Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Health & Wellness

Dangerous Hype: Infant Formula Companies Claim They Can Make Babies 'Smarter'

By Ari LeVaux, AlterNet. Posted October 20, 2009.


Companies have fortified their products with synthetic versions of certain fatty acids associated with brain development. But evidence shows it may be making children sick.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

If you believed a certain baby formula would make your child smarter, would you buy it?

Infant formula manufacturers are banking that you would. That's why, since 2002, several companies have fortified their products with synthetic versions of DHA and ARA, long-chain fatty acids that occur naturally in breast milk and have been associated with brain development.

The oils are produced by Martek Biosciences Corp. from lab-grown algae and fungus and extracted with hexane, according to the company's patent application. Hexane is a neurotoxin.

A growing number of parents and medical professional believe these additives are causing severe reactions in some babies, and it has been repeatedly shown that taking affected babies off DHA/ARA formula makes the problems go away almost immediately. The FDA has received hundreds of letters to this effect by upset parents, even as products containing the additives are being marketed as better than breast milk.
 
Karen Jensen says that due to health complications she was unable to breastfeed her daughter, and so fed her daughter Neocate, a formula with DHA/ARA.

"At two weeks, my daughter would often stop breathing in her sleep and was having various other serious health conditions. She cried constantly and couldn't sleep due to gastrointestinal upset."

After many trips to the hospital, a CT scan, an EEG, time on an apnea monitor and thousands of dollars in bills, "we tried the Neocate without the DHA/ARA in it. Within 24 hours, we had a brand-new, entirely different baby. She had no abdominal distress, no gas, she smiled and played, and for the first time ever we heard her laugh."

Jensen's story is echoed many times over in similar letters urging the FDA to ban DHA and ARA from baby foods, or at the very least to put warning labels on the product advising that some babies may experience adverse reactions like bloating, gastrointestinal distress, vomiting, and diarrhea.

While only a fraction of babies seem to react in this way, it's a common enough occurrence to have earned DHA/ARA baby formula the nickname "the diarrhea formula" in the neonatal unit of an Ohio hospital.

In 2001, the FDA expressed concerns about the safety of adding DHA and ARA to infant-formula additives and notified Martek of the agency's plans to convene a group of scientists to study these concerns.

Martek wrote back: "... convening a group of scientific experts to answer such hypothetical concerns would not be productive." Within months, the FDA wrote to Martek that it would allow DHA and ARA in infant formula, without any scientific review of its own.

While quick to protest hypothetical safety concerns about DHA/ARA, Martek was ready to pounce on the hypothetical benefits of its oils.

In a 1996 investment brief, Martek explained, "Even if [the DHA/ARA blend] has no benefit, we think it would be widely incorporated into formulas as a marketing tool and to allow companies to promote their formula as 'closest to human milk.' "

Mead Johnson Nutritionals took this opportunity to heart, drawing the ire of breastfeeding advocates when it began promoting its DHA/ARA Enfamil Lipil as "The Breast Milk Formula."

Mead Johnson was also involved with a report in current issue of the journal Child Development, in which a Dallas team of scientists provided evidence that DHA and ARA in baby food improves brain development. Several members of the team have received Mead Johnson money in the form of research funding, as well as the coveted currency known as "consulting fees."


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: breastmilk, infants, formula

Ari LeVaux writes a syndicated weekly food column, Flash in the Pan.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Health and Wellness! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
They dont change.. Remember the Nestles boycott?
Posted by: brianct on Oct 20, 2009 1:49 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
So yet againm the baby milk manufactuers are making the rounds with new and more insidious lies...how many more babies will they harm? how many more parents will they gull?
nestlesbloycott

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Yes, the corporate class is so ethical
Posted by: cdlepthien on Oct 20, 2009 5:40 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that it has no problem experimenting with babies. What else is new? It's just like our "health care" system. And of course, the FDA is in collusion with them. You would think that eventually people would cotton on to the fact that radically new foods probably aren't great for the human organism.

At one time, FDA approval meant something, and the food corporations rely on the false sense of security that that has engendered.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The FDA Was Doing a Good Job Until 1981 when It Became Totally Corrupted By Rumsfeld
Posted by: tony_opmoc on Oct 20, 2009 7:18 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Read the story of how Aspartame became approved. It is a total disgrace.

http://www.whale.to/a/rumsfeld4.html

As is the story of how Tambocor was approved

Read Deadly Medicine: Why Tens of Thousands of Heart Patients Died in America's Worst Drug Disaster

But who gives a shit?

The World is overpopulated. These guys think they are doing a good job to correct the problem.

That's fine so long as you don't mind dropping dead yourself - or seeing your family do.

Tony

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow, a lawyer and an administrator made the call!
Posted by: franklyspanking on Oct 20, 2009 8:29 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've got nothing against synthetics per se--insulin produced in E. coli has been a godsend to folks with diabetes, but c'mon? Is this lady even a scientist, or is she another crony in the Bush/Obama model of scientific advisors?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Breast feed
Posted by: Jeanne on Oct 20, 2009 11:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First of all, breast feeding is the most superior form of nourishment for babies. Who would opt to not breastfeed if they have the best interest of their child in mind? It's the food we evolved to nourish infants; it's free; it's always fresh and at the right temperature.

Secondly, are manufacturers not required to assure a product is safe? Can you add artificial supplements willy nilly without proving that it is safe for infants to consume?

Corollary: Just because it's on the grocer's shelf and called "food" doesn't mean it is.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Breast feed Posted by: MelissaEvans
James Akre
Posted by: James Akre on Oct 20, 2009 1:30 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Thanks very much for the up-to-date summary of the health implications of infant formula laced with ARA and DHA. I continue to wonder how long it will be before this question is taken up by the non-specialty media as well. I hope that your article will contribute to greater awareness of the topic. Just one thing, though, if I may. I would have preferred if you hadn't said that breast milk "remains ... free of charge".

While we occasionally speak about the money breastfeeding saves, we mostly ignore what breastfeeding costs. Breast milk is most assuredly not free. In fact, I would start by describing it as priceless, even as breastfeeding itself has at least three price tags directly attached: a mother’s time (which far too many people erroneously consider to be on the house), the energy cost of producing milk (up to 500 kcal a day that need to come from somewhere) and the opportunity cost. You’ll have no difficulty recognizing the first two tags, which are an altogether spectacular bargain when you consider the payback in terms of positive lifelong consequences for children, mothers and thus the entire society. But the third one may not be so familiar. I’m borrowing from economic theory where "opportunity cost" refers to the cost of something in terms of an opportunity forgone – for example mothers who must choose between staying at home with their children and returning to paid employment outside the home to meet their families’ financial needs. As we all know from personal experience, there really is no such thing as a free lunch.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Don't forget history........
Posted by: Spiritgirl on Oct 20, 2009 2:17 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Back in the 1950's pregnant women were given D.E.S., it was supposed to help them with nausea and the "ill effects" that went along with being pregnant. It may have, but it turns out that the children born to these women were the ones that suffered! They are the ones that are not able to bear children, some were born with birth defects, some were born with both sexes, some of the effects are turning up in the grandchildren!

50 years later, and people still want to believe that better living thru chemistry replaces nurturing time, reading to your infants, spending time with your children! So your kid may not be Einstein, but, that doesn't mean that your child did not come with it's own gifts to share with you and contribute to this world!

In case you aren't paying attention, let us stop pretending that these large corporations are out to do anything other than to make money, and they don't really care about the long term effects on our health, our environment- they are solely responsible to their shareholders to make money! They have bought the politicians, and the laws that are still on the books favor the corporation over the individual! Please don't think that anything has changed!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Thalidomide also Posted by: Alenna
Smart Babies Jump Higher
Posted by: melpol on Oct 20, 2009 4:14 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The best way known to have a smart baby is by having two athletically talented parents. Some say having a smart baby is not important but how quickly they learn in later years. All babies deserve love whether smart or stupid.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Ironic Advertising
Posted by: MelissaEvans on Oct 21, 2009 8:22 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And ironically, when reading this article I got 3 artificial milk ads! Go Google!
~Melissa Evans, AAHCC, CLE

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I'm still glad someone makes formula
Posted by: valkyrie on Oct 21, 2009 11:25 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I agree that formula is not as good as breastmilk, and should be under the most stringent of standards, I'm not going to demonize feeding your child breastmilk.

As a mother who never produced any breastmilk, I'm glad the stuff exists. There are many reasons why someone can't or won't feed their child breastmilk, so insulting those people is non-productive. I'm personally really tired of this chant. People should actually start to use their minds and think about _why_ someone doesn't feed their kid formula. Turn on the brain, turn off the judgment.

It would be best if the FDA actually did its job and worked to make the stuff safe, and to verify that all components are safe, effective, and are extracted in a safe manner (Hexane! At least they're not using dichloromethane, I guess.). The more effective thing to do here is yell at the FDA.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

NON-DHA/ARA FORMULA
Posted by: kenhouse66 on Oct 21, 2009 2:18 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone know where you can still get NON-DHA/ARA FORMULA?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pesky
Posted by: pesky on Oct 22, 2009 9:45 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have done a great deal of research on DHA and neuronal development.Everywhere you look DHA is considered an essential super fatty acid.I'm afraid its not that simple.When you supplement with long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids such as DHA/ARA,you will increase their cellular levels.Sounds safe.The problem being that this will decrease levels of saturated fatty acids.Cholesterol synthesis and reglulation is critical for neuronal development.Alter this regulatory machinery and disease will develope.Cholesterol is needed for axon pathfinding,neuron migration,dendrite outgrowth,synapse formation,glutamate receptor regulation,insulin resistance,as well as proper immune system responses.The list goes on and on.Protein signaling is dependent on cholesterol.Neurodegenerative disease is associated altered cholesterol homeostasis.Would a pediatrition reccommend skim milk for infant development?Statins are linked to cognive decline.Is DHA/ARA supplementation in to infant formula safe.I would think not.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pesky
Posted by: pesky on Oct 22, 2009 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have send several inquiries to the manufacturers involved with DHA/ARA infant formulas.I have asked for answers that are needed to establish the fact that increasing the unsaturation index of lipid rafts in infants during critical stages of neuronal development is really safe.Their response was that these formulas have been fed to millions of children worldwide,parents and pediatritions are familiar with the safety and benefit of DHA/ARA fortified infant formulas and the FDA recognizes DHA/ARA infant formula as Generally Regarded As Safe.I did not recieve any info on the real safety involved with lipid rafts and brain development.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pesky
Posted by: pesky on Oct 22, 2009 10:26 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A recent study conducted by the manufacturer of the synthetic DHA/ARA used in infant formulas today concluded:At five times the current dosage used today, DHA/ARA had no benefit among males in regards to improvements in brain and eye development."The reasons for this difference among gender is unclear."They theorize that males may need a higher dosage.If DHA/ARA are powerful enough to affect brain and eye development,and this result was not found among male infants,what affect are these supplementations actually having?What is next?Will there be gender specific formulas?What is the magical amount needed for males?Why are parents paying a premium for benefits that do not exist?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

pesky
Posted by: pesky on Oct 22, 2009 10:45 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I have 176 pages of adverse events reported to the FDA on Enfamil products containing DHA/ARA.I obtained these after numerous requests through the Freedom of Information Act.At first,I recieved five pages.I informed them that my reports were not among what they told me was a complete summary of all reports submitted.To make a long story short,after five additional requests,I was sent a CD containing 176 pages.My reportings are still among the missing.How many pages are missing?The FDA states that one or two well documented adverse events warrants a product investigation.Why do I have hundreds?Is DHA/ARA safe or just Generally Regarded As Safe?Almost every infant formula today contains DHA/ARA.Despite knowing that infants have been seriously harmed by these novel oils,and in some cases DHA/ARA elimination provided instant relief,why is formula without DHA/ARA so hard to find?Where are the side effect warning labels?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: pesky Posted by: femtobeam
» RE: pesky Posted by: pesky
Toxins
Posted by: femtobeam on Oct 22, 2009 11:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
These baby formulas contain pond algae derived agar and oils which have toxins in them due to a growth rate which is not uniform. This can cause severe allergic responses in infants.

It is precisely the reason why closed loop uniform growth rates in photobioreactors are necessary to provide the ability to produce toxin free alga and other nutriceutical feedstock.

The omega 3 fatty acid is excellent from these sources but the rotten cells and their toxins are hard to remove from the batch. As a result, they are using chemical extraction processes.

Breast feeding is by far the best choice if a mother eats healthy food, but in today's societies it is necessary to have a healthy alternative, and pond algae infant formula just is not it. The best way is to freeze dry the best substitute, sheep milk with pure algae sources.

Pesky had some very important information.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Toxins Posted by: pesky
pesky
Posted by: pesky on Oct 22, 2009 11:20 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Cholesterol depletion through statins or long chain polyunsaturated fatty acids(DHA/ARA)will have a major impact on cellular signaling.Those who profit from this would like you to believe that this impact will only have positive results.Let me save you some time on researching this statement.To date,researchers are unsure of the mechanics of lipid rafts and their role in cellular signaling.In the area of neurodegeneration,altered cholesterol homeostasis and increased oxidative stress are two factors directly linked to these diseases.DHA/ARA will increase both.Don't be so concerned with what the bottle is made of,I would worry about what it now contains.Add ferrous sulfate(iron supplement used at 12x the level found in breast milk) to DHA/ARA and a Fenton reaction will occur.This will yield neurotoxic components termed f-4 neuroprostanes and f-2 isoprostanes respectively.These neurotoxic components are found elevated in patients suffering from neurodegenerative diseases.Don't worry,infant formula manufacturers add anti-oxidants to limit this reaction and their neurotoxic breakdown components.They are currently doing a clinical study defining the implications of cholesterol depletion and increases in oxidative stress on infants during critical stages of neurodevelopment.The only problem is that your infant is part of the study and they are not sure of the outcome.No wonder alzheimers and autism is out of control.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement