(Natural News) New research published in the British Medical Journal (BMJ) reveals that most infant formulas come with health and nutrition claims that are not backed by science – and that, in many cases, are flat-out fraudulent.
A team of researchers from the United Kingdom, Poland, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Canada, Germany, Italy, Spain, Greece, Romania, Australia, Nigeria, Israel, Norway, and the United States looked at nearly 800 different baby formulas sold around the world. They specifically evaluated the health and nutrition claims on the label that entice mothers into buying and using them rather than breastfeeding.
Upon analysis, 608 of the products were found to contain one or more questionable health claims. More than half, 53 percent, claim they help or support brain, eye, and nervous system development. Another 39 percent claim they assist in strengthening or supporting a healthy immune system.
Thirty-seven percent of the infant formula products claim that babies who consume it will grow and develop healthy.
Will the 2nd Amendment Be Destroyed By the Biden Admin?
Overall, 41 groups of ingredients were found to be linked to one or more of these health claims. The most common ones indicated include long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids, prebiotics, probiotics, or “synbiotics,” and hydrolyzed protein. Half of the formulas include claims that do not point towards any specific ingredient.
(Related: Remember when fake president Joe Biden sent America’s limited supplies of baby formula straight to the southern border so they could be consumed by illegal aliens instead of American babies?)
75% of baby formulas don’t (can’t) back up their health claims
Of the hundreds of infant formulas evaluated, a shocking three out of four of them contain health claims that are not, and cannot, be backed by any type of science. The 26 percent that do cite studies of questionable origin and accuracy, according to the @Babygravy9 (RAW EGG NATIONALIST) Twitter account.
When references were made available on an infant formula label, 56 percent of the time the findings came from clinical trials. The rest came from reviews, opinion pieces, or other types of research including animal studies.
“Nine in 10 health claims came from clinical trials carrying a high risk of bias,” the study delineates. “What’s more, 88 percent of registered trials included study authors who received funding from the formula industry or had direct connections to the business.”
None of this will come as a shock to folks who are familiar with the baby formula industry and its constant efforts to vilify breastfeeding as inferior. We are constantly told by the industry that man-made formulas are superior, even though they lack the power of breast milk, a nutritional powerhouse that is simply unmatched.
“The case of baby formula is basically the history of nutrition over the last century, in a nutshell,” the @Babygravy9 Twitter account tweeted about the study. “We have a perfect animal-based product, in need of no improvement, replaced by inferior products of industrial origin, with serious negative effects.”
On Twitter, numerous people responded to the news with personal anecdotes, including one man who says the infant formula push on new parents is very real and very noticeable.
“My son was born 4 months ago and my wife had some initial discomfort breastfeeding,” this person wrote. “The number of people telling us to switch to formula was startling.”
Another mentioned an easy way to weed out bad doctors and pediatricians from the good is to “ask his opinion on formula.”
“It’s startling how a ‘mother’s intuition’ has become so easily overridden by ‘studies,’” said someone else. “Why it is not painfully obvious to everyone that breastmilk is superior? I will never understand.”
More related news can be found at Conspiracy.news.
Sources for this article include:
Your Daily Briefing:
Fight Online Censorship!
Get the news Google and Facebook don't want you to see: Sign up for DC Dirty Laundry's daily briefing and do your own thinking!