What SHOULD go into the decision (m)
Find a Conversation
What SHOULD go into the decision (m)
| Tue, 01-01-2008 - 6:33pm |
OK, I don't think anyone really denies that it is ultimately every mom's decision.
| Tue, 01-01-2008 - 6:33pm |
OK, I don't think anyone really denies that it is ultimately every mom's decision.
Pages
I disagree on comparing BM to the organic meal. Organic, to many, is unattainable. Either financially, or b/c it isn't easy to get in a remote region or something. BM is, for the majority, attainable and normal. *reminder...I said for the majority*. ;-)
Powered by CGISpy.com
<
<
There is an easy way to make all FFed babies "on the same level" WRT the water that is added: assign babies RTF formula. That way no water should be added. That way you are not adding any extra variables WRT the added water, if there is none.
Not having read all the studies in depth I can't account for what they *did* do, however.
Powered by CGISpy.com
<>
Enough to skew the results of thousands of studies? Sorry, not buying it. I've been drinking water for 31 years and I've never got sick from it. Bad things "can" be in water, but most likely the water being used to prepare formula is perfectly safe to ingest. If a formula fed baby were to get sick from drinking water, it would be an isolated incident...certainly not enough to skew the results of a study, let alone thousands of studies.
Besides, how would drinking "bad" water account for the higher incidences of ear infections? Is that really the most logical explanation?
Sorry, but the fact still remains that there is ONE commonality in these studies: the babies who are worse off were formula fed.
<>
Playing devil's advocate implies that you see both sides. You don't. You continually dismiss the results of thousands of studies demonstrating formula's inferiority.
<>
That is certainly true. But is it just coincidence that many, many studies produce duplicate results?
<>
So we agree that all the FF babies were drinking water.
You could adjust for factors like water very simply for example by testing the water in the homes of the FF babies a few times throughout the study period or simply by knowing the water quality of wherever the babies were or only including babies using RTF formula, or using samples of babies that are widely dispersed geographically so they aren't getting water all from the same source...
Also the fact that formula usually has to be made with water and water is not always guaranteed pure is, in itself, a known risk of FF.
Powered by CGISpy.com
<>
Sure, you "could", but they didn't do any of this to our knowledge.
Just repeating this, b/c you seemed to have missed it.
Powered by
Pages