Is Breastfeeding Natural? Appeal to Natural Fallacy
Humans are interesting beings.
Evolution has benefited us with the ability to think at a very high level and our cognitive abilities have proven fruitful in many ways.
As a result of our collective intellect, we have developed, created, and accomplished many astonishing things: advances in science and technology are just two of many.
Another impressive thing about us, one that sets us apart from other animals in the animal kingdom, is that we're the only ones arguing the merits of our own species' milk.
To my knowledge, no other mammal spends time debating whether their milk is beneficial for their babies.
( Note: I believe that debate is a significant and useful practice that furthers our insight and can influence change.)
The development of an alternative supplementation product for human babies and the debates regarding the potential impact of its use that have arisen from its development is a direct result of our evolution and is uniquely human.
But just as not everyone is going to be the next Daniel Hale Williams or Patricia Bath, two brilliant minds that have propelled science forward, not everyone is adept in the skill of debating.
Enter 'Dr' Amy Tuteur, author of the blog Skeptical OB.
She recently posted a blog in an attempt to highlight the fallacy of saying that human milk feeding (breastfeeding) is beneficial because it's natural.
And before I begin..
Trigger warning: Rape. Because this is a response to an article that mentions it, the topic of rape comes up in this post. I apologize in advance.
While I don't want to link directly to the blog post, I do want to summarize her points so that you can get a good understanding of her side of the argument. And though she mentions both childbirth and breastfeeding, I will only focus on the breastfeeding aspect.
Her Points
Breastfeeding supporters/advocates use the statement "breastfeeding is natural" as the beginning and end of arguments regarding breastfeeding vs. formula.
Stating that breastfeeding is natural aims to emphasize its advantages (being scientifically and evolutionarily superior) over the claims of those with opposing viewpoints, which in this case is assumed to be those who formula feed.
Rape is seen in the animal kingdom and thus is considered natural and "best" based on the logic of breastfeeding supporters.
Rape is natural but not best so breastfeeding, though natural, shouldn't be argued as best either.
She then continues on the rape line of conversation, analyzing rape in different contexts and drawing comparisons between rape and breastfeeding.
------
I've had a hard time deciding where to begin in responding to her post, because while I learned a long time ago not to be surprised by her viewpoints (they are very different than mine), this one in particular, is quite a sensitive subject to many of us.
The first instinct of many, as seen by the responses online, is to attack the claim of rape being natural.
Her mentioning that ‘rape is natural’ does a great job in detracting from the points that most breastfeeding advocates bring up in the conversation of human milk feeding vs. artificial infant milk: Are there short and long term health disadvantages of formula feeding and what impact might these disadvantages have on us as a whole?
The sociobiological theories of rape have long been debated and continue to be a discussion among psychologists, scientists, and scholars.
This topic does not need to be hashed out in conversations regarding infant health and human milk feeding.
What I believe she was attempting to do, albeit in a very unsavory, insensitive, and childish way, is address the fact that many people are using the Appeal to Nature Fallacy in an attempt to prove their position.
The Appeal to Nature Fallacy assumes that something that is 'natural' is better than something deemed 'unnatural' on the sole fact that it's natural.
So in other words, breastfeeding and human milk are better because they're natural, whereas formula is man made so it can't be superior to human milk.
If the only point made in a discussion regarding human milk and formula, is that breastmilk is natural, the reasoning is inherently flawed.
However, I am not sure what circles 'Dr' Tuteur is having these conversations in because I've never heard the only point made for human milk be 'it's natural,' especially in response to counterpoints.
We need to steer the discussion away from the biological normalcy of human milk and instead continue to mention specifics facts pertaining to human milk/breastfeeding and its impact on infant health.
I also think we need to stop making it seem that there is this raging war between those who human milk feed and those who formula feed.
The vast majority of parents today have in some form or fashion provided some formula to their babies.
Breastfeeding parents also formula feed.
There are many parents who’ve desired to human milk-feed but due to their circumstances, use formula despite their desires.
Yes, human milk is 'natural' and biologically normal but that is NOT why it should be encouraged, promoted, and normalized.
It being natural is NOT the reason why we fight for parents needing better support and resources.
And human milk being natural is NOT the reason why there is a demand for lactation to be viewed as a normal state of the breast vs solely as a byproduct of pregnancy. Or why when parents are unable to meet the feeding demands of their babies with their supply alone, we're fighting for it to be viewed as a medical event to be explored and resolved.
Human milk, outside of specific and rare circumstances, is best for human babies because it provides optimal growth and nutrition.
It is the standard for which we base norms. Thus, any 'benefits' or 'advantages' human milk confers to babies turn into 'disadvantages' when they're absent.
The interesting thing about this debate is that the majority of parents are fully aware of the disadvantages of formula yet, have no choice to but formula feed because they are being failed.
And while certain people in the medical field continue to pick fights demanding that we prove the merits of human milk and are essentially arguing the point that formula is better for babies (which science and biology doesn't support), families continue to be failed and put in the position where formula feeding, despite the disadvantages, is their only option.
For those who choose to formula feed for no other reason than it's just a choice they feel is right for them and their babies, the persistence of discussing human milk vs. formula does nothing for them nor does it change their minds.
I truly believe that parents know what is right for them and their families and that everyone deserves access to any and all information that will help them decide what choice is right for them.
'Dr' Tuteur's attempt to make it seem that those of us working to ensure every family gets access to ALL information surrounding human milk, formula, and their various delivery methods have no other point to make besides ‘it's natural’, is noted.
'Dr.' Amy, we see you. It was a good attempt, but you're going to have to do better.
For those of you who are looking for evidence-based information on the importance of human milk feeding on infant health because you're not sure if there is a difference between the two or want additional talking points should the conversation of the difference pop up, below is a good starting point.
Otherwise, I think more good would be spent debating the ways we can support the parents that are getting failed in their attempts to human milk-feed successfully.
Read more: Why the lactation industry will never win against Fed is Best
Most of these are abstracts which serve to give you a starting point in your research.
Long-term neurodevelopmental benefits of breastfeeding
Breastfeeding and its gamut of benefits.
Association of breastfeeding and three-dimensional dental arch relationships in primary dentition
Evidence of a Preventive Effect of Breastfeeding on Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Children and Adults
Bioactive Proteins in Human Milk—Potential Benefits for Preterm Infants
Breastfeeding, Childhood Asthma, and Allergic Disease
Breastfeeding for at least 2 months provides SIDS protection
Human milk and necrotizing enterocolitis
The benefits of breastfeeding and associated risks of replacement with baby formulas
Breast Milk Fats and Lipids: Expanding Benefits to Fragile Infant Populations
The Maternal Microbiome & Perinatal Colonization (Resource from Abbot nutrition (formula company) research conference)
Human milk is the feeding strategy to prevent necrotizing enterocolitis