.
2. AAP Committee on Nutrition. The use of whole cow's milk in infancy.pediatric1992; 89(6): 1105.
3. FuchsG et al. Gastrointestinal blood loss in older infants: effects of cow's milk versus formula. J Ped Gastroenter Nutr 1993; 16:4-9.
4. Fomon SJ. Infant nutrition in the 20th century: infant formulas and complementary foods.j is nourished. 2001; 131(2) 409S-420S.
5. Ebd.
6. Dallman public relations. Symposium: Nutrients in Infant Formulas. Upper limits of iron in infant formulas.j is nourished1989; 119: 1852–1855.
7. Dallmann public relations. Iron deficiency anemia: a synthesis of current scientific evidence and US recommendations for prevention and treatment. For Iron Deficiency Anemia: Recommended Guidelines for the Prevention, Screening, and Treatment of American Women and Children of Childbearing Age. Committee for the Prevention, Detection, and Treatment of Iron Deficiency Anemia in Children and Women of Childbearing Age in the United States; ER and CE Woteki CE, editors.
1993. Washington (DC): National Academies Press.
8. Baumslag N. Tricks of the baby food industry.wise traditions, Herbs 2011.
9. Guard K. The grain of rice can wait, let them eat meat first: the AAP committee has changes in mind.pediatric newsNovember 2009 (Vol. 43, Issue 11, Pages 1-5)
10. Kerr M. Neurodevelopmental delays associated with iron-fortified formula in healthy infants. medscape. May 12, 2008 Coverage PAS1008: The Pediatric
Joint Meeting of Academic Societies and Asian Pediatric Research Society.
11. Baumslag N. 2011.
12. Dallmann, 1989.
13. Ebd.
14. Roux S. et al. Kinetics of Maillard reactions in model infant formula during UHT treatment using a static resistive batch heater.Dairy Science and Technology2009;
89 (3-4), pp. 349-362 and Pischetsrieder M, Henle T. Glycation products in infant formulas: chemical, analytical, and physiological aspects.amino acids. 2012; 42:1111–1118.
15. Sebekova K, Somoza V. Advanced glycation dietary products (AGEs) and their implications for health.Mol Nutr Alimento Res. Set of 2007; 51(9):1079-84. PMID: 1785400.
16. Dallmann, 1989.
17. Ebd.
18. Your baby's need for iron. gerber. with.

Similac, Enfamil and Gerber Good Start, which together account for more than 90% of all infant formula sales in the United States, expose American babies to potentially serious health risks by using genetically modified ingredients, according to GMO Inside. org.79

According to pediatrician Dr. Michelle Perro, babies' livers don't mature for about two years and are therefore less able to process toxins in the body, such as B. herbicides used to grow genetically modified plants. “Due to the toxic effects of herbicides, mainly glyphosate (due to its productive use), as well as other organophosphates and genetically modified foods in non-organic commercial formulas, these are not an option for infant feeding. To guarantee the health of our babies and children, there is no acceptable level of herbicides or GMOs to include in their diets."79

Some of the ingredients that can be genetically modified are sugar, maltodextrin, soy, and even the dairy base (GMO-derived bovine growth hormones). The effects of feeding GMOs to young children and babies are unknown. A search of the Pub Med archives of the National Library of Medicine did not find any studies.80

Nucleotides and infant growth rates
Nucleotides (adenylic acid, guanylic acid, cytidylic acid, and uridyl acid) are non-nitrogenous substances found naturally in breast milk. They are the building blocks of RNA and DNA necessary for cell growth and proliferation.

Nucleotides were added to baby foods in the 1990s. They are produced commercially from hydrolyzed yeast, which undergoes a number of chemical modifications to allow extraction of the nucleotides, including heating to denature proteins, cell wall proteolysis, enzymatic hydrolysis and dehydration. In a randomized controlled study led by Dr. Singhal, published in Pediatrics in 2010, researchers demonstrated that nucleotide supplementation increased weight gain and head growth in formula-fed infants. Previous randomized trials have not shown any benefit for nucleotide supplementation. It was originally suggested that nucleotides would help babies small for gestational age or those diagnosed with failure to thrive (FTT). However, there is controversy about the benefits of faster weight gain, and the slower weight gain that occurs in breastfed babies compared to formula-fed babies may be more beneficial.85

Thirty years ago, Michael Crawford, author of What We Eat Today, wrote that a growth-accelerating factor is considered beneficial, but "it is clear from comparative biology that the fastest growing animals are always the least intelligent." .86

Infant formula manufacturers strive to mimic the breast milk content in their products. It is absolutely necessary to add certain vitamins, such as vitamin A. Otherwise, babies would suffer irreparable damage to their body and brain growth. Vitamin A is absolutely vital for the health, development and maintenance of the skin, vision, the immune system, gene transcription, bone metabolism, antioxidant activity and other bodily systems before and after birth. The active form, retinoic acid, affects many downstream target genes.1

Natural sources of vitamin A are animal products such as liver, butter, and cold-water fish, which provide the "cis" form of vitamin A.2compared to the cheap, artificial "trans" form of retinyl palmitate that manufacturers put into infant formula, refrigerated liquid milk, and other vitamin A-fortified products.3Retinol palmitate was first produced in 1942 by esterifying crystalline vitamin A with a halide.4The natural and synthetic form are not equivalent.3

Poly Vi-Sol Vitamin Drops and other baby vitamin supplements contain retinyl palmitate per milliliter (one serving).5

The activity of one international unit of vitamin A (equivalent to one USP unit) is contained in 0.3 μg (micrograms) of trans-retinol and 0.55 μg of trans-retinol palmitate. Each gram of retinyl palmitate contains approximately 9 milligrams of butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) to retard oxidation.3BHT is a toxic petroleum product.6Infant formulas contain synthetic retinol palmitate with added BHT, unless otherwise stated on the label.

Under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, retinyl palmitate is recognized as safe (GRAS status) with no restrictions for use in infant formulas.7despite evidence that it is toxic to various cells and organs,8is a tumor promoter9weakens the immune system10affects the nervous system and behavior,11and has negative effects on the production, reproduction and development of sperm and eggs.12

As far back as 1974, a study by Stoke and Scudder reported that feeding pregnant rats BHT reduced brain cholinesterase and serotonin in their pups to half normal levels. BHT can damage DNA when ingested in the officially sanctioned daily intake amount.13

BHT is not always listed on product labels. If the product contains oil or other minor ingredients, preservatives may not be included for those ingredients.6

The vitamin A content of breast milk is influenced by diet. The content of breast milk from well-nourished mothers is much higher in preformed vitamin A than from malnourished mothers. The vitamin A content changes dramatically with the lactation stage. The vitamin A content in colostrum and early milk is many times higher than in late mature milk. The lipase stimulated by bile salts in breast milk aids in the absorption of preformed vitamin A. The contribution of carotenoids and beta-carotene (previtamin A found in vegetables) to vitamin A levels in breast milk is much less than that of animal products with preformed vitamin A. Preformed vitamin A is a mixture of retinol and retinyl fatty acid esters.14

1. Schaffer MW et al. Qualitative and quantitative analysis of retinol, retinyl esters, tocopherols and selected carotenoids from various internal organs of different species by HPLC/Anal. methods. 2010; 2: 1320-1332. doi:10.1039/c0ay00288g.
2. O'Byrne SM, Blaner WS. retinol and retinyl esters; biochemistry and physiology.j lipids. 2013; ul;54(7):1731-43. PMID: 23625372
3. Sigma Aldrich. Data sheet. All trans-retinol palmitates Production Sigma no. R3375
4. Baxter, JG, Robeson CD. Crystalline aliphatic esters of vitamin A.J AmChemSocOctober 1942; 64 (10) 2407.
5. family. Products. Enfamil® Poly-Vi-Sol provides vitamins that may be lacking in your child's diet. Available with or without iron. ®
6. Edelkind S, editor. Feingold's Blue Book. Behavior, learning and health: the food connection. 2012 Feingold® Association of the United States. Page 8.
7. Federal Code. Title 21 – Food and Drugs. Chapter 1 - FDA, Department of Health and Human Services. Subchapter B: Food for Human Consumption, Part 184 Direct Food Substances Confirmed Generally Accepted as Safe. Subpart B - Listing of specific substances confirmed as GRAS. second. 184.1930 Vitamin A
8. Thompson DC, Trush MA, 1988. Amelioration of mouse lung damage induced by butylated hydroxytoluol by butylated hydroxyanisole.Toxicology and Applied Pharmacology1988 Oct 96(1):115-21. Thompson DC, Trush MA, 1989. Peroxidase-mediated oxidation enhancement of butylated hydroxytoluene to a quinone methida by phenolic and amine compounds. Chemical-Bio. interactions. 1989;72(1-2):157-73 Stolze K, Nohl H, 1999. Free radical formation and erythrocyte membrane changes during MetHb formation induced by the BHA metabolite, radical research. 1999 abr;30(4):295-303.
9. Kahl R, 1984. Synthetic antioxidants: biochemical actions and interference with radiation, toxic compounds, chemical mutagens, and chemical carcinogens.Toxicology1984 Dec 33 (3-4): 185-228; and Bauer AK, et al., 2001. Induction of pneumonia by butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT): a role in tumor promotion. Experimental lung research. 2001 Apr-May;27(3):197-216; and Bauer AK, et al. 2005. Toll-like Receptor 4 in Butylated Hydroxyltoluene-Inposed Mouse Pulmonary Inflammation and Tumorigenesis,J Nat Can Inst.2005 Dec 7;97(23):1778-81.
10. Tryphonas H. et al. The effect of butylated hydroxytoluene on selected parameters of immune surveillance in rats with enzymatically altered preneoplastic liver lesions. Food and Chem Tox. July 1999; 37(7): 671-81.
11. Tanaka T, Oishi S, Takahashi O, Three-generation toxicity study of butylated hydroxytoluene when administered to mice.Toxicology Letters1993 Mar;66(3):295-304. Stokes 1974; and Stokes JD, Scudder CL, The effect of butylated hydroxyanisole and butylated hydroxytoluene on behavioral development in mice.Developmental Psychobiology1974 julio; 7 (4): 343-50.
12. Takami M. et al. Antioxidants reversibly inhibit the spontaneous resumption of meiosis.I'm Jrnl de Phys. 1999 abr;276(4 Pt 1):E684-8.
13. Sasaki YF, et al. 2002. Mouse 8-Organ Comet Assay: Results with 39 Feed Additives Used for mutations. 26. August 2002;519(1-2):103-19.
14. Bennett P. N. Drugs and Human Lactation: A Comprehensive Guide to the Content and Consequences of Drugs Etc. Ámsterdam, Países Bajos: Elsevier Science B.V. 1996, 539-540.

In a 2005 publication, Mark Lucock of the University of Newcastle, Australia, and Zoe Yates of the University of Leeds, UK, suggested that folic acid fortification and supplementation could be "a genetic time bomb." He was referring to the high levels of folic acid to which the fetus is exposed, which persist after birth and have the potential for serious epigenetic effects.1Folic acid is added to all baby foods.

The terms folate and folic acid (FA) are used interchangeably, but they are not the same thing and do not have the same properties. Folates are water-soluble B vitamins found in foods such as organ meats and leafy green vegetables in the form of L-5-MTHF (methyltetrahydrofolate), while FA, the synthetic form used in dietary supplements and fortified foods, was synthesized at Lederle Laboratories. in 1943 it was converted.2-3FA is 100 percent bioavailable, unlike folates in food, which are 50-80 percent available. Therefore, the body absorbs more FA for metabolism. Folates are used by the baby for vital functions such as methylation reactions, amino acid synthesis, and RNA and DNA replication.2-3

The body metabolizes folates and fatty acids differently. Fatty acid metabolism requires a two-step process that involves the same enzyme, dihydrofolate reductase. At certain concentrations, as low as 400 micrograms (mcg), which is the recommended daily allowance, this enzyme can become saturated. At this point, unmetabolized folic acid (UMFA) enters the bloodstream by passive diffusion.4UMFA has been detected in umbilical cord blood of newborns in mothers who took prenatal vitamins and not. In 2005, M. R. Sweeney and her colleagues found UMFA in the cord blood of all four-day-old babies they tested. Others replicated these results.5The effects of excess UMFA in neonates and other groups are unknown.6

Pregnant women now consume many more fatty acids from prenatal and dietary vitamins than they did before 1990. Average fatty acid exposure increased after 1998, when the United States and Canada, without long-term studies, introduced mandatory fortification with fatty acids from all commercial cereal products. only to prevent tube defects (NTDs) to prevent - structural defects, such as spina bifida, which can occur anywhere along the neuraxis from the brain to the spinal cord seventeen to twenty-eight days after conception. The UK Standing Advisory Committee on Nutrition has estimated that for every potentially salvageable child with a neural tube defect, between 370,000 and 780,000 people would be exposed to higher levels of folic acid.7

However, studies have shown that GA fortification is not successful in reducing neural tube defects in high-risk groups, such as obese or Hispanic women or in women with epilepsy who are taking anticonvulsants.8 Most countries do not require GA fortification of foods.

In addition, since 1991, the US government has recommended 400 μg of FA per day during pregnancy and for all women of childbearing age, and 4,000 μg per day beginning one month before trying to conceive and for the first few months. three months pregnant. The US Prevention Task Force recommends 400-800 micrograms of FA per day for all women who are planning or may become pregnant.9

For babies, this means higher levels of FA throughout their lives, not only in the uterine environment, but also in infant formulas legally fortified with synthetic FAs.10 Researchers have pointed the finger at this dubious health measure. public as a possible cause of autism. . In the United States, reported cases of autism have increased significantly since FA fortification in foods.11

The high intake of fatty acids continues into childhood with the ingestion of grains and other grain products. Today, the typical five-year-old in the United States has the highest daily blood levels of FA (780 μg/d) of any group, double the untested proposed tolerable upper limit (300–400 μg/d) for children of this age. About 10% of these children consume 1,320 mcg per day, which is well above the tolerable upper limit of 1,000 mcg per day for adults. The second largest group for PA values ​​are children from six to eleven years old, and the third highest concentration is in people aged 60 years.12

Since then, research has shown that AF does not prevent neural tube defects in all women at risk and that some populations are "folic acid resistant." It is estimated that 30 to 40 percent of the population cannot efficiently convert synthetic folic acid to folate.13About 10 to 15 percent of the population share a common genetic error called a single nucleotide polymorphism in the MTHFR folic acid enzyme, which may be responsible for this resistance. People with certain MTHFR mutations do not process FA acid into 5-MTHF and need folate, not FA. Certain groups have a much higher level of this error, such as US Hispanics, Southern Europeans, and the English and Irish. This genetic tendency is relatively new, and some speculate that high levels of unmetabolized fatty acids contribute to the problem. In Spain, for example, the prevalence of this polymorphism has doubled since the introduction of FA supplements for women in early pregnancy in 1982.14

The enzyme can still work with polymorphisms, but its potency is greatly reduced. One copy of a polymorphic gene from one parent results in a 40% loss of function of the MTHFR enzyme, while there is a 75% loss of function for an affected gene from each parent.15

Pregnant women with folate polymorphism are considered to be at particular risk of miscarriage, stillbirth, and birth of brain-damaged babies.sixteenThis mutation is associated with a two- to four-fold increased risk of NTD if the mother has two copies of the faulty gene (homozygous).17In a 2010 Italian study of 42 high-risk pregnancies in women with folate polymorphism, in which all women received heparin, aspirin, and folic acid, two women lost their babies, four lost before birth, and six had babies. with hemorrhagic brain lesions. .18

Breast milk contains amounts of naturally occurring folate (5-MTHF), but fatty acid supplementation can disrupt this process. In a 2015 double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study (the gold standard for clinical trials) involving more than fifty pregnant women, with one group taking FA 1 mg daily for four weeks, Lisa Houghton and his research team found that supplementation reduced red blood cell levels, but folate levels in breast milk did not change. Instead, she found unmetabolized fatty acids in breast milk and a downregulation of the natural folate-binding protein needed to absorb folate in breast milk in both supplemented and non-supplemented mothers.19

Another problem with synthetic fatty acids is that additional high intakes mask B12deficiency associated with adverse neurological sequelae and microcytic anemia.20 In India, FA but not B12it is mandatory for all pregnant women, despite the high rate of vegetarianism, which can predispose the mother to hypoglycemia12levels21In fact, it was in India that British researcher Dr. Lucy Wills, working with women with anemia in the 1920s and 1930s, discovered a factor in Marmite, an inexpensive British yeast product then called 'Wills Factor', later called folate, which cured women of anemia.22In a 2013 Indian study, babies born to mothers low in vitamin B12 and high in folate were small for gestational age, a risk factor for normal growth. B.12It is an emerging problem of pregnancy and childbirth associated with neural tube defects, preeclampsia, placental abruption, pregnancy loss, hyperhomocysteinemia, and intrauterine growth restriction (small for pregnancy).
to alter).21

As the folate receptor in the brain also has an affinity for fatty acids, unmetabolized fatty acids in certain amounts can bind to the receptor and effectively block the necessary transport of folate to the brain through the blood-brain barrier. The effects of unmetabolized fatty acids in the brain are unknown.23However, in some autistic children, a condition called cerebral folate deficiency (CFD) occurs when autoantibodies against the folate receptor prevent folate from entering the brain.24The autoantibody has been found in some mothers with the MTHFR mutation who gave birth to babies with neural tube defects.25Among many other functions, the brain uses MTHF to form tetrahydrobiopterin, a critical cofactor in the synthesis of serotonin, norepinephrine, and dopamine.26To date, no study has examined the relationship between unmetabolized folic acid and CFD.27


1. Lucock M, Yates Z. Folic acid fortification: a double-edged sword.Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2009 November; 12(6):555-64. PMID: 19726978.
2. Winkels, RM et al. The bioavailability of dietary folates is 80% of the bioavailability of folic acid.Bin J Clin Nutrition1007; 85: 467-73.
3. Hoffbrand AV, Weir DG. The history of folic acid.Bruder. J. Hematol. 2001; 113 (3): 579–89. PMID 11380441.
4. Kelly P et al. Unmetabolized serum folic acid: acute studies in subjects consuming fortified foods and dietary supplements.Bin J Clin Nutrition1997; 65:1790-5; and Lucock MD et al. In vivo characterization of pteroylmonoglutamic acid uptake and biotransformation in humans: a model for future studies.Biochem Med MetabBiol. 1989; 42: 30–42. IDPM:
5. Sweeney MR et al. Measurements of subnanomolecular concentrations of unmetabolized folic acid in serum. J Chromatog B. 2003; 788:187-91; and Obeid R. et al. Concentrations of unmetabolized folic acid and primary forms of folate in pregnant women at the time of delivery and in umbilical cord blood.AJCN2010 Dec;92(6):1416-22. PMID: 20844072 and McPartlin J, Weir DG, et al. Detection of unmetabolized folic acid in umbilical cord blood of newborns and serum of 4-day-old infants.Brother J.Nutr. 2005;94:727-30.
6. Smith AD et al. Is folic acid good for everyone?Bin J Clin Nutrition2008; 517-33.
7. Frey L., Hauser WA. Epidemiology of neural tube defects. Epilepsy. 2003; 33(s3):4-13.
8. Ebd.
9. CDC Use of folic acid in the prevention of spina bifida and other neural defects 1983-1991.
10. Newberry RE. The Infant Feeding Act of 1980.J Assoc Off Anal-Chem. 1982 Nov;65(6):1472-3.
11.Rogers EJ. Did elevated folate level during pregnancy alter natural selection and possibly the prevalence of autism? Medical Hypothesis 2008; 71, 406-410; and James SJ et al. Metabolic endophenotype and related genotypes are associated with oxidative stress in children with autism.Bin J Med Genet. B Neuropsiquiatra. gineta. 2006. 141B: 947–956.
12. Pfeiffer CM et al., Biochemical indicators of vitamin B status in the US population after folic acid fortification: results from the 1999–2000 National Health and Nutrition Survey.Bin J Clin Nutrition2005;82:442-50; and Pfeiffer CM et al. Unmetabolized folic acid is found in nearly all serum samples from children, adolescents, and adults in the United States.J. Nutr.2015 145: 3 520-531 PMID: 25733468.
13. Obeid R. et al. Is 5-methyltetrahydrofolate an alternative to folic acid to prevent neural tube defects? J Perinat Med 2013; 4195) 469-83; and Obeid R. et al. Unmetabolized folic acid concentrations and primary forms of folate in pregnant women at birth and in umbilical cord blood.AMJN, 2010;92:1416–22; and Heseker HB et al. Not all cases of neural tube defects can be prevented by increasing folic acid intake.Br J Nutri. 2009 julio 102(2):17380.
14. Lynch B. Methylation and clinical nutrigenomics. Part 1. Bastyr University, October 2013; Smith AD et al. Is folic acid good for everyone? 2008
15. van der Put MNJ et al. A second common mutation in the ethylenetetrahydrofolate reductase gene: an additional risk factor for neural tube defects,Era. J.Hum. Gineta. 1998; 62:1044-1051
16. Ebd.
17. Ebd.
18. Pogliani L et al. Maternal methylenetetrahydrofolate reductase (MTHFR) homozygosity and neonatal outcome: follow-up of 42 high-risk pregnancies.J Child Neurol.June 2010; 25(6):701-4. PMID: 20357240.
19. Houghton LA et al. Unmetabolized folic acid and total folate concentrations in breast milk are not affected by low-dose folate supplementation.Bin J Clin Nutrition. 2009 Jan;89(1):216-20.
20. MC from Israel, Wilkinson JF. Risk of neurological complications in pernicious anemia treated with folic acid.Br mit JNovember 12, 1949; 2 (4636): 1072-5. PMID: 15407545; and Will JJ et al. folic acid and vitamin B12 for pernicious anemia; Studies in patients treated with these substances over a period of ten years.J Laboratory Clinic Med. . . . 1959 Jan;53(1):22-38. PMID: 13621020.
21. Dwarkanth P. et al. High folate intake and low vitamin B12 intake during pregnancy are associated with small-for-gestational-age babies in south Indian women: a prospective observational cohort study.Bin J Clin Nutrition. 2013 Dec;98(6):1450-8. PMID: 24108785.
22.Rosenberg II. A history of the isolation and identification of folic acid (folate).Ann Nutr Metab. 2012; 61:231-235. PMID: 23183294.
23. Smith AD et al. 2008.
24. Ramaekers V et al. Clinical recognition and aspects of cerebral folate deficiency syndromes.Clin Chem Lab Med.2013 Mar 1;51(3):497-511. two: 10.1515/cclm-2012-05.
25. Cabrera RM et al. Autoantibodies against folate receptors during pregnancy and the risk of neural tube defects.J Reprod inmunolOK T. 2008; 85–92. doi:10.1016/j.jri.2008.08.002.
26.Tony B. et al. Biosynthesis, regeneration and functions of tetrahydrobiopterin.biochemistry J2000; 347(1):1-16. PMC 1220924; and Miller AL. Methylation, neurotransmitter, and antioxidant links between folate and depression.Toggle with Rev. Set of 2008; 13(3):216-26. PMID: 18950248.
27. Smith AD et al. 2008.


Breast milk contains many unique factors not found in commercial infant formula that affect the nutritional status, growth, and development of the infant:

• Enzymes: amylase, proteases and lipases.
• Growth factors and hormones: epidermal growth factor, erythropoietin, insulin, insulin-like growth factors I and II, lactoferrin, lipase, nerve growth factor, relaxin, transforming growth factor alpha.
• Various hormones and growth factors, such as adipokines (leptin and adiponectin), as well as ghrelin, resistin, and obestin, which are thought to control food intake and energy balance, and induce satiety and autoregulation of energy. intake. Adiponectin, a circulating protein of adipocytes, is associated with a reduction in obesity. Breastfed babies are rarely obese. Breast milk also contains a number of unique anti-infective or immune-boosting properties and other substances.115
• The high concentration of biopterin in breast milk suggests that biopterin plays a crucial role in fetal development. Tetrahydrobiopterin (BH4) is the essential cofactor in the breakdown of essential amino acids and in the biosynthesis of neurotransmitters. In cells, the release of dopamine and serotonin increases. Biopterin also serves as a cofactor for the production of nitric oxide enzymes. The formulas only contain trace amounts of Biopterin.116

1. Stevens EE et al. A history of infant feeding.J Perinatal education.2009; 18(2) 32-39. ID de PMC: PMC2684040.
2. Davis M. Commercial production of infant formula. September 11, 2010; and Wall G. Breastfeeding Outcomes. Perennial perinatal education. Washington University. 2013; 1-61 and MilkShare. Breast milk is the best for your baby. Know why.
3. Pottenger FM Jr, Krohn B. Influence of breastfeeding on facial development”.Arch Pediatr.1950; 67(10):454-6.
4. Oral health during pregnancy and early childhood. Sacramento, CA: CDA Foundation. February 2010.; and Mittleman JS et al. Healthy teeth for children: A prevention program: from before birth to adolescence. 2001 New York. Kensington Books, page 34.
5. The FDA is taking the final step to protect infant formula. United States Food and Drug Administration. 02/27/2015.; and CNN. The FDA does not approve infant formula. December 20, 2011;
6. Lawrence RA, Lawrence, RM.Breastfeeding: A Guide for the Medical Profession. 5th edition, New York; CV. Mosby, 1999; and Elbeck G. The FDA does not approve infant formula. Unthinkable FDA scandal behind soy infant formula. CNNI report, December 20, 2011.
7. FDA. Meeting of the Food Advisory Committee on Infant Formulas.informational material overview.
8. Perlmutter D. Food is information.; Hyman M. Nutrigenomics. How food speaks to your genes. Protocol dr Marco.; and Hyman, Mark. Eat your medicine: food as pharmacology. Dr Mark Hyman.
9. Apple, Rhyme. Mothers and Medicine. A social history of infant feeding 1890-1950. 1987. University of Wisconsin Press: Madison, WI.
10. Apple rhyme, 1987; Fomon SJ. Infant feeding in the 20th century: formula and complementary feeding. 2001j is nourished131:409S-420S. PMID: 11160571 (Freitext).
11. Fomon, S, 2001 (S. 412).
12. AppleR, 1987.
13. Ebd.
14.Kelly mom. Education. lactation
15. Institute of Medicine. Committee for the Evaluation of the Addition of New Ingredients in Infant Formulas. Table 3-1: Factors unique to human milk that positively affect nutritional status and somatic growth in Chapter 3. Comparison of infant formula and human milk. In infant formula: evaluation of the safety of new ingredients. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (USA), 2004.
16. Limback J. Infant formula recalls consumer problems. June 9, 2014.
17. Which infant formulas contain toxic chemicals? August 5, 2010.; Gadoth A, Somers NL. Melamine: Infant Formula Adulteration, Health Effects, and Regulatory Response 441-456 in Manual on Dietary and Nutritional Aspects of Bottle Feeding. June 2014. Wageningen Academic Publishers.; Toxic phthalates in infant formulas. Spring 1996
18. Fomon, 2001.
19. Devany T. Why baby food regulations are changing. The hill.
20. Kaleita TA et al. A neurobehavioral syndrome following failure to thrive on a low chloride formula.Dev Med Child Neurol.July 1991; 33(7): 626-35. PMID: 18174.
21. Stehlin D. Feeding the Baby: Nature and Nutrition. 1993. Washington, D.C.: US Public Health Services; United States Food and Drug Administration.
22. Food and Drug Administration. Infant Formula: The addition of minimum and maximum levels of selenium to infant formula and associated labeling requirements Federal Register. June 23, 2015.
23. Dewar G. Nutrients and calories in breast milk: a guide for scientists. 2008 Educational Sciences. with.
24. Soft goat milk foods. Goat.; and Cooper's recipe. Healthy and nutritious baby food recipe.
25. Abbott Nutrition. Soil.; Enfamil; gerber good start
26. Who turns their baby into a lab rat? to take action.
27. Abbott Nutrition.
28. Vallaeys C. Human breast milk replacement in the laboratory. Cornucopia Institute May 2010.; Vallaeys C. DHA and ARA in infant formula. Dangerous and unnecessary synthetic additives have no place in baby food. Corn. Institute, May 2010; and The Watergate Organic White Paper. Connecting the Dots: Corporate Impact on the USDA National Organic Program. 2010
29. Vallaeys, 2010 (Cornish Institute).
[PubMed] 30. Flanagan JL et al. Role of carnitine in obesity.metab nutrition(London). April 16, 2010; 7:30. PMID: 20398344.
31. L-carnitine. Handling/Processing. Technical Evaluation Report. June 25, 2012. 1-14.
32. Vallaeys, 2010 (Cornish Institute).
33. Ebd.
34. Ebd.
35. Melnik, BC. Formula feeding promotes adipogenic, diabetogenic, hypertensive, and allergic mTORC1 programming.Human Health Manuals. AT THE. 8. Wageningen Academic Editors. DOI 10.3920/978-90-8686-223-8-34.
36. Linen THE. Infant formula with high concentrations of a-lactalum.Bin J Clin Nutrition2003;77 (suplemento):1555S-8S.
37. Sharp RJ et al. Longitudinal evaluation of the type of milk consumed and weight status in preschoolers.arch dis type. Mayo 2013; 98(5): 335–340. PMID: 23508869.
38. Zhang Z et al. Amino acid profiles in preterm and term breast milk during lactation: a systematic review. Nutrients 2013, 5, 4800-4821; PMID: 24288022; and Bastos DM et al. Maillard reaction products in processed foods: pros and cons. technology 2012; 281-300. 39.Bastos, 2012; Martysiak-Żurowska D, Stołyhwo A. Furosine content in infant formulas and follow-on formulas.Pol J Food Nutr Sci2007; 57 (2): 185-190.
40. Meltretter J et al. Maillard-specific formation, oxidation and condensation products of whey proteins during reaction with lactose.J Agric FoodChem. 2007 July 25; 55(15): 6096-103.
41. Birlouez-Aragon I ET AL. Evaluation of protein glycation markers in infant formulas.Food Chemistry.2004, September 87(2), 253-259.
42. Roux S. et al. Kinetics of Maillard reactions in model infant formula during UHT treatment using a static resistive batch heater. Dairy Science and Technology 2009; 89 (3-4), pp. 349-362 and Pischetsrieder M, Henle T. Glycation products in infant formulas: chemical, analytical, and physiological aspects.amino acids. 2012; 42:1111–1118.
43. Baxter JH et al. Direct determination of methionine sulfoxide in milk proteins by enzymatic hydrolysis/high performance liquid chromatography.J Croma A2007;1157:10-16; Snyderman SE et al. The need for essential amino acids in babies. X methionine.Bin J Clin Nutrition1964; 15:322-30.
44. Hoekstra PJ. Plasma kynurenine and related measurements in patients with tic disorders.Eur child and adolescent psychiatry. June 2007; 16 Supplement 1:71-7. 17665285); and Rickards H. et al. Elevated plasma kynurenine and its relationship with neopterin and tryptophan in Tourette's syndrome.psych. mid. 1996 julio; 26 (4): 857-62. 8817721.
45. Finot et al. 1981; Erbersdoubler et al. 1991; Henle et al. 2000.
46. ​​Klenovics, KS et al. Advanced glycation end products in infant formula do not contribute to the insulin resistance associated with their consumption,plus one8(1) January 2013. E53056. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone. 0053056.
47. Jacobson MF. CSPI petition to the FDA. June 4, 2003.; and Erkekoglu P, Baydar T. Toxicity of acrylamide and evaluation of its exposure in baby food.Nutr Res Rev2010; 23: 323–333; und Health Canada's Revised Exposure Assessment of Acrylamide in Food agosto de 2012.; and Fohgelberg P et al. Acrylamide intake of some common baby foods for infants in Sweden during the first year of life: an improved method for analyzing acrylamide.Food Toxic Chemical. 2005 Jun;43(6):951-9. 15811575.
48. Klenovics, 2013; Martysiak-Żurowska, 2007.
49. de Boissieu D. et al. Allergy to highly hydrolyzed cow's milk proteins in infants; Safety and duration of amino acid-based formulas.J pediatrician. 2002; 141(2):271-273.
50. Hernell O, Lonnerdal B. Nutritional evaluation of protein hydrolyzate formulas in healthy term neonates: plasma amino acids, hematology, and trace elements.Bin J Clin Nutrition. 2003; 78: 296-301. PMID: 12885712.
51. Horie KA et al. Atopic dermatitis in children in the United States, 1997-2004: Visit trends, patient and provider characteristics, and prescribing patterns.pediatrics. 2007; 120: 527-534. PMID: 17766497; and Chung CS et al. FDA Health Claim Review: Partially Hydrolyzed Infant Formula with Whey Protein and Atopic Dermatitis.pediatrics. 2012 Aug, 130(2):e408-14. PMID: 22778306; and one of nature. Does the media cause a sensation with processed formulas?
52. Committee on Nutrition, American Academy of Pediatrics. Soy protein-based formulas: recommendations for use in infant nutrition.pediatrics1998;101(1):148-153.
53. Loew T. Portland infant formula contains pesticide-resistant GMOs. October 24, 2014.; and Seidler R. Summary of infant formula test results for genetically modified ingredients for tolerance to chemical herbicides. October 24, 2014.
54. Daniel K.T.The whole story of soy. . . . 2005. Washington, DC: New Trends; and Feingold Association of the United States, Pure Facts, November 2002. 26(9): 3-4.
55. Ebd.
56. Goalkeeper D Midlands. ADM: special products. Pro-Fam Soy Protein Isolate 646 066-646 Data Sheet. 06/07/2010.
57.WAPF. A campaign for real milk feeding. Whole milk. Pastures. Raw references Infant formula items. realmilk with.
58. Patrick RP, Ames BN Vitamin D and omega-3 fatty acids control serotonin synthesis and action, Part 2: Relevance to ADHD, bipolar disorder, schizophrenia, and impulsive behavior. FASEB, 2015; 29(6):2207-22. PMID: 25713056. Free text, Onusic, SP. "Violent behavior: a solution in sight".wise traditions. Primavera. 14(1). 2013. 19-35.
59. DL released, Dietary lectins cause disease.BMJ.1999 318(7190) 1023-1024 1115436); (PMC13262030).
60. SP Onusik. More government support for soy-based infant formula.wise traditions. Winter 2012.
61. Bainbridge RR et al. Bone mineral content of infants fed soy-based formulas.J pediatrician.1988 July; 113 (1 Pt 2): 205-7; PMID: 3392639,
62. Westmark CJ. A hypothesis about the molecular mechanism underlying the effects induced by soybean on the tendency to convulse.frontiers of neurology. September 3, 2014; 5, AR no. 169 and Westmark CJ. Soy formula may be linked to autistic behaviors. Autism. 2013 3(3):1-12.
63. Lorenzo, 2011.
64. Sinatra ST et al. The controversy surrounding saturated fat, cholesterol and statins. A comment.JACN. 2014 Jan-Feb 33(1): 79-88.
65. Fomon S, 2001.
66. J Bruce German, CJ Dillard Saturated fat: lactation perspective and milk composition.LIPIDS2010; 45:914-923.
67. Mittleman, 2001 (48-50).
68. Place of lactation. Exploring the ingredients of Similac infant formula. October 17, 2013.
69. Vallaeys, 2010 (Cornish Institute).
70. Lloyd B et al. Formula tolerance in postfed and formula-fed infants. pediatrics. 1999 Jan;103(1):E7. PMID: 9917487; and KooWW et al. Palm olein in mixed fats for infant formulas: effect on the intestinal absorption of calcium and fats and on bone mineralization.Jelly. Column. nourish, 2006. 25(2): p. 117-22; and Ostrom KM et al. Lower calcium absorption in infants fed casein hydrolyzate and soy protein-based infant formula containing palm olein compared with palolein-free infant formula.Jelly. Column. nourish. December 2002; 21(6) 564-9 PMID 12480803.
71. Watson E. Canola oil gets GRAS status in infant formula after Danone petition greenlit. Food Browser. January 22, 2013.
72. Eat baby. Processed to death - get these cooking oils from your pantry immediately! March 27, 2015.
73. Similac with OptiGRO: our unique blend of DHA, lutein, and vitamin E.; enfamilar con Mead Johnson.
74. Singh M. Essential fatty acids, DHA, and the human brain.Indio J Ped2005; 72(3): 239-242.; and Brenna JT. Docosahexaenoic acid and arachidonic acid concentrations in human breast milk worldwide.Bin J Clin NutritionJune 2007; 85(6): 1457-1464.
75. Carlson SE. Arachidonic acid status of human infants: influence of gestational age at birth and very long-chain n-3 and n-6 ​​fatty acid diet.J. Nutr Abrnineteen ninety six; 126 (4 supports): 1092S-8S; and Carlson SE. Arachidonic acid status of human infants: influence of gestational age at birth and very long-chain n-3 and n-6 ​​fatty acid diet.j is nourishedApril 1996; 126 (4 supports): 1092S-8S.
76. Vallaeya C. Replacing the mother - mimicking breast milk in the laboratory. Cornucopia Institute; The Watergate Organic White Paper. Connecting the Dots: Corporate Impact on the USDA National Organic Program.
77. Vallaeys, 2010 (Cornish Institute).
78. Vandenplas Y. Oligosaccharides in infant formulaBr J Nutri. May 2002;87 Exhibit 2:S293-6. PMID: 12088532; and Cai JW et al. Effects of infant formulas containing galacto-oligosaccharides on the intestinal flora of infants. Zhongguo Dang Dai Er Keza Zhi. 2008 October; 10(5): 629-32; and Osborn, 2007.
79. O'Connell E. Is your baby part of a risky science experiment? GMO Insider's Blog. OMG inside. with. May 1, 2013.; And who turns their baby into a lab rat? a Green America campaign. 2012; and O'Connell E. Non-GMO Infant Formula resource. May 3, 2013. 80. Baby ingests genetically modified ingredients.; genetically modified ingredients in infant formulas 03.09.2015.
81. Chuchu N et al. The aluminum content of infant formula is still very high.BMC Pediatrics. 2013 13; 162.
82. Message board. The I.K study shows the concentration of aluminum in infant formula.Food Safety News. October 14, 2013.
83. Tomljenovic L. et al. Aluminum adjuvants for vaccines: are they safe?Curr Med.Chem. 2011;18(17):2630-7. PMID: 21568886.
84. Cariñena CC et al. Estimated exposure to arsenic in breastfed and formula-fed infants in a US cohort.children's health environmental health perspective123:500–506;; Onusik, SP. Violent behavior: a solution in sight. Sidebar: arsenic.wise traditions, 2011.
85. Cornucopia Institute, 2010, Singhal A, Lanigan J. Breastfeeding, early growth, and later obesity.Obes Rev.. 2007; 8 (Supplement 1): 51-54.
86. Allport S.the fat queen.Why omega-3 fatty acids have been eliminated from the western diet and what can we do to replace them. 2006 University of California Press: Berkeley and Los Angeles, CA. page 186; Crawford M, Crawford Swhat do we eat today, 1972. Neville Spearman Publishers, Londres, Inglaterra. art. 146.
87. EFSA scientific opinion. Scientific Opinion on the Public Health Risks Associated with the Presence of Bisphenol A (BPA) in Food: Part I: Exposure Estimation.EFSA Journal2015; 13(1) 3978.
88. D'Ari L, Barker HA, p-cresol formation by cell-free extracts of Clostridium difficile,The book. Microbiol.1985, 143, 311-312; and Azad, M.B., Gut microbiota of healthy Canadian infants: profiles by mode of delivery and infant feeding at 4 months of age.Permitted. Medicine. Ass. j.2013 185, 385–394; of Kelly, C.P. et al., Colitis por C. difficile.N. ingl. J.Med.1994, 330, 257-262 and Issa, M et al. Impact of C. difficile on inflammatory bowel disease.Klin. Gastroenterol. hepatol. 2007, 5, 345–351).
89. Perlmutter D. Loberg K.brain maker. 2015. Nueva York: Little, Brown and Society.
90. Davis, M. 1999.
91. Fomon S, 2001.
Premio 92 WA.Nutrition and physical degeneration. 8th Ed. 2008. Price Pottenger Nutrition Foundation; and Pottenger FM Jr.,gato's pots. 2nd ed., 2012. PPNF.
93.WAPF. A real milk campaign. Full fat. pasture feeding. not modified. Exit. realmilk with. Slides 59. 60. 64.
94. Davies A.Let's have healthy children. . . . 1951, 1959, 1972 New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. (“Dicke in Training,” p. 220).
95. Adele Davis Foundation. who was she what wrote
96. Private communication, Sally Fallon Morell, July 2015.
97. Mercola J., The best infant formula for babies of mothers who cannot breastfeed. June 24, 2011.
98. Fallon Morell, S. Cowan T.The Nourishing Traditional Baby and Toddler Care Book. 2013. Washington, DC: New Trends; Fallon S., Enig M.nutritious traditions. 2001 Washington, DC: New Trends; Pope S YouTube Pope S. Homemade Baby Food (Video Recipe and Instructions) The Healthy Home Economist.; Papa S. Make formulas. WAPF.
99. Melnik, BC. Formula feeding promotes adipogenic, diabetogenic, hypertensive, and allergic mTORC1 programming. 545-569 VR Preedy et al (eds.) Manual of the dietary and nutritional aspects of bottle feeding.Human Health Manuals. AT THE. 8. Wageningen Academy. Publishers. 2014
100. Hinde K, German B. Eating in an evolutionary context: perceptions of human milk.J Sci Food Agric.2012; 11(22) 2219-23 PMID: 22729619.
101. Power, ML 2009, Bouret SG, Simerly RB. Programming the development of hypothalamic feeding circuits.clin genet. 2006; 70:295-301. 16965320 Harris G. Development of taste and food preferences in children.Curr Opin Clin Nutr Metab Care. 2008; 11:315–319. 18403930.
102. Cederlund A. et al. Lactose in breast milk as an inducer of innate immunity with an implication of a role in intestinal homeostasis.PLUS ONE2013; 8(1): e53876. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0053876.
103. Guarantee, THE. infant formula with elevated levels of α-lactalbumin;Bin J Clin Nutrition2003;77 (supplement): 1555S-8S. Ghosh S. Nutrition andChild care: a practical guide(2nd edition). 2004. Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers New Delhi, Cederlund A et al. Lactose in human breast milk as an inducer of innate immunity with implications for a role in intestinal one2013; 891) e53876. PMC3542196.
104. InnisSM et al. Evidence that breastfed infants absorb palmitic acid from breast milk as sn-2-monoacylglycerol.LIPIDS1994; 29(8): p. 541-5.
105. 105 Enig M. Fat and cholesterol in breast milk.wise traditions. December 31, 2001. This article appeared in Wise Traditions, Fall 2001.
106. Allport S.The queen of fats: why omega-3 fatty acids have been eliminated from the western diet and what we can do to replace them. 2006. Berkeley: University of California Press. S. 177, 185-86, 92-93, 35-36.
107. Käsemann MA. FDA. CFSAN/Food Additive Safety Office. GRM 355 FDA Notes on House Weeds. eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA) Yarrowia lipolytica; March 7, 2011; and Dupont GRAS notification for EPA-rich triglyceride oil, August 30, 2010 to the Office of Food Safety regarding GRAS exemption claim.
108. Wong WW et al., Effect of dietary cholesterol on cholesterol synthesis in breastfed and formula-fed infants.J. Lipid-Res.1993. 34:1403-1411; e Cruz MLA et al., Effects of infant feeding on cholesterol synthesis rates.child research. 1994; 35(2): 135.
109. Orth M, Bellosta S. Cholesterol: its regulation and role in disorders of the central nervous system.Cholesterol.2012; 292498;
110. Deans E. Low cholesterol and suicide.developmental psychiatry. July 29, 2010.
111. Shrivastava S, et al. Chronic cholesterol depletion with statin use affects the function and dynamics of human serotonin (1A) receptors.Biochemistry. 2010; 49:5426-5435.
112. Gimpl G, Fahrenholz F. Cholesterol as a stabilizer of the oxytocin receptor.Biochim Biophys Acta. 31. August 2002; 1564(2):384-92 . PMID: 12175921.
113. Hamosh M. “Fat Requirements for Term and Preterm Babies” In: Tsang RC, Nichols BL, eds., Infant Nutrition. 1988 Philadelphia: Hanley and Belfus. 133-159; and Frederickson B, et al. Bile salt-stimulated lipase in breast milk: evidence for in vivo activity and a role in the digestion of milk retinol esters.pediatric beef1978. 12:1048-1052.
114. Frederickson B. et al. Bile salt-stimulated lipase in breast milk: evidence for in vivo activity and a role in the digestion of milk retinol esters.pediatric beef1978. 12:1048-1052; and Hernell O, Blackberg L. Molecular aspects of fat digestion in the newborn.Pediatric Act1994;Suppl. 405:65-9.
115. Institute of Medicine. Committee to evaluate the addition of new ingredients to infant formulas. Table 3-1: Factors unique to human milk that positively affect nutritional status and somatic growth in Chapter 3. Comparison of infant formulas with human milk. Infant formula: safety evaluation of new ingredients. Washington, DC: National Academies Press (USA), 2004. (p. 470).
116. Ponzone et al., Dihydropteridine reductase deficiency in humans: from biology to treatment.Reviews Medical Res., vol. 24, no. 2, 127-150, 2004; and Matsubara, Gaull GE. Biopterin and Neopterin in various milks and infant formulas.AJCNJanuary 1985; 41:110–112.
117. Dykes F. Western Medicine and Marketing: Constructing the insufficient milk syndrome in lactating women. International Women's Health. 2002; 23(5): 492-502.
118. Lepore J.Mansion of Happiness. A story of life and death. 2012 New York: Knopf and Lepore, J. Baby Formula: If Breast Is Best, Why Do Women Bottle Milk? New Yorker. January 19, 2009.
119. Akre, James, eds Infant feeding: the physiological basis. World Health Organization, Geneva 1989; and Neifert MR. Infant problems with lactation. 303-331. In Neville MC, Neifert MR. Lactation: Physiology, Nutrition and Breastfeeding 1983; New York: Plenum Press. 120. Lawrence RA, Lawrence RM. Normal growth, growth retardation, and obesity in breastfed infants. Breastfeeding: a guide for the medical profession. 7th ed. 2011, Elsevier-Mosby. 336-338.
121. Personal communication with Ana Sonc-Jevtic, June 2015.
122. Personal communication with Joyce Bailey, July 2015.
123. Dadkes and Williams, p.
124. Diques F. 2002; Apple R. 1987; Lepore J. 2012.
125. Republic of Slovenia. Ministry of Labour, Family, Social Affairs and Equal Opportunities. Law on the protection of parents and family benefits.; family and maternity allowance.
126. The bump. Maternity protection around the world. August 12, 2015.
127. Gilpin L. 10 Things to Know About Maternity Leave in the US, May 8, 2015.
128. Beecher C. Human milk exchange networks reflect a growing movement.Food Safety News. July 2, 2015; and Onusic, SP Breast Milk Pasteurization Campaign.wise traditions. Winter 2013.
129.; Onusic SP. Cooking competition for children in Slovenia.wise traditions, 2014.

This article appeared inWise traditions in food, agriculture and healing., the quarterly magazine of the Weston A. Price Foundation,herbs 2015

🖨️ Print publication

Read this at:Español


Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Kieth Sipes

Last Updated: 30/08/2023

Views: 6063

Rating: 4.7 / 5 (67 voted)

Reviews: 82% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Kieth Sipes

Birthday: 2001-04-14

Address: Suite 492 62479 Champlin Loop, South Catrice, MS 57271

Phone: +9663362133320

Job: District Sales Analyst

Hobby: Digital arts, Dance, Ghost hunting, Worldbuilding, Kayaking, Table tennis, 3D printing

Introduction: My name is Kieth Sipes, I am a zany, rich, courageous, powerful, faithful, jolly, excited person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.