Hacker News Reader

Comment by dpierce9 | Hacker News Reader

If you need baby formula you can’t avoid baby formula. Not all mothers can or want to breast feed. Mothers are not always available when babies need to be fed. Any supply chain for secondary breast milk is going to have similar contamination and cold chain management issues.

View on HN

I'm no expert on infant nutrition but why wouldn't cow milk and/or goat milk be an acceptable substitute? They're both safe for humans to consume, they're widely available at fairly low cost. They provide enough nutrition to get large animals growing.

It may not be scientifically 100% "perfect" but why wouldn't it be "close enough"?

Look up history of alternatives to breastfeeding. Cow/goat milk has been used as portion of various recipes, and I think cow milk is one of usual inputs in formula making, but it's not enough on its own and could get contaminated etc.

Not to mention other mammals have different micro and macro element needs than humans.

But formula is effectively a safer and more filling endpoint of improvements that started with animal milk and some other foods.

I get that formula is better, and should be the #1 choice but in a formula shortage/emergency situation would most babies be seriously harmed by using goat milk instead?

I suspect the end result would be similar to why me and my two siblings had to be put on formula - malnutrition. Goat milk simply is not going to have all the elements that a human baby needs, so I'd consider it somewhere closer to "last resort" rather than "oh well, not enough formula, let's grab goat milk". Doable, but only because it's emergency.

Goat's milk was the historical alternative, since it's a close match. We don't have a lot of goats, nor a lot milking of them. But my wife's grandfather was in fact fed on goat's milk when he was young.

Cow's milk is absolutely inappropriate [1]: it has way too much protein for babies and the wrong nutritional profile - even when they start being able to drink it you have to be careful about how much since they're not great at digesting it yet. It's missing all sorts of things - i.e. not enough iron.

[1] https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4882692/

> Not all mothers can or want to breast feed.

Those that don't want to should probably reconsider having kids.

> Mothers are not always available when babies need to be fed.

This is why pumps exist. No problem.

> Any supply chain for secondary breast milk is going to have similar contamination and cold chain management issues.

It's often frozen.

Agree,

And I wonder, how does it matter if the milk is frozen? (Can't they put it in the micro? I guess I'm misunderstanding something)

"> Not all mothers can or want to breast feed.

Those that don't want to should probably reconsider having kids."

How well does that work for their first baby if it's some unanticipated problem the mother has??

Modern civilization starting with agriculture is also a repudiation of the "survival of the fittest" philosophy you're pushing.

Problems are not a lack of desire. I didn't address "can't" for exactly that reason: if you tried and it didn't work out, then of course it's a valid reason to feed formula.

Those are pretty naive and shortsighted views. Some women simply can’t breastfeed, and don’t discover that until the baby is born. Milk doesn’t always come in, feeding can be painful, etc.

Some babies are orphans. You gonna pump a corpse? Or force the child on some other new mother?

You apparently didn't notice that I didn't address "can't", and the reason I didn't is because it's absolutely a valid reason to feed formula.

Not wanting to breastfeed is also a good reason. First, breastfeeding and/or pumping is a lot of work. Second, it can be painful for a number of reasons (latching, chafing, engorgement). Third, women have jobs and the US has horrendous parental leave policies. It can be nearly impossible to breastfeed/pump AND do your job. Fourth, it isn’t your kid so it isn’t your choice how to feed them. If you want to breastfeed your kids that is fine. Many women do hybrid. Some don’t do any breast milk.

You have provided no good reasons to think your position on this is correct and you have said a number of other things which are just reprehensible. I am only responding because I hope you will see this.

The WHO has weighed in on this topic, and their recommendations are well known. "Breast is best" is not just a trite cliché, but supported by science and worldwide medical authorities. I'll leave the research to you.

“Breast is best” does not mean or suggest “you shouldn’t have kids if you don’t want to breastfeed” for the simple reason that the second best option can also be a good one. Put differently, breast is best doesn’t imply that formula is bad. Your reasoning is atrocious and simply isn’t justified by anything the WHO could cite in support of “breast is best”.

When my children were born the nipple nazis were in full control where if you asked about formula, you half-expected a visit from DCFS

> Those that don't want to should probably reconsider having kids.

Buddy I got some news for you r.e. the availability of that option

You realize not all women *can* breastfeed? And they don't always know it when they decide to have a kid.

And some babies need the special formulas. And some non-babies need the special formulas.

I didn't say anything against "can't" for precisely that reason; it's absolutely a valid reason to feed formula.

When I say mothers are not always available that was a polite way of saying mothers sometimes die during childbirth. A gross number in America but childbirth is dangerous even in the best circumstances. It is a leading cause of death among young women in the US.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com