staybeautiful
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2012
- Messages
- 493
- Reaction score
- 0
You aren't the only person here ticking.clock, there are a lot of girls here "on the fence" who still believe that formula is equal in terms of ingredients or who believe Aptamil is the "closest to break milk" because of advertising.
Surely aptamil or any other formula is 'closet to breast milk' because its either BF or FF therefore FF is the only other thing to breast milk. Therefore I do agree with that statement. It wouldn't be allowed otherwise. Weather you agree or not it's the only alternative to breast milk therefore it's got to the closet available. It never mentions being the same.
I think the point there was referencing claims that formula manufacturers used to put on packaging - Aptamil specifically put that they were 'closest to breast milk' on their packaging. Other companies put different things. The article below (Daily Mail, 2007, when companies were banned from putting nutritional claims on formula packaging) gives some examples of the things companies used to say to make consumers favour their product more than their competitors.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-441566/Baby-milk-firms-told-drop-nutrition-claims.html
In response to your second postpersonally, I'd say that formula is 'the best alternative' to breast milk rather than 'the closest thing to'.
I have to disagree, there are better alternatives than mass produced formula. Wet nursing or donor milk being the next best thing. In fact there is a list (I have a vague feeling it is WHO or UNICEF related) which shows formula is around the 4th alernative after donor milk and even homemade formula
Yeah, I've seen the WHO list, and it goes: Breast milk straight from the breast, breast milk from a cup or bottle, Donated breast milk and THEN formula - but for the sake of simplifying things, I class the first three as the baby still getting breast milk so all as good as each other but with varying levels of convenience.
