Questions that promoters of breastfeeding wonít or canít answer:*

 

1)  Can you give any reason to disagree with the following statement?

 

Breastfeeding has been found to be associated with adverse health outcomes in 51 scientific studies, including the largest study ever conducted on the health effects of breastfeeding.1

 

2) Consider the following:

    a) Typical U.S. breast milk of recent decades has been found to contain developmentally-toxic dioxins in doses over 100 times the EPA-estimated safe dose2 and also scores to hundreds of times higher than levels in infant formula;3  it is similar with regard to mercury;3a

 

    b) following the major increase in breastfeeding in the U.S. after 1971, four epidemics of childhood disorders came into being (diabetes, asthma, allergies and obesity); highs, lows and mid-levels of these epidemics have correlated closely with highs, lows and mid-levels of breastfeeding;

 

    c) a highly-published scientist, studying data from all 50 U.S. states and 51 U.S. counties, found that "exclusive breast-feeding shows a direct epidemiological relationship to autism," and also, "the longer the duration of exclusive breast-feeding, the greater the correlation with autism;"5   

 

    d) the four above-mentioned epidemics and the increases in ADHD and autism did not exist for the generation born in the 1950ís and 1960ís, for whom breastfeeding was unusual;4

 

          e) all but one of the diseases said by the Surgeon General to be reduced by breastfeeding actually increased since breastfeeding increased in the 1970ís, according to CDC and other authoritative data.4

 

 

 Q:  Considering the above, how do you know that the undisputed high levels of developmental toxins in contemporary human milk are not having seriously harmful effects on children?

 

 (continue on reverse side if more space is needeed)

 

If advocates of breastfeeding canít answer these questions, while they are advising mothers to feed their infants a food that contains undisputed high levels of toxins, should you respect their advice -- or them?

_______________________

 

*The American Academy of Pediatrics, American Academy of Family Physicians, American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists, and the World Health Organization have all failed to respond to any of two or more letters to each of them from the director of Pollution Action, challenging the evidence supporting their positions on breastfeeding.

 

If somebody says the questions above aren't valid, ask them to explain how the references in the footnotes below fail to show the questions to be accurately based on authoritative sources.  If they are unreceptive or irritated when asked, those are indications that they arenít considering the matter rationally.

________________

 

- (1) Three studies on the subject of breastfeeding and attention deficits and hyperactivity, 3 on the subject of breastfeeding and autism, 6 related to breastfeeding and obesity, 6 on breastfeeding and diabetes, 22 on  breastfeeding and asthma or allergies, one relating breastfeeding to ear infections, and 11 studies that relate breastfeeding to developmental problems; not counted in the 52 total are 6 studies (which include a clear majority of the high-quality studies related to SIDS) that found no beneficial effect of breastfeeding on SIDS incidence; see www.breastfeeding-studies.info

 

- (2) Infant Exposure to Dioxin-like Compounds in Breast Milk, Lorber (EPA senior scientist) et al., Vol.110, No. 6, 6/02, Environmental Health Perspectives, at  http://cfpub.epa.gov/ncea/cfm/recordisplay.cfm?deid=54708 #Download, and EPA document at www.epa.gov/iris/supdocs/dioxinv1sup.pdf in section 4.3.5, at end of that section, regarding safe dose. 

 

- (3) U.K. Food Standards Agency Food Survey Information Sheet 49/04 March 2004, Dioxins and Dioxin-Like PCBs in Infant Formulae, found at www.food.gov.uk/multimedia/pdfs/fsis4904dioxinsinfantformula.pdf 

- (3a) see Section 1.c of www.breastfeeding-toxins.info

 

- (4) To read about major increases of diseases when breastfeeding was rapidly increasing, and about disease lows & mid-levels that correlated with lows and mid-levels of breastfeeding rates, see www.breastfeedingprosandcons.info.

 

- (5) Autism rates associated with nutrition and the WIC program. Shamberger R.J., Phd, FACN, King James Medical Laboratory, Cleveland, OH  J Am Coll Nutr. 2011 Oct;30(5):348-53. Abstract at www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22081621

 

Any reader is invited to see if you can get a response to these questions from any organization or from any person who promotes breastfeeding.  If anybody responds in writing, please send a copy of it to dm@pollutionaction.org or Pollution Action, 27 McWhirt Loop, Ste. 111, Fredericksburg, VA  22406 USA, since the organizations don't respond to us.

 

For more information on this matter, please visit www.breastfeeding-effects.info.

 

The web address of this page is www.breastfeeding-questions.info.  It is available in one-page printable form in PDF format at www.breastfeeding-effects.info/Q.

≠≠≠≠≠≠≠