In recent years, the United States has been grappling with a baby formula shortage, exacerbated by a combination of supply chain disruptions, product recalls, labor shortages, and inflation. These challenges have made it difficult for manufacturers to meet the demand for formula, leading to rationed supplies at stores. As a result, families who depend on formula are scrambling to ensure their babies receive adequate nutrition.
In response to this crisis, some individuals have suggested simple solutions, such as “Why not just breastfeed like people did before formula was invented?” While this may seem like a reasonable suggestion, it overlooks the complexities of breastfeeding and the history of infant mortality.
Carla Cevasco, Ph.D., a historian at Rutgers University, took to Twitter to clarify some misconceptions about infant feeding. In a viral thread, she explained why the notion that breastfeeding alone sufficed for babies before formula was invented is misleading. She provided sources for her claims, which can be viewed in the thread.
Cevasco emphasized that, throughout history, there were many reasons why infants had to be fed something other than breast milk. She outlined various circumstances, such as:
- The birthing parent being unable to breastfeed due to complications like death in childbirth, health issues, or the need to return to work shortly after giving birth.
- A lack of breastfeeding capability in the baby, such as poor latch, prematurity, or health conditions.
- Cases where babies were cared for by someone other than their birth parent, including adoptive parents.
In some situations, babies were fed breast milk from other women, such as relatives, neighbors, or paid or unpaid servants. In extreme cases, such as under slavery, women were forced to breastfeed children other than their own, sometimes at the expense of their own infants.
Cevasco also shared examples of alternative feeding methods. For instance, in the 18th century, Wabanaki women sometimes fed infants a mixture of boiled walnuts, cornmeal, and water. Similarly, in early Europe, babies often consumed pap or panada, mixtures of animal milk or water with bread crumbs or flour. While these alternatives worked for some babies, they were often unsafe and nutritionally inadequate.
Before the creation of modern formula in the 1950s, many babies died from illness or starvation because they couldn't be breastfed and the available alternatives were not safe or sufficient. Cevasco highlighted the harsh reality that many infants perished due to a lack of proper nutrition.
She cautioned against romanticizing the past and advocating for universal breastfeeding, as this oversimplifies the challenges parents face today. While improvements like paid parental leave, better access to lactation support, and education could increase breastfeeding rates, Cevasco reminded us that formula has saved many babies' lives, especially when breastfeeding was not an option.
In conclusion, Cevasco urged against demonizing formula, pointing out that the crisis we face today is partly due to the actions of the corporate formula industry. While breastfeeding should be supported and encouraged, formula remains an essential option for many families. The priority, she emphasized, should always be ensuring that all babies have access to safe, nutritionally complete food. By understanding the historical and logistical realities of infant feeding, we can make more informed decisions and avoid perpetuating harmful myths.