Hey, did you hear formula is POISON?
With the exception of a few weeks worth of Similac Advance at the beginning of her life, and of course four months of half breastmilk, half formula, Similac Organic was the only thing Bat Girl drank for the first year of her life. And seriously? This article alarms me not one little bit. Really, I fail to see the problem here.
I may not be a "professional taster," but in my experience breastmilk is far sweeter than ANY formula, SO included. So the idea that adding sugar to formula instead of lactose or corn syrup is going to make your kid overeat or give them an insatiable taste for sweet things seems bogus to me. One mother is quoted as saying, "[S]ugar is a concern for us--that’s why we started her on vegetables rather than fruits, so she wouldn’t get used to the sweet taste first." Too late--your baby was BORN with a taste for sweet, and the commandment to start on veggies instead of fruits is outdated and not based on real science.
And what about the argument that sucrose causes tooth decay? Well, first of all, a kid needs to have TEETH to have tooth decay. Second, so does lactose or corn syrup or ANY kind of sugar--it's why you're supposed to brush your kid's teeth after they have a cup of milk at bedtime. Is it possible that sucrose is not the healthiest form of sugar available? Sure. I'll even concede that there may be unknown differences in the way sucrose is metabolized versus other sugars that could be deleterious to health. But, you know, once you make the decision to poison your baby with formula, does it really matter? (HA!)
No, seriously though, for me, if this article had come out when Bat Girl was still drinking formula, I would not have switched. Organic is more important to me than what kind of sugar is in the stuff. And SO comes in ready-to-feed form, which other organic formulas do not, and I am really, really lazy. And based on my highly scientific sampling of babies (n=1), SO has not caused any problems. Bat Girl generally had no more than 24 ounces of formula a day when it was her sole source of nutrition. She drank a little more (around 30 ounces/day) when she was nearing 10-11 months, but that was a signal to us that we needed to step up her solids consumption. She has consistently fallen around the 50th percentile for height and around the 25th percentile for weight. She eats all kinds of vegetables, including broccoli, spinach, and peas. She had no problem switching from formula to cow's milk, and when I gave her (sweet!) apple juice for the first time this weekend she spat it out. She is super healthy and active and suffers no apparent ill effects from her year drinking pure evil.
But if you need a good Monday morning dose of rage, check out the comments on the article. There's the usual "breast is best," "down with the evil formula conglomerates," followed by the backlash by women who couldn't breastfeed, followed by the backlash-backlash from people claiming that women who can't breastfeed are RILLY RILLY RARE and everyone else is just a lazy selfish bitch, etc. Awesome! My favorite comment is #56, which I quote in part especially for you, my IF homies: "One thing we forget is that there is much more to breastfeeding than the milk itself. Breastfeeding is to breastmilk as making a baby the usual way is to in vitro fertilization. Feeding a baby breastmilk in a bottle is just not the same thing as breastfeeding." The best/worst part is that that commenter? Jack Newman, whose handouts I used extensively during my own breastfeeding battles. Ain't that just a kick in the pants?