Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Misleading articles about breastfeeding in today's Indo/on RTE/other media

  • 14-01-2011 10:38pm
    #1
    Cat Melodeon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,617 ✭✭✭


    There were a number of articles carried by various media today with headlines along the lines of 'Breastfeeding not always best' or 'Breast milk alone lacks sufficient nutrients for babies' or 'Is breast really best?'. If you happened to have read any of these headlines, please delete them from your memory. Anyone who reads the actual article published by University College London will soon discover that the authors are saying no such thing. The research paper is actually titled "Six months of exclusive breastfeeding: how good is the evidence?" and the point of the article is about when solids should be introduced, at 4 or 6 months. The authors state that they are not in any way challenging the idea that breast milk should be the norm and reiterate WHO guidelines that breastfeeding should continue up to 2 years and beyond.

    Yet the media (and Irish media in particular) have leaped on this with glee, stating that 'breastmilk isn't enough for babies' (ahm, it is completely enough for babies until at least 4 months and probably 6 months) with the Indo screaming that recommendations MUST now be changed (based on one research paper? It might be worth noting that 3 of the 4 authors of the paper have received payments or research funding from infant food companies in the past 3 years. I think I'll trust the WHO research, thank you very much).

    It really bugs me when the media willfully misrepresents research, but there seems to be a special joy surrounding anything that they can use to denigrate breastfeeding. I'm not linking to the articles because they are so misleading, d the research paper is in the BMJ (here, if you're a member: http://www.bmj.com/content/342/bmj.c5955).


Comments

  • #2
    lynski
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,585 ✭✭✭lynski


    Here is a link to an article with info on why the other articles are misleading. http://info.babymilkaction.org/node/321
    WHO breastfeeding recommendations under attack from industry-funded scientists.

    Press release 14 January 2011

    The BBC, the Guardian and other media are carrying stories about a comment piece from four authors published in the British Medical Journal today. This is not a new scientific study - it is a review of existing research selected by the authors and has been published in the 'Comment' section of the BMJ. Three of the four authors of the piece, Mary Fewtrell, Alan Lucas and David Wilson, receive funding from the baby food industry. Prof Lucas in particular plays a key role in advising the UK baby food industry, and has opposed the WHO recommendation for many years. In 2003 he went so far as to appear for the defence when one of the largest baby food companies, SMA Wyeth was successfully prosecuted for illegal advertising by Trading Standards.

    www.babymilkaction.org/press/press31july03.html

    http://www.babymilkaction.org/update/update33.html#2

    http://www.babymilkaction.org/www.babymilkaction.org/update/update29.html#2

    http://www.babymilkaction.org/www.babymilkaction.org/update/update23.html#11

    Baby Milk Action expects this comment piece and the media coverage it is generating to be used by companies in their attempt to weaken national policies and legislation requiring complementary foods to be labelled for use from 6 months. In the UK, baby food companies are already labelling complementary foods for use from 4 months of age despite Government policy recommending 6 months exclusive breastfeeding or formula feeding.

    When looking at the authors' comment piece, the following points should be borne in mind:

    The four authors are not attacking the recommendation that breastfeeding continue alongside complementary foods or the WHO recommendation of breastfeeding into the second year of life and beyond. Baby Milk Action is concerned about misreporting of the paper, with headlines such as, "Breastfeeding 'not always best'" or "Recommendation to breastfeed for 6 months challenged". Please post examples as comments to this articles, with links if possible.
    This is not a new scientific study - it is a review of existing research selected by the authors and has been published in the 'Comment' section of the BMJ.
    WHO’s policy arose from a systematic review of 3,000 studies on infant feeding. See The optimal duration of exclusive breastfeeding and Guiding principles for complementary feeding of the breastfed child. WHO has issued a statement today (14 January 2011):


Advertisement