Understanding the world as it really is—random—can liberate and empower us.
Verified by Psychology Today
Dr. Narvaez, the additional citations you provide are outdated and demonstrate an association only - not a causal link. Horne et al. employed a quasi-experimental design to compare breast- and formula-fed infants, not random assignment, so causal inferences can not be made. I can only imagine that you are aware of this, so I am confused as to why you persist in presenting this evidence as casual?
I would also point out that (a) Horne et al. only found a difference between breast- and bottle-fed infants at 2-3 months, and NOT when they were 5-6 months, and (b) these data were collected between 1997 and 2001, long before DHA and other key nutrients were added to formula. Thus, there is no justification for claiming benefits of breast feeding beyond 5 months for reducing the incidence of SIDS, nor can these data be generalized to contemporary cohorts. You must provide evidence from studies conducted in the last 5 years or so in which formula-fed infants received formula supplemented with DHA to validate your claim that formula contributes to SIDS. Again, I can only imagine that you are aware of these issues and am confused as to why you would mislead this way?
Parents want what is best for their children, and they rely on some combination of instinct, experience, and expert advice to make important decisions about child-rearing, They deserve complete and accurate information about scientific research. At best, this article falls far short of that goal and, at worst, it manipulates the reader with outdated, incomplete information in order to advance a personal (or perhaps religious) perspective on how parents - and mothers in particular - "should" behave.
Get the help you need from a therapist near you–a FREE service from Psychology Today.