Skip to content
Call Us Today! 212-533-4646 | MON-FRI 12PM - 4PM (EST)
DONATE
SUBSCRIBE
Search for:
About Us
UNWLA 100
Publications
FAQ
Annual Report 2023
Annual Report 2022
Annual Report 2021
Initiatives
Advocate
Educate
Cultivate
Care
News
Newsletters
Sign Up For Our Newsletter
Join UNWLA
Become a Member
Volunteer With Us
Donate to UNWLA
Members Portal
Calendar
Shop to Support Ukraine
Search for:
Print
Print Page
Download
Download Page
Download Right Page
Open
1
2-3
4-5
6-7
8-9
10-11
12-13
14-15
16-17
18-19
20-21
22-23
24-25
26-27
28-29
30-31
32-33
34-35
36-37
38-39
40
HEALTH & WELLBEING BREAST-FEEDING VS. INFANT FORMULAS: THE CONTROVERSY CONTINUES by Dr. Maria Motyl able to resist infections. A mother, however, having been exposed to many bacteria and viruses in her life has many anti-bodies, which are proteins that can stop invading microorganisms. Many of these antibodies are passed in the milk to a nursing baby, thus providing it with the first line of protection against infection. As the infant grows, its own systems mature and take on this protective role. In studies comparing breast-fed and formula-fed infants in underdeveloped countries it was found that the breast-fed group suffered fewer illnesses such as diarrhea, meningitis and upper respi ratory infections. In the U. S. the incidence of breast feeding fell to a low of 23% in 1971. Women’s early return to work soon after the baby’s birth was one reason. Another was the vigorous advertisement campaign of the formula companies (such as the Swiss-based Nestle) that suggested that formula feeding was a status symbol and sign of upward mobili ty. However, as increased awareness about the importance of human milk grew, breast feeding increased to 54% in 1980. In underdeveloped countries, breast feeding also declined, for some of the same reason as in the U. S. However, be cause of the various health and socio economic problems of underdeveloped countries, the disadvantages of formulas became evident very quickly. In these parts of the world sanitation is inadequate, and mothers prepare formulas using water contaminated with bacteria. The lack of refrigeration and storage of prepared formulas at room temperature cause an overgrowth of potentially harmful microbes. Furthermore, while an adequate supply of formula to feed an infant may cost about $1 per day in the U. S., it may cost up to one-half the family’s entire daily wage in an underdeveloped country. Consequently, mothers dilute the formula far below the level that will sustain the baby’s growth. It is obvious that the use of formula under such conditions can lead to malnutrition, illness and death. Another practice in the underdeve loped countries which the WHO was very concerned about was the common practice of formula company representa tives to visit maternity wards, wearing white, distributing free formula to woman who had recently given birth and leaving the impression that they were health professionals instead of salesmen or saleswomen. Harsh criticism from world public opinion has forced the companies to stop this misrepresentation. The problem of the use of infant formulas in underdeveloped countries is very complex, since a return to breast feeding may be impossible in countries where malnutrition prevents a woman from being able to produce milk to nurse her child. WHO, in cooperation with the formula companies, is considering the possibilities of developing alternate methods of preparing infant food from locally available produce, thereby avoiding the problems associated with unsterile water and high expense of the formulas. Readers who are interested in the applications of the most current scientific research to their personal health, however, should not look to this as a medical advice column, but should consult with their personal physicians. Dr. Motyl is a microbiologist at the Mt. Sinai Medical Center in New York, where she is involved in teaching as well as clinical and pure research. For an interview with Dr. Motyl, see the November 1981 issue of Our Life. All nutritionists and pediatricians agree that there is no substitute for breast-feeding newborn infants. Yet not all mothers have an adequate supply of milk. Some mothers must, or wish to, return to work soon after their baby’s birth. It is for these women that packaged infant formulas have been especially helpful. If prepared properly, these formulas provide adequate nourishment for the infant’s growth. However, in underdeveloped coun tries many serious problems have been associated with infant formulas. A controversy has arisen over their real benefits. A 1974 journalistic expose in London contended that in underdeve loped countries formula products, such as Similac, contribute to significant infant malnutrition, disease and even death. Last spring, this debate reached global proportions when the World Health Organization (WHO) voted to restrict the advertisement and promotion of infant formulas. The U. S. A. has the dubious distinction of casting the only dissenting vote on this issue, maintaining that such a ruling ran counter to the cons titutional guarantees of freedom of speech and information. In protest against their government’s stand, two top health officials of the U. S. Agency for In ternational Development (AID) resigned their positions. Human milk contains a complex array of nutrients, many of which are chemically different from those in formula products. Infant formulas, on the other hand, are based on cow’s milk to which certain components have been added, and others removed. One problem with formulas is that some infants develop an allergic reaction to the proteins in them. However, the most significant advantage of breast milk is the presence of maternal anti-bodies. When a baby is born, many of its systems are very immature and it is un- Cont. VIEW POINT _ thus gives us the possibility of a deeper retention of the values we do decide to accept. 4. Continuous balancing of theory and practice will reinforce our authority as parents and our viability as a community. 5. It will strengthen the values of the younger generation against outside influence. 6. It will create a concrete link between the generations. 7. A sense of free will and a positive approach will help us build a strong foundation for our collective Ukrainian House. Natalia Korm eliuk, m em ber o f UNWLA Br. 115, lives in Rock ville, Md. A m other of two, she teaches art and w ill soon receive a Master of Fine Arts degree. For many years she has been active in the educational sphere of SUMA. This article is adapted from a talk she delivered in Ukrainian at the 19th UNWLA Convention in 1981.
Page load link
Go to Top
1 
2-3 
4-5 
6-7 
8-9 
10-11 
12-13 
14-15 
16-17 
18-19 
20-21 
22-23 
24-25 
26-27 
28-29 
30-31 
32-33 
34-35 
36-37 
38-39 
40 
