Breastfeeding has turned into a Terrorist issue--at least that's the
view of the National Ad Council in its claims that formula feeding
babies increases the risk of leukemia and diabetes. Where
do you stand on one of the most maternal of all debates? Is the
Beast of Terror lurking in Similac?
4, 2003—Ground Zero Plus 813
Terrorism of Not Breastfeeding
Editor, New York City Combat Correspondent News
GROUND ZER0, New York, N.Y.--Dec. 4, 2003--
Technocracy, or is that commercialism, butted heads the other days
with the Primary Mammary Gland Of Vigilance.
And, she's mad--or, at least, spitting and
scratching her way toward fundamentalism.
It's a battle of Nature vs. Technocracy; of
formula for babies vs. natural mother's milk.
Prior to the
last century, the
primary source for a child's nourishment came from mother's breast
Feeding one's baby
in a modern rush-rush world isn't like it was a hundred years ago.
Back then, the primary source for a child's nourishment came from his
or her mother's
breast. The wealthier women had nurse maids, women who
offered their breast milk.
Whether from a surrogate or from the mother
herself, millions upon millions of human beings for about as many
years since the dawn of humankind have found the rich nourishment of
mother's milk the primary source of fuel to grow a child.
Over the last century, however, feeding baby has
been streamlined by formulas such as Similac.
today has been streamlined by formulas such as Similac
Nobody raised much dispute over the
formula-fed babies until recently when the Ad Council, a non-profit
group that develops advertising for the government, announced a major
assault against formula feeding babies.
One of the proposed ads showed pregnant
women roller skating and asked the question: "You'd never take
risks when your pregnant. Why start when the baby's born?"
The Ad Council newsletters, in
support of the anti-formula ads, stated that babies who consume
formula milk have a 30 percent increased risk of getting leukemia and
a 40 percent increased risk of getting diabetes.
Enter the conflict. The
American Academy of Pediatrics came to the defense of formula feeding
while the United States Breastfeeding Committee held hard and fast in
defense of the ads.
It seems the "scare tactics" are at
question. At controversy also are the statistics and data
of increased risk to a baby regarding leukemia and diabetes.
Not everyone agrees the risk is as great as the Ad Council suggests.
Also at question is money. Millions
of dollars in business is being threatened if the Department of Health
and Human Services, the government agency that supports the Ad
Council, pushes anti-formula ads.
So here we go. Terrorism at work.
Fear, the handmaiden of Terrorism, is about to wash ashore into the
homes of mothers who don't breastfeed their babies.
The pro breastfeeding camp is the Sentinel
of Vigilance in this scenario, and the formula makers and promoters
are the Beast of Terror--if you buy that formula feeding will put your
child at great health risk.
It comes down to heaping "guilt and shame"
on mothers who are too busy to feed their children breast milk.
But is it all true?
the volunteer forces of advertising agencies and media companies
to effect positive social change" The Ad
Right now, no one is sure. The
pressure put on the Ad Council to tame down the ads has worked.
The New York Times reports today in its story on the subject that the
statistics are being pulled until more definitive data can be found.
We live in a world of constant threat to
the security of our children--from the recent abduction of a young
woman in North Dakota, to now, the threat that baby formula might be a
brew straight from the Beast of Terror's breast.
It is easy to feel like we are at a
tennis match, our heads swiveling one way and then the other, trying
to decide who is the "right" player to root for. But one
thing is certain from this conflict--that there is a growing concern
for our children's welfare.
Little argument can be made that
breastfeeding is bad. It has worked throughout human history.
Certainly, there is wiggle room for
the argument that formula feeding isn't as good as breastfeeding, from
both the health to the emotional bonding viewpoints.
I don't know the exact "rightness" or
"wrongness" of the situation at hand, but I do know that I am
encouraged that the Sentinels of Vigilance are alert, alive and
working to let the public know that the farther they extract
themselves from their child's growth, the more room there is for the
Beast of Terror to worm his way between parent and child.
breastfeeding guarantee a happy, wonderful child?
Breastfeeding bonds two beings. A
bottle disenfranchises a child from a parent. And
yet, let's assume that Hitler was breastfed. Does
breastfeeding guarantee a great, happy, wonderful child?
But, Complacency with a glass bottle just
might start the process.
You decide. Think it over.
Study it. Take the Pledge of Vigilance and then ask
yourself--what is right for the future of the children?
Maybe there's an answer we can all feed on.