[debmalya]

Here is how I compare formula feeding to nursing: it is like hooking up a baby to a dialysis machine instead of letting the kidneys do their job. Of course it will make money for the dialysis clinic and technicians (like it does for Nestle etc.) however it will have adverse benefits for the baby. This analogy may sound extreme but I feel it is a logical comparison.

Of course if the baby has immature or non-functioning kidneys, dialysis can serve as an alternative, but why do it otherwise? Similarly, if nature's perfect food is available, why consider substituting it with anything else is beyond me.

[lithos]

That lady on the cover was pretty damn hot...

Wait, Time Magazine: am I doin' it right?

[K-9]

On the contrary, common sense tells me this is quite true. A baby acquires passive immunity from the mother's antibodoes, which helps it to survive by fighting disease germs that it was or is most likely to be exposed to in early life. The baby's own antibodies start building meanwhile. Without any defense (aka passive immunity) at all the baby has comparatively less chance of surviving to be able to survive on the merit of its own antibodies (aka active immunity). But being not a doctor or phsyiologist my simple understating may not be fully accurate.

Plenty of children can fight off things on their own without breastfeeding. It's not a necessity and while it is true they can get extra antibodies then what they produce on their own, it doesn't mean the child who does not breastfeed and does not get them will not be able to fight off anything. I know kids who were on formula that had less colds and sickness than other people's kids I know who breastfed.

And to baby that is done breastfeeding, there is no extra advantage for the immune system from that point on. It develops exactly the same either way.

[debmalya]

Plenty of children can fight off things on their own without breastfeeding. It's not a necessity and while it is true they can get extra antibodies then what they produce on their own, it doesn't mean the child who does not breastfeed and does not get them will not be able to fight off anything. I know kids who were on formula that had less colds and sickness than other people's kids I know who breastfed.

And to baby that is done breastfeeding, there is no extra advantage for the immune system from that point on. It develops exactly the same either way.

I don't have scientific test or study results to prove the differences between breast versus formula feeding and immunity development, but didn't notice any scientific data to back your limited observation of formula fed children fending better than breastfed. Passive immunity increases the chances of a healthy survivial in early life, and that in itself gives active immunity a better chance to develop and mature. Also, induced immunity - aka vaccination is not the same as actively acquired immunity. Which is why, if you once get chicken pox or mumps you develop a life long immunity whereas if you acquire immunity through vaccination you still risk contracting the disease but usually with milder effects. Also, common cold is one of those few viral diseases where preventive immunity is useless since the virus mutates constantly, which is why we catch cold multiple times in our lifetime. (Although I can understand that you may have used cold just as an example.) The immune system (like many other physiological systems) is quite complex and not well understood.