Strollerderby : formula

They Say: Formula Not Necessarily Fattening. But!

Madeline Holler — Mon, 01 Jun 2009 17:22:00 GMT

Researchers studying the influences of body composition in early childhood found that, indeed, babies who were breastfed longer had a lower fat mass that could not be accounted for by genetic differences or height.

But the study isn't another "Breast is Best" pitch.

Just as influential, researchers found, was a child's weaning diet -- both those being weaned from the breast and those being weaned from formula.

Kids who had the better diet during weaning -- you know the drill, more fruits, veggies, whole grains and lean proteins -- also had greater lean mass by the time they were four years old.

At first blush, you kind of want to say, "duh. More veggies, less fat." However, (shout out to Hanna Rosin!) while the findings are evidence supporting some claims that breastfeeding reduces the risk of obesity in babies, they also show you can undo the breastfeeding bennies rather quickly by going from num-nums to three meals a day of chicken nuggets and Goldfish crackers.

And also, good nutrition is good nutrition, no matter what you ate in your first year of life.

This is the first study to look beyond ounce-for-ounce comparisons of milks and their influence on baby/toddler body fat. Instead of breast vs. bottle, it's fruit vs. Fruity Pebbles.

Oldest Mum Gives Son a Young Name

They Say: We Don't Know How the Hell to Treat Pregnant Women

Police Discover Girl Raised by Dogs

Sonogram Cufflinks for Father's Day ... or a Pro-Life March

Photo: ehow.com

Babies Switched In NYC Hospital

JeanneSager — Sat, 28 Mar 2009 16:52:00 GMT

Let me just say that part of this story is absolutely awful - that a maternity ward's security practices could fail so miserably that two newborn babies are mixed up for several hours is criminal.

HOWEVER, every time I hear a re-telling of the story of Shatiesha Brown's baby being given to the wrong mom in the New York City hospital's maternity ward, I am more mystified by her misplaced anger.

Brown told a NYC news station that she was outraged that her little girl, Aniya Victoria, was breastfed by another woman at Brookside Hospital.

OK, so what? I'd be flipping a lid over the fact that my newborn child was given to someone else to begin with. That she was breastfed by that woman. . . eh. . . as long as the woman had no communicable diseases, who cares?

The thing is, Shatiesha Brown was told by her doctors that her dangerously high blood pressure had to be monitored. For twenty-four hours, they said, she would have to be separated from her newborn. It's during that period when hospital staff apparently took little Aniya Victoria to the room of another new mom, whose last name was also Brown and whose first initial was also S. The other new mom breastfed the baby and posed for pictures before the mistake was discovered.

Now Shatiesha is claiming that her daughter suffered nipple confusion and that the hospital ruined all her plans to breastfeed the little girl with the mistake. "The bond that you have when you breastfeed your child, that's everything," she told ABC 7.

Except that's not how nipple confusion works. Moving from breast to breast isn't an issue - if it was, babies would have trouble moving from the right side to the left on a mom who has different shaped or sized nipples (which is actually most of the population). Nipple confusion comes into play when a newborn baby feeds from an artificial nipple - which Aniya Victoria would have done ANYWAY if mom and baby were to be separated for twenty-four hours. Even then, babies can still make the switch, albeit with some difficulty, and many women report successful breastfeeding of a year or more after their baby received an artificial nipple during the very early days of life.

The mother I feel for is the one who breastfed Aniya Victoria . . . while her own baby lay in the nursery, missing out on the colostrum that's chock full of nutrients and antibodies.

Shatiesha is suing, of course (doesn't everyone?). I agree she has grounds to demand the hospital be held accountable for the mix-up itself, but I'm smelling a cock and bull story here.

Would you be more upset over the mix-up or the fact that your child fed at someone else's breast?

Image: ABC

They Say: Blame Hospitals for Breastfeeding Failures

JeanneSager — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 15:31:00 GMT

Reading this study, I couldn't help but feel a little vindicated. I've always felt like a big fat failure at breastfeeding - despite all my best efforts, I didn't make it very long. And I put a lot of that blame on the misinformation swirling around the maternity ward where I gave birth to my daughter.

Guess what?

A new study says hospitals are largely to blame for the failure of breastfeeding moms in America. And that includes hospitals where attempts are being made to encourage breastfeeding.

The study by the Boston University School of Public Health looked at data on some fifteen hundred women in the nation who had recently given birth. At least seventy percent of first-time moms said they wanted to breastfeed exclusively. Good news, right? Except by the time the babies were a week old, only HALF of the women were exclusively breastfeeding.

Guilty as charged.

Which is why even this article about the study made me angry. One of the chief problems I've found with many maternity wards (not all, but many) is the lack of breastfeeding education for members of the staff. And the same misinformation peddled in hospitals that hurts breastfeeding rates is being pushed out in articles like this one: ie. "some new mothers really are too exhausted to breast feed right away, or they can't produce enough breast milk for their baby's nutritional needs."

No. No. No. No.

I heard this in the hospital after my daughter was born, and I bought it hook, line and sinker. It's one of the main reasons I exhausted myself in the first two weeks of my daughter's life, attempting to breastfeed every two hours, attempting to pump every other hour to increase my milk production because the nurses at the hospital had me convinced I wasn't producing enough. Yes, that meant I was up every hour on the hour for two solid weeks - I was literally tethered to the breast pump.

The problem? Most women DON'T produce milk in the first few days of their child's life. We produce colostrum, the incredibly rich and incredibly thin liquid that's a sort of pre-milk. And that's all the baby needs. As breastfeeding expert Laura Keegan said in a recent piece I wrote about the most common hurdles for new moms right here on Babble, "If you are pumping, be aware that pumping small amounts is not an indicator of a low milk supply."

Colustrum is in every breastfeeding book out there, so why don't nurses working on maternity wards know about it? Although I don't agree that formula is poison, I will say that convincing a mother she isn't making enough . . . so she needs to supplement . . . is poisoning her mind. Her body CAN'T make more, and she's being told she's a failure. Yet, her body is doing exactly what it's supposed to do.

What else is wrong with the above statment? The idea that moms are too exhausted immediately following birth to breastfeed. Yes, we're tired. But after that first feed, so is the baby. In fact, while nurses at my hospital practically tanned the hides of my husband and myself for not waking our daughter every two hours to eat, newborn babies are exhausted too. They just went through the same labor Mom went through. And so sleeping for a few hours is one hundred percent normal. Babies will not starve if they suckle only a few times at the very beginning. And Mom, by the way, may be exhausted. I was. But I've yet to see a mother who isn't on drugs from a C-section or already showing severe signs of postpartum depression who isn't itching to get her hands on that baby in the first twenty-four hours.

So sticking a bottle in the baby's mouth to let his mother sleep is wrong; she should have the chance to make that decision. But so is harping on a breastfeeding mother every few moments - pushing her to breastfeed now, when the baby is sleeping and she could be getting the sleep she missed when you woke her in the middle of the night for a feeding.

There is a movement that's gaining speed in American hospitals, sponsored by UNICEF, that can make all the difference. Baby Friendly Hospitals require all staff - be it the nurses, the doctors, whoever - have up-to-date breastfeeding education. They make lactation consultants available to every mother and allow babies to room-in with their mothers, so she can determine when the baby's hungry and when she wants to attempt feedings.

It takes effort to become Baby Friendly, but if breast is best is ever going to really take hold, misinformation has to stop at the beginning - the place where the baby is born. When you're losing the mothers (like me) who walk in the door with the very best of intentions, the women who already know breast is best and WANT to make it work, you have to step back and realize the machine is broken. It's time to fix it.

Images: BabyFriendlyUSA

UPDATE: Bye Bye BPA: WHICH Bottles Will Go Bisphenol Free

They Say: Early Pacifier Use Can Undermine Breastfeeding

Also on Babble:

Your Breastfeeding Timeline

Ban BPA? Manufacturers Cry Poverty

JeanneSager — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 13:26:00 GMT

You've got to love the recession - all of a sudden big manufacturers are worried about the poor. Worried their poor customers won't have the money to buy their products anyway.

As Suffolk County, New York tries to become the first county in the country to enforce a ban on Bisphenol-A (BPA) in children's products, manufacturers are crying poverty.

Force them to remove the reported carcinogen, and makers say they'll have to jack up their prices so high it will be bad for low-income parents and create problems for hospitals. Snort.

They do realize six of the largest baby bottle makers JUST announced they're going BPA free, right? It's obviously working for some companies . . . or at least six of them. Lobbying against the county, representatives of the plastic bottle and sippy cup makers asked lawmakers to point the bill toward EMPTY containers, freeing them up to fill bottles of formula sent to hospitals for newborn babies with lots of icky chemicals.

But, hey, they're helping poor people. They can sleep at night!

The Suffolk County Legislature voted unanimously in support of the ban on BPA earlier this month, and a set of state legislators are now working together to make a similar ban effective across New York.

Image: OhMyGov

They Say: Breastmilk Fights Respiratory Viruses Better in Girls

Miriam Axel-Lute — Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:30:00 GMT

Science gets particularly exciting when it turns up things no one was expecting. Researcher Fernando Polack, working in Buenos Aires investigating how much protection breastmilk provides for very-low-birthweight babies against the wicked metapneumovirus (no vaccine yet developed), was surprised to find stark gender differences in his results:

Girls who were not breastfed had a much higher risk of rehospitalization for respiratory illness than boys, but breastfed girls were almost never rehospitalized. In boys, the difference between breastfed and not was insignificant. (The researchers hasten to point out that there are plenty of other benefits of breastfeeding that still hold true for boys.)

The fascinating part of this is that a gender difference may point to breastmilk's protective properties working differently than previously supposed. Maybe it's not just delivering mom's immunities until the kid gets its own—why would there be a gender difference in that? Could breastmilk prompt anti-viral protection in the absence of exposure to viruses somehow, interacting directly with the baby's developing immune system? (Of course, why would there be a gender difference in that either?) The report from Vanderbilt Medical Center speculates maybe, though they have no idea how.

Sounds to me for now like another thing to throw on the "we don't know what breastmilk is well enough to replicate it" evidence pile.

More by this author:

Formula Makers Get a Spanking for False Claims

Amy Kuras — Fri, 27 Feb 2009 22:01:00 GMT

Now, I am not a formula hater – my little one quit nursing just shy of his first birthday and now has a disgusting stomach flu, so formula is pretty much keeping him nourished since it’s the only thing he can keep down. But this kind of stuff makes it pretty hard to defend from the hysterics who think formula companies are the root of all evil.

Mead Johnson, makers of Enfamil, is getting spanked by advertising watchdog group the National Advertising Division for making unsupported claims that Enfamil boosts eye development and IQ in babies.

NAD recommended that Mead Johnson either discontinue the claims or modify them by specifying that improvements are limited to only the first 18 months of an infant’s life and that the improvement refers to a prior version of the product.

It’s apparently very unusual for a manufacturer to ignore NAD’s requests, but Mead Johnson has done so three times. NAD refers these types of issues right to the federal Trade Commission, which can go after them with fines and penalties. It’s understood that the FTC takes NAD’s complaints seriously and treats them as high priority.

Come on, formula people. When all your advertising, packaging, etc. trumpets “breast is best” turning around and making unsupported claims doesn’t help anything.

5 Things That Make You a Breastfeeding Nazi . . . And 5 Things That Don’t

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 17:01:00 GMT

Ah, breastfeeding and formula. It seems like forever since we’ve been able to talk about infant feeding without immediately getting sidetracked into the explosive meta discussion about how we should talk about it, or, more often, how we shouldn’t.

The ability to discern between truth-telling and guilt-tripping seems to get a little hazy to all involved sometimes. In the interest of lancing the boil I present the following cheatsheet on how not to become a breastfeeding Nazi—and how not to see them where they are not.

Part 1: 5 Things That Make You a Breastfeeding Nazi

1.   Making disparaging comments to parents giving bottles to their kids.
I shouldn’t even have to say that this is Not OK, and I think it is rarer than some on the defensive would like to make out, but apparently strangers hissing “Shame on you, you should be breastfeeding” does happen. So let’s just get this straight: You don’t know what the story of that parent/caregiver and baby are (or even what’s in that bottle), so shut the eff up. Besides, even if you somehow knew that someone really could be breastfeeding, do you really think that being mean is the way to change their mind?

2.   Refusing to acknowledge that sometimes breastfeeding is hard and sometimes it sucks.
I’m well convinced that with the right post-partum protocols (baby to breast within an hour of birth, for example), support, and information (and maternity leave) that breastfeeding could be a lot easier for a lot of people than it is. But the fact is that (a) most mothers aren’t in that ideal situation and (b) even in ideal cases sometimes milk comes in late, latches aren’t formed right, infections happen, medical conditions lower milk supply, etc. and those things can be miserable. Pretending this isn’t the case is rude to the women who’ve struggled really hard—both the ones who persevered through it and the ones who eventually prioritized other things.

3.   Quoting discredited studies.
Guess what? Breastfeeding doesn’t raise your baby’s IQ. That finding failed to control for parental IQ and when they did, the difference went away. I didn’t know that until recently either, but now that you know, have the integrity to drop it from the plenty-long list of advantages to breastfeeding.

4.   Confusing lactivism with promoting one-right-way-to-parent.
I will never forget reading an otherwise decent article critiquing all the subtle ways in which our culture promotes bottle feeding when suddenly the author was on a condescending tangent about the insufficiently committed mothers who had this selfish need to occasionally have a little time to themselves without their kids. I could just hear a thousand undecided pregnant women saying “Well, if that’s what breastfeeding is about, forget it.”

5.   Blaming individuals, not systems.
The major cause with low breastfeeding rates in the United States is not selfish parents. It’s a stew of bad hospital protocols, bad family leave policy, misleading formula marketing, badly crafted parental education, overworked and undertrained labor and delivery nurses, unsupportive workplaces, and on and on. If we all keep that in mind we might even be able to work together.

Part 2: … And 5 Things That Don’t

1.   Encouraging an uncertain or undecided mother to give it a try/keep trying.
This is different from berating someone who has already made a decision and it doesn’t count if it’s done in such a way as to fall under #2 or #4 above. But if someone truly isn’t sure, offering encouragement, suggestions, information, data, or contacts that might help them succeed in something this big is a service not a judgment. This extends to critiquing misinformation or “balanced” pro-con literature that parents have been given or offering to talk to an uncertain spouse.

2.   Trying to get the word out about how some common breastfeeding problems can be alleviated by different nursing patterns.
Talking about breastfeeding “management” tactics to address problems like lactose overload in no way blames mothers for the problems. It certainly sucks to learn afterward that there might have been something in your control that might have helped make breastfeeding work better, but we all know this isn’t inborn knowledge. You can’t withhold the information from those who want it so you don’t offend those who didn’t have it when they could have used it.

3.   Talking about the statistical risks of routine formula feeding.
This is the hot, wet heart of it all. Yes, there are plenty of perfectly healthy formula-fed kids. They are just statistically less common. Yes, fear of illness doesn’t have to trump every other consideration.

But neither of those things mean we should stop talking about the real and stark differences in health between the two options on a statistical level: Two to five times the rate of SIDS, twice the death rate from diarrhea, six to ten times the rate of necrotizing enterocolitis, higher rates of respiratory illness, leukemia, asthma . . . Post neonatal infant mortality rates in the United States 26.6 percent higher. We’re not actually just talking about fewer annoying ear infections here.

We need to talk about these numbers not in order to make anyone feel bad, but in order to organize for the systemic changes that would actually make breastfeeding a viable option for more people.

4. Opposing formula marketing in hospitals.
Formula is an important option to have on hand when breastfeeding doesn’t work for many reasons. In that way it’s a little like a drug, or at least a nutritional supplement. Hospitals don’t hand out anti-cholesterol meds to people with healthy hearts; they shouldn’t hand out formula as a matter of course either. It’s misleading and it implies that doctors think it is a medically equivalent option and it isn’t. (Same goes for opposing misleading formula ads.)

5. Disliking the term “breastfeeding Nazi.”
Aside from this being yet another case of the term Nazi being tossed around like the Nazis were merely cross-patches, not mass murderers, it implies that there is an organized movement to be horrible and judging to all parents who don’t toe the line, instead of a loosely-knit network of people and organizations trying to advocate for a public health measure, some small minority of which sometimes behave in mean or counterproductive ways. The same can be said of both sides of nearly any cause people get passionate about. It’s time we got back to having the real conversation.

Related Posts:

The great breastfeeding Strollerderby Smackdown: Boob Nazis vs Breastfeeding—Why Not? vs Damned If You Do, Doomed If You Don't
Breast is Best 2.0: Pumping in Public

More by this author:

Survey Time: Infant Feeding Choices

Miriam Axel-Lute — Wed, 04 Feb 2009 21:00:00 GMT

Jennifer Fegan-Szala, a doula and certified professional midwife from upstate New York, is looking for mothers to complete a survey for her midwifery degree thesis.

It's not the happiest topic in the world: the correlation between infant feeding choices and childhood sexual abuse (as in the mother having a history thereof, not the feeding choices causing abuse). I assume—though like a good reseacher, she doesn't say—that her hypothesis is that those with a history of abuse might be more likely to avoid breastfeeding.

In any case, it seems like it's a good question to be asking, and it's a short, easy survey. She wants to hear from bio moms who both do and don't have a history of abuse, and who made any range of feeding choices, so the field is fairly wide open. Click a few boxes for (social) science!

More by this author:

Smackdown: Breastfeeding -- Why Not?

Brett Singer — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 14:15:00 GMT

Cole challenged me to a Smackdown on breastfeeding, and of course I said yes. I never back down from a challenge, at least not one as harmless as a blog face off. (In other words, don't challenge me to get in the ring with Mike Tyson. That, I will decline.)

Breastfeeding is a controversial subject, but it wasn't always. Back in the day (as in, black and white televisions, Uncle Milty, etc.) many women took a pill to dry up their milk ducts. They didn't feel guilty about it, and those children grew up to live happy lives despite being denied breast milk.

There was also a point in our history when women didn't have the right to vote. In other words, times change. We've learned a lot about human health, and there is definitely evidence that breast milk CAN be good for your kids. Is it conclusive? No. So what? If you are able to breastfeed, isn't it worth the potential benefits?

Now for some specifics:

1. The Guilt Factor: No disagreement here. It's wrong to bully a woman, especially a new mother. However, let us not ignore…

2. The Laziness Factor: There are a number of reasons why some women don't breastfeed their kids. I've heard at least one new mom who said that breastfeeding her child made her feel "gross"; she had no problems with her child latching on, she just didn't like having a baby suckling at her "teet." It made her, "feel like a mammal." When someone says that, I want to ask them a simple question: If you are able to do something that has potential health benefits for your child, why wouldn't you? If you can't breastfeed, you can't breastfeed. But if you tried once and just bailed, that seems like a cop-out. Some of the La Leche people may be a little nuts, but many lactation counselors are very good at what they do. If you have trouble with latching or other breastfeeding issues, it's worth trying a counselor just for the potential health benefits.

3. Expressed Milk in a Bottle: Cole, I love ya, but sometimes I wonder if you've been sipping from a different type of bottle. (A glass one. Filled with bourbon.) Who says that expressed breast milk is a bad thing? As I understand it, the debate is usually between breast milk and formula. And I have yet to see a study that says formula is undeniably better for the child. At best, some say that breast milk may not have the benefits that some claim. Which brings us to the next point:

4. "No Proof That Breast Feeding is Healthier": Is there proof that it's harmful? There is certainly evidence that breast milk is good for babies. Again, why not give it to your children if you can? There was a time when doctors said that smoking was healthy. Look at how that turned out.

5. Formulas Aren't Perfect Either: I haven’t done extensive research but I know that whenever there is a product that is mass-produced, there is the potential for problems. Remember the Chinese milk recall? Ever heard of a breast milk recall? I didn't think so.

There's a difference between "can't" and "won't." No one should be bullied into breastfeeding (sorry, La Leche). But if you won't even try because you just don't want to, or you feel like you want to "rebel" against the "breastfeeding nazis", maybe you should rethink your position. Cole is right -- you shouldn't do anything JUST because of peer pressure. But if everyone isn't jumping off the Brooklyn Bridge, that doesn't mean you should. (Think about it for a minute, I'm pretty sure it makes sense.)

Read Cole's take on the matter here.

Read Madeline's take on the matter here. (And I didn't say that ALL women who don't breastfeed are lazy. I mean, c'mon.)

What do you think? I'm right and he's wrong, yes? (Even if you think I'm wrong, let us know in the comments.)

Ann Coulter Says Single Moms Are Bad For Society

Smackdown: Damned if You Do, Doomed if You Don't (Breastfeed, That is)

They Say -- Kids Who Skip Breakfast and Hate Mom Have Sex Sooner

New Pro Vaccine Book Author Getting Death Threats

Kid Named Hitler Taken From His Parents By Family Services

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

Brett Singer — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 14:00:00 GMT

Allanah Earley went to a Durham, Connecticut bar to have a couple of drinks. Nothing wrong with that, right? But the 36-year-old brought her baby. Hey, lots of us think that's fine as well. Then she started breast-feeding the baby, who is seven weeks old.

Two new acronyms have popped up as a result – DWB (Drinking With Baby, from NBC Connecticut) and BWI (Breastfeeding While Intoxicated, from ParentDish). BWI works better, I think. The official charge is "risk of injury to a minor", which sounds pretty, um, minor. At the moment, Earley is free on $10,000 bail.

Imperfect Parent asks, "Wonder where the breastfeeding advocates stand on this issue." Well, it's generally thought that drinking alcohol while breast-feeding is a bad idea. Especially if you literally drink alcohol WHILE YOU ARE BREAST-FEEDING. Like, have a couple of drinks, feed the kid, have another shot, and so on. That's what Allanah Earley is accused of: The Middletown Press says that when police interviewed Earley, she was visibly drunk, and admitted to officers that she'd had seven drinks. I'm guessing even the strictest La Leche Leaguer would suggest formula in that situation.

Poor kid. Even without the breast-feeding, mom's got some problems.

One report says that bar patrons called the police when Earley left the bar and "wandered out into the cold" with the baby, eventually finding her way to a friend's house, where she kept on drinking and breast-feeding. (Ah, reminds me of my college days… sorry, not funny.) In other words, the "concerned customers" didn't make the call while Earley was at the bar.

Would you do something if you saw a mom drinking and breast-feeding her baby at a bar? It's trickier than it sounds, I think – one the one hand, she has a right to do what she wants as long as it's legal. But as she becomes more and more intoxicated, the baby could be in danger, right? I'm not sure what I would do. How would you handle it?

Source: wfsb.com, others

Should Homeschooling Parents Be Certified?

They Say: Smoking While Pregnant Makes Kids Aggressive

Cops End Search for Baby Thrown in Hospital Trash

Airing the Parental Dirty Laundry

Man Says Drinking Breastmilk Cured His Cancer

Donated Breastmilk Comes to NY, Slowly

Breastfeeding Moms Fight Facebook Ban

China Detains Dad of Baby Sickened by Tainted Milk

JeanneSager — Sat, 03 Jan 2009 19:01:00 GMT

Parents of the babies sickened by melamine in the Chinese tainted milk scandal shot down a $160 million payout, and now they're being punished. Zhao Lianhai, organizer of a parents' news conference slated for yesterday, was picked up by the Chinese government and detained.

The families' lawyer, Li Fangping, says the government did it just to keep the parents from talking.

The payout would have put $29,000 (200,000 yuan) in the bank accounts of the parents who lost their babies (six in all were killed), while parents whose kids suffered kidney stones would get just $290 (or 2,000 yuan). Parents whose children were sicker -but survived - would likely get $4,380 (30,000 yuan). The plan, outlined in the China Daily, said the total one-time cash payouts (for all parents affected) would be $131 million (900 million yuan). Another $29 million (200 million yuan) would be put into a fund to cover bills for lingering health problems.

The numbers, the parents say, are far too low (and I'd agree with them - $29,000 for a dead child?). Put into Chinese economic terms, one of the families' attorneys said it represents one half of the per capita annual income for rural Chinese residents.

The parents have been advised not to sign anything, and a set of ten parents had planned Friday's press conference to broach their next step. That's been called off, and with Lianhai in custody, nothing has been rescheduled.

Image: Toronto Star

How About Some Placenta in that IV Drip?

Kids Digital Cameras Come Loaded with Computer Virus

Who Buys The Baby Products In Your House?

AAP: Delayed Vaccines Too Risky for Kids

New Study To Test Formula and Allergies

Amy Kuras — Wed, 17 Dec 2008 21:01:00 GMT

Some research has shown that babies who are breastfed suffer fewer allergies than babies who aren’t.

So an international study is recruiting currently pregnant women who have a history of allergies to test out hypoallergenic formula on their children. The study, known as the PATCH study, is attempting to recruit 1200 mothers in total.

Like breastmilk, the trial formula contains prebiotics, compounds that encourage the development of health bacteria in the gut, as well as partially digested milk proteins, that are more likely to be easily tolerated by the babies.

A pediatrician involved with the British part of the study cautions that the idea is not to replace breastfeeding with formula. Ho notes that at least in Western countries it’s pretty common to at least supplement with formula after the first few months of life, so the goal is to find a formula that’s less likely to trigger allergies in children

“We know that a significant proportion of women do introduce formula within the first few months of life in this part of the world and we believe this increases the risk of allergic symptoms, compared to exclusive breastfeeding,” said Dr. Bob Boyle.

The study is looking at eczema especially, and will follow children through 18 months, by which time 70 percent of eczema cases are apparent.

Rite Aid Says They Will Stop Selling Expired Baby Products

Brett Singer — Fri, 05 Dec 2008 19:00:00 GMT

Drugstore chain Rite Aid is paying a million dollar fine in order to settle a lawsuit brought against them by New York State Attorney General Andrew Cuomo. This quote (from the New York Daily News) is priceless:

"Rite Aid agreed to pay a $1 million penalty, refrain from stocking outdated merchandise and conduct weekly inspections for the next three years. It could face another $300,000 in fines for noncompliance." (Emphasis added.)

The products that were found on their shelves include "expired over-the-counter drugs, baby formula, milk and eggs."

How nice of them. They agree to stop selling expired eggs! And to no longer stock their shelves with expired medicine and baby formula! And all they have to do is pay a million dollar fine, with the threat of $300,000 if they screw up again? Am I the crazy one here?

New York State AG Cuomo released this gem of a quote: "In today's difficult economic times, consumers should not be spending their hard-earned money on expired products that may be harmful to themselves or their children." So true. Because when the Dow was soaring, it was completely acceptable to feed your kid expired formula. I know that's not what he meant, but it just sounds silly.

This would be a candidate for Greatest News Headline Ever if it didn’t have something to do with expired baby food.

Now, as parents, we all have to pay attention to what we put in our kids' mouths (and our own, and what our kids put in their own mouths, as well as their noses, which is a whole other topic). But even if the expiration dates were clearly marked on these products (that is, not changed or hidden from consumers) knowingly selling expired products, especially baby formula, is completely reprehensible.

Oh, and another chain, CVS, is still under investigation. Fun. If you'll excuse me, I have to figure out how to start a garden in my living room so I can grow my own food.

Source: New York Daily News

Image: Listphile

Read more:

Why Do People Still Hand Out Unwrapped Halloween Treats?

Woman Swings Crowbar At Trick Or Treaters

They Say – Most Toys Are Toxic

Nebraska Butt Bandit Caught

Missing Girl Reunited With Father

They Say: "Microwave Safe" Ain't

Miriam Axel-Lute — Mon, 17 Nov 2008 17:00:00 GMT

If you're the type to be suspicious of chemicals and corporations, and especially their mixture, this will likely not surprise you:

A team of investigative journalists from the Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel did one of those surprisingly simple things that we love real, honest-to-god investigative journalists for: an experiment. Specifically, they took 10 items marked with the comforting phrase "microwave safe" that were likely to be ingested by children or used for children's food (several were actually baby food, one was formula), heated them (in both a microwave and an oven), and had the contents tested for bisphenol-A (BPA).

(If you've been under a rock, BPA is the hormone-like substance that everyone from the Canadian government to Wal-Mart have been all freaked out about getting out of baby bottles recently, on account of it's been shown to do nasty things to neurological development and also cause pre-cancerous changes to mammary glands and other fun stuff at super low levels.)

I think you can tell where this is headed: All of the food had levels of BPA that were shown in lab tests to be problematic. The food in the Rubbermaid all-purpose container and the infant formula had the highest levels. So much for worrying about the bottles themselves. The article estimates how much an average kid might be ingesting per day, and it ain't pretty.

The manufacturers' response, of course, is to say it's just a tiny amount and won't hurt you. The FDA says "What they said" and goes back to buffing up an 8-year-old resume. There are (prepare to be shocked now) apparently no standards whatsoever behind the designation "microwave safe." If the container doesn't blow up, which would presumably generate complaints if not any regulatory action, then it can be labeled zappable.

This was one of those stories I almost didn't read, because I am (1) predisposed by my environmental studies background to be veeeerrrry skeptical of claims that strange chemicals are harmless and (2) completely and utterly dependent on my microwave. I'm sure as hell not going to put a pan on the stove every time I need to heat up a quarter cup of frozen peas or leftover lentil soup for my daughter.

I had been comforting myself with the vapid mneumonic that Real Money readers came up with a while back about the better and worse plastics ("1, 2, 4, 5 will keep you alive; 3, 6, 7 will send you straight to heaven." Yes, I am embarrassed that I remember it), but the infuriatingly thorough MSJ notes that BSA was leaching from no.s 1, 2, and 5 as well. Great.

I guess this is where I consider dropping the plastic bowls when microwaving is needed and hoping my toddler doesn't shatter enough of our motley assortment of ceramic ones to constitute its own safety hazard. The plastic is still going in the dishwasher though. I know my limits.

More by this author:

Six Steps to a Parent-Friendly Wedding

Breaking News: Cadbury chocolate made in China recalled

Brett Singer — Tue, 30 Sep 2008 03:15:00 GMT

The AP is reporting that Cadbury is "recalling 11 types of Chinese-made chocolates after tests found they contained the industrial chemical melamine." This follows the recall of tainted milk powder in China.

AND, according to Newsinferno.com, a specific candy made by Cadbury called "White Rabbit" has been found to contain Melamine, the substance that cause more than 50,000 children to fall ill in China. The candy has been "distributed to California, Georgia, Hawaii, Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Oregon, Texas, and Washington state through wholesale distributors to retail stores."

Before you say what I said ("Newsinferno? What's that?"), here's a link to the FDA's press release about the recall.

Newsinferno also reports that, "Pizza Hut suspended supplying cheese powder found to be contaminated by melamine in Pizza Hut’s Taiwan branch." Unless you happen to be in Taiwan, this one is pretty easy to avoid, but the White Rabbit stuff sounds like it could be in your local candy shoppe. Plus there are 11 other varieties, such as Eclairs (sold in Australia). So be careful.

But wait! There's more! According to Wikipedia, this White Rabbit stuff was recalled last year in the Philippines because it contained formaldehyde. Yum!

Anyone else in the mood for some good news? Like, "Field of unicorns found frolicking in Central Park, film at 11"? Sorry, I made that one up. Sounds good though, right?

Sources: CBS News/AP, Newsinferno.com, Sydney Morning Herald, Wikipedia (also image)

Arkansas Evangelist's compound raided, six children removed

They say: Chinese baby formula is dangerous

Mom finds hairy Goldilocks in 2 year old's bed

Dad buys beer for his toddlers

Now Chinese Coffee May Also Be Contaminated

Chinese Milk Scandal Heads to Europe. Is the U.S. Next? Yes!

YOU say: I got fooled (update to "They USED to say: give babies cola")

UPDATE: Tainted Milk Tally tops 50,000

Brett Singer — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 16:00:00 GMT

An update to the tainted milk story from VOANews.com:

China is vowing to stop tainted milk from reaching export markets, amid a growing scandal...Four Chinese infants have already died from drinking toxic milk products and more than 53,000 others have been made sick...The widening scandal has already claimed resignations from several officials, including Li Changjiang, the head of China's top quality inspection agency.

Apparently this was a known problem for eight months before anyone did anything about it.

53,000 kids sick? Nasty.

Original post follows.

*-*-*-*-*

The number of children affected by a dangerous chemical in certain brands of Chinese-made baby formula is going up. CNN is reporting that more than 13,000 children in China have been, "sickened by tainted milk."

The details are even worse: four babies have died, and a 3-year-old girl in Hong Kong was hospitalized after drinking the tainted formula. The little girl was released, but this means that the illnesses are no longer isolated to Mainland China.

AND: "In addition, nearly 40,000 other infants and young children have received outpatient medical treatment and consultation as a result of the tainted milk," according to Xinhua, China's state-run news agency.

The issue, according to published reports, is that the formula contains a chemical called melamine, which is a "key ingredient in most fire retardant materials." In other words, not something anyone should be eating.

Full details are on CNN.com.

A reader emailed to ask if we knew whether or not any U.S. formula brands were affected. We do not. That's not to say that there is any reason to think that there IS a problem with any U.S. baby formulas; as far as I know (the key words there are "as far as I know") there have been no recalls or reports of infants becoming sick from baby formula in the United States. Still, I would be very careful with any formula that you buy, especially if you have any reason to believe it was manufactured in China. To clarify: we are NOT saying that you should avoid any brand of baby formula, we are only telling you what CNN has reported. There has been some concern that boxes of Sanlu-brand formula may be on store shelves in Chinese grocery stores in the United States; more details are here.

Source: CNN
Image: china.org.cn

Mom finds hairy Goldilocks in 2 year old's bed

YOU say: I got fooled (update to "They USED to say: give babies cola")

Babies R Us tells breastfeeding mother to get out

Mom leaves kids in a Jersey parking lot

Important news stories depicted by five year olds

Austrian incest mom speaks out

A Guy's Take on Why Breastfeeding Isn't That Great (and why it is great) -- Part II

Cole Gamble — Tue, 23 Sep 2008 13:00:00 GMT

We’ve covered some of the drawbacks and false benefits of breastfeeding, now here is the good stuff:

1) Breast Milk Has Antibodies. A breastfed baby is less susceptible to illnesses thanks to the good stuff found in breast milk.

2) You Save Money. No formula or bottles to buy.

3) Makes Mommy Feel Attached. Studies may have found that breast feeding has no particular psychological benefits for children, but it can’t hurt a mother’s bond with her child.

4) Breast Feeding Promotes Jaw Strength. And I don’t mean yours after gritting your teeth at 3 am because you’re up with the baby and your significant other is sleeping soundly. I mean the baby has to work his little jaw harder to get that precious milk, exercises it until he’s got a super jaw. And who doesn’t a toddler that looks like Jay Leno and can chew through steel?

5) Breast Milk Might Make Your Kid Smarter. The evidence on this one isn’t conclusive, but one study found a link between breast feed children and slight increases in I.Q. However, there is a fairly strong argument that the relationship between breast milk and I.Q. is correlation and not causation. The breast milk itself may have nothing to do with grey matter, but mothers (and couples even) who breast feed are more inclined to be attentive and nurturing toward their children generally. So the magic milk may not be the solution, but once again, it couldn’t hurt.

Back to Part I: Breastfeeding Negatives

More by this author:

7 Classic Kid's TV Shows Clearly Conceived on (Bad) Acid

12 Pregnancy Myths

My Daughter Wants A Penis

**The Sh*t List: 10 Bizarre (or Terrific?) Potty Gadgets**

The 26 Most Disturbing Kids Movies Ever

5 Reasons Breast Feeding Isn't That Great (and 5 Reasons Why It Is) Part 1

Cole Gamble — Tue, 16 Sep 2008 13:00:00 GMT

I know a guy commenting on breastfeeding is just asking for trouble. Raising ire be damned, I think it’s a personal choice for a woman to breast feed and no one should be bullied into it, especially if said woman may not have the choice. My wife was such a person, a woman ostracized for her inability to breastfeed. Even our government put out a commercial featuring a pregnant woman thrown from a mechanical bull, equating that action to not breastfeeding. There’s an unnecessary hysteria surrounding the practice. Does it have benefits? Yes, but if you believed what you read you’d have the impression the world is made up of two types of people: those vehemently against BF’n and those who think not breastfeeding is tantamount to child abuse. I’d like to think people are not so extreme (though I have met my share of boob Nazis). So in the spirit of unity, here are the top reasons not to breastfeed and the top 5 why you should.

The Cons:

1) Mastitis. An inflammation of the mammary gland occurring in lactating mothers. Nipple can get infected and turn into an abscess that must be surgically removed. Although this can occur in non-breastfeeding women, it’s more likely in breast feeders.

2) The Psychological Benefits are False. The conventional wisdom was breastfeeding led to a more focused, less hyperactive child adept at forming peer relations. However, an exhaustive study recently proved these assumptions wrong. Experts and laymen presumed that the constant physical closeness involved with breastfeeding would do all kinds of psychological wonders. Nope.

3) B-Milk in the Bottle is Just as Good. Some women can’t get their kids to latch. Some women simply don’t like the feeling of breast feeding. No problem, just pump a bit of that magic elixir and give it to junior via bottle. Not only is there no shame in it, but now that we know the physical act of breast feeding comes with no special benefits, the bottle is more acceptable than ever.

4) Where’s the D? This news is hot off the presses: there is insufficient vitamin D in breast milk. A lack of vitamin D can lead to rickets. So, if you breast feed, your kid will become a pirate.

5) You Should Never Do Anything Just Because of Peer Pressure. Like I said above, breast feeding is a choice. If you want to get a little breast milk to your kid but can’t or don’t want the suckling, that’s your business. And if you don’t want to do it at all, you are not abusing your child.

Continue for Part II: Breastfeeding Benefits

More by this Author:

7 Classic Kid's TV Shows Clearly Conceived on (Bad) Acid

12 Pregnancy Myths

**The Sh*t List: 10 Bizarre (or Terrific?) Potty Gadgets**

The 26 Most Disturbing Kids Movies Ever

They say: Chinese baby formula is dangerous

Brett Singer — Sat, 13 Sep 2008 16:30:00 GMT

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has issued a waning about baby formula made in China. These products are illegal in the U.S., but the FDA fears that some bottles may have found their way onto store shelves in Chinese neighborhoods.

Before I start a worldwide panic, let me point out that the FDA also said, "There is no threat of contamination in the domestic supply of infant formula." So you can give your little one good ol' U.S. baby formula (provided there are no La Leche people nearby – ba dum bum.)

According to Chinese officials, "contaminants were found in Sanlu-brand milk formula," which, "killed one baby and caused kidney stones in dozens of others who may have drunk the same product." A recall of the product was issued in China on August 6.

The FDA...said agency officials were concerned the Chinese formula may be tainted with melamine, the contaminant found in pet food ingredients from China and linked to the deaths and illnesses of hundreds of cats and dogs in 2007.

Bad stuff. If this formula is on sale in the U.S., or anyplace else, I hope it gets pulled from the shelves.

Source: Reuters
Image: china.org.cn

Morning News: Sarah P. Soothes Some, Induces Spit-Takes in Others

Des Moines sex club shut down

Protesters and journalists arrested in China (video)

33 year old mom wins silver medal, saves son from leukemia

Whole lotta fakin' goin' on at the opening ceremony

Green products that don't work

Egyptian woman gives birth to septuplets because she wanted a boy

Girl Talk May Fuel Anxiety

Naked Harry Potter pics hit the web

How They Live: The Japanese Daycare Experience

Disturbing Origins of 5 Nursery Rhymes

Austrian incest mom speaks out

5 Reasons Breast Feeding Isn’t That Great (and 5 Reasons Why It Is) Part 1

Grand Theft Auto player saves family

I can tell how much you orgasm because of how you walk

Queens woman pregnant with sextuplets

Mr. Rogers Talking Keychain

5 Ways to Not Go Broke (with Kids)

Cole Gamble — Mon, 18 Aug 2008 17:00:00 GMT

Having a family is a pricy pastime, like eating Faberge eggs or using antique bone china for skeet shooting. Instead of fantasizing about the kind of European sport car you could buy for the amount of money you spend on your kids, consider ways to cut those costs. Here are some budget trimmers:

1 Christmas in January

When is the best time to buy Christmas presents? Why after Christmas, of course. Stock up for next year. Just make sure you don’t buy this year’s fad. By next year that toy will be as cool as a Beanie Baby.

2 Pack up to Travel

Whether on a plane or in the car, buying food while on route to your destination is going to be expensive. Pack up snacks and lunches for the kids. Yes, airlines do allow you to bring food aboard.

3 Know When to Clothe ‘Em

The best time to buy kid clothes are February and August. That’s when most stores put their stuff on sale. The key here is to think ahead to the season you are buying for. Buying a coat will be cheap in the summer, but you’re kid will be bigger by the time they need it. Think about buying a size larger.

4 Don’t Wait in Line, Buy Diapers and Formula Online

Skip the store for baby needs and buy online. If you hunt around you’re guaranteed to get a better price.

5 A Home Cooked Meal

Dining out costs 6 to 10 times more than eating at home. Start treating a dinner out as a treat. Also try more ethnic food. It’s generally cheaper than, say, steakhouses, and it will teach your kids an appreciation for a broad range of foods.

More by this author:

My Daughter Wants A Penis

They Like Big Butts, and They Can Not Lie: Survey Finds Men Prefer Bigger Body Sizes

The 9 Most Racist Disney Characters

The 6 Creepiest Marketing Campaigns Aimed at Children

**The Sh*t List: 10 Bizarre (or Terrific?) Potty Gadgets**

Satan and 9 other bad (but real) baby names

Nipple Jewelry: 5 Products Moms DON’T Need

10 Naughty Things We Do to Our Kids (but keep doing anyway)

18 Kids From One Vagina: Woman Births 18th Child

The 26 Most Disturbing Kids Movies Ever

What's Next, Shock Collars For Your Kids?!

They Say: BPA-Larded Plastic Bottles Safe and Delicious

Madeline Holler — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 13:03:00 GMT

The European Union's top safety officials say that the tiny amount of BPA found in plastic baby bottles -- you know, the ones you threw out a few months ago and replaced with heavy glass -- isn't enough to harm humans. Or baby humans. Only rats. And baby rats.

From MSNBC:

A scientific panel of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) has looked into how people metabolize BPA and concluded that tiny amounts of the chemical to which humans are exposed leave body quick enough to cause no harm, EFSA said Wednesday.

The tests that got everyone in an uproar were done on rats and humans, turns out, are different from rats.

I don't know, though. The cats out of the bag on this one for me. I'm one of those that went through the cabinets and tossed most of our sippies and kiddie cups (not much of a sacrifice since my youngest is old enough to drink from unlidded glass cups). We also cut down on our bottled water consumption, which can only be a good thing in the broader picture. So I don't think this study will get me to go back to plastic just yet.

What about you? Did you throw out the babies bottles with the earlier BPA study? Think you'll go back? Or are you going to sit tight like me and see what else comes out about this?

Photo:

10 Mysteries of Modern Parenthood (and some possible solutions)

Rachael Brownell (Redsy) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 12:01:00 GMT

Facing the awesome responsibility of parenthood is easier if leavened with humor, enlightenment, and many vacations.

Here are 10 mysteries of modern parenthood and some possible solutions:

1. Paying for childbirth - Assuming you have insurance, when the bills start pouring once you have the baby, unraveling the payment puzzle requires patience and persistence and possibly an economics degree.

Possible Solution: Don't be shy about availing yourself of the insurance company's appeal process and making many calls to resolve outstanding bills. Each state has some version of a health insurance commissioner, who can be a very helpful advocate. Many children are also eligible for free or low-cost insurance.

2. Baby sign language - Is this is the biggest con sold to modern parents of all time or does it really help parents communicate with their kids?

Possible Solution: Babble polled several experts on this topic and did your research for you. Or just submit to your cynicism and read this.

3. FMLA - Family Medical Leave Act. Mystery: Are we eligible? Are we not? Should I be grateful for 12 weeks of unpaid leave?

Possible Solution: Save up your sick and vacation time, ask your company to consider offering paid maternity leave, move to Canada, Support Momsrising.org.

4. Toy/Carseat/Baby Product Safety - Are we poisoning our children if we buy Dora or Diego toys, feed them formula in BPA laced bottles, or cover them in sunscreen?

Possible Solution: Z Recommends blog offers many extremely informative product safety guides addressing everything from sunscreens to bathtoys.

5. Breast vs. Formula - Most of us agree that breast is best, but how much better than formula is it really? And what if you are unable to breastfeed or choose not to?

Possible Solution: Do the best you can and stand behind it. Stay away from La Leche League if you choose to formula feed. Read: Formula Fed and Flexible Parenting and Madeline Holler's Babble feature about extended breastfeeding to appreciate different approaches.

6. Childcare - How to afford it. How to find high quality options. Nanny or center? Work or stay home?

Possible Solution: Most studies are concluding that some combination of work and family time makes most parents feel happiest. If your work lets you cut back your hours and you can afford it (without being Mommy or Daddy Tracked) this has been the best solution for my family.

7. Education - Single sex education? Homeschool? Public or private? Waldorf? Montessori?

Possible Solution: Doing what works is obviously best. There is no question that public school is cheapest, but has No child Left Behind Ruined it?

8. Coparenting - Myth or reality?

Possible Solution: This assumes there are (at least) two parents available and willing to raise the kids. While there are plenty of signs that parenting is more equal than it used to be, many still think there is much room for improvement.

9. Potty training - Is it necessary?

Possible Solution: Parents these days are much less stressed about getting their kids potty-trained by 6 months of age. For a great round-up of blogs discussing potty-training, go here.

10. When is it the right time to have a child? - Even though we're cynical narcissists who complain a lot, most of us would agree that "yes" nearly anytime is a great time to have a child.

Vegan Parents Malnourish Baby

Amy Kuras — Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:02:00 GMT

It's my week to be on the bummer beat. To wit: A couple in Atlanta was sentenced to life in prison in the death of their 6-week old son. They were convicted last year of malice murder, felony murder, involuntary manslaughter and cruelty to children for feeding the baby only soy milk and apple juice.

Crown Shakur, the son of Jade Sanders and Lamont Thomas, was only three and a half pounds when he died. The baby was born at home, so no records existed of his birth weight, but he was a full term baby and 3.5 pounds is less than half normal size. Also, there was only one bottle anywhere in the house.

He was never seen by a doctor in his entire six weeks of life, and the parents claimed they didn’t realize he was in real trouble until minutes before he died.

They couple claim they were vegans and thought the soy milk and apple juice diet was reasonable. A similar case in New York a few years ago led to a lighter sentence. Prosecutors, however, charged the couple deliberately starved their son.

Now I am not a vegan, but a very quick Google search turned up no evidence whatsoever that vegans would recommend such a whackjob way of feeding a baby – in fact, two different nutritionists were very clear that there is no acceptable homemade alternative to baby formula.

And it seems like vegans would be natural breastfeeders. I mean I know they are against animal products, but people products? Which the person can give willingly? Why not breastfeed if at all possible?

What do you think? Malicious? Or just plain dumb?

Budget Baby: Cutting Corners on Baby Stuff

Amy Kuras — Wed, 18 Jun 2008 01:52:00 GMT

There's some ridiculous figure out there about how much it costs to raise a baby to adulthood. Of course, that seems to assume that you buy everything new, for yourself (no showers or hand me downs or whatever), disposable diaper and bottle feed, have your little darlings in every activity known to humanity and so forth.

Still, even with generous friends and families and an eye for resale, it can be breathtaking how much it actually costs to have a little baby around. We've been out of babyland for a couple years and now are horrified at how much money goes out of this house on a weekly basis, and we mostly cloth diaper and only supplement with formula here and there (he's four months old and we're still on the free cans from the hospital). And he's not even eating solids yet.

Consumer Reports, a.k.a bible of the thrifty dork, is on the case.There's some ridiculous figure out there about how much it costs to raise a baby to adulthood. Of course, that seems to assume that you buy everything new, for yourself (no showers or hand me downs or whatever), disposable diaper and bottle feed, have your little darlings in every activity known to humanity and so forth.

Still, even with generous friends and families and an eye for resale, it can be breathtaking how much it actually costs to have a little baby around. We've been out of babyland for a couple years and now are horrified at how much money goes out of this house on a weekly basis, and we mostly cloth diaper and only supplement with formula here and there (he's four months old and we're still on the free cans from the hospital). And he's not even eating solids yet.

Consumer Reports, a.k.a bible of the thrifty dork, is on the case. They actually have a baby and kids blog, and this post talks about tips on saving on baby stuff. For example, sign up for every "new parent club" out there. They'll send you good coupons ($2 off diapers is par for the course) and formula "checks" (which has baffled every cashier at every store I ever used them at, but whatever).

They also suggest buying a warehouse club membership, which I can also vouch for – I've even given Costco memberships as baby gifts. They not only have good prices on whopping packs of diapers and wipes, but I've even seen fancy jogging strollers and bike trailers there, and really good deals on Carter's pajamas and cute dresses.

What are your tips to save on baby shopping? Any hidden coupon deals out there or good places to pick up bargains?

Fear of plastic + timing = big bucks

Brett Singer — Sun, 08 Jun 2008 14:30:00 GMT

Interesting article over on Forbes.com about the BornFree people. Turns out they not only make the bottles, they help make sure that people know how dangerous the BPA-filled versions are.

Apparently, when BornFree began back in 2006, very few people cared about BPA. So what does a dadpreneur (that's a dad entepreneur – see how dumb it sounds?) do? Make sure that everyone knows how bad plastic is. According to Forbes, BornFree's President Ron Vigdor "sometimes exaggerates when comparing bisphenol A-free bottles to polycarbonate versions. 'One is with arsenic, one without. Which one would you like to buy?'"

So what's wrong with that?

It makes me wonder how many supposedly dangerous things are the result of hype rather than fact. I'm not saying BPA-free bottles are a bad thing, or that Bisphenol-A isn't harmful. I have no idea. I'm not taking a side, and if people would rather use BPA-free bottles, I think it's great that they have the opportunity to do so. But think about it this way: if you have a product that you think meets a need, and nobody seems to care, how far do you go to create that need? Are you doing the world a favor or just making a quick buck? Or both? Does anyone have a problem with that? How many question marks can I use in a single post?

image: Amazon.com

Strollerderby : formula

They Say: Formula Not Necessarily Fattening. But!

Babies Switched In NYC Hospital

They Say: Blame Hospitals for Breastfeeding Failures

Ban BPA? Manufacturers Cry Poverty

They Say: Breastmilk Fights Respiratory Viruses Better in Girls

Formula Makers Get a Spanking for False Claims

Don't Blame Formula Companies for Breastfeeding Problems

5 Things That Make You a Breastfeeding Nazi . . . And 5 Things That Don’t

Survey Time: Infant Feeding Choices

Smackdown: Breastfeeding -- Why Not?

Woman Arrested For Breast Feeding At A Bar

China Detains Dad of Baby Sickened by Tainted Milk

New Study To Test Formula and Allergies

Rite Aid Says They Will Stop Selling Expired Baby Products

They Say: "Microwave Safe" Ain't

Breaking News: Cadbury chocolate made in China recalled

UPDATE: Tainted Milk Tally tops 50,000

A Guy's Take on Why Breastfeeding Isn't That Great (and why it is great) -- Part II

5 Reasons Breast Feeding Isn't That Great (and 5 Reasons Why It Is) Part 1

They say: Chinese baby formula is dangerous

5 Ways to Not Go Broke (with Kids)

They Say: BPA-Larded Plastic Bottles Safe and Delicious

10 Mysteries of Modern Parenthood (and some possible solutions)

Vegan Parents Malnourish Baby

Budget Baby: Cutting Corners on Baby Stuff

Fear of plastic + timing = big bucks