GreenSmoothieGirl Logo
Lose 10 Pounds in 10 Minutes. Add 10 Years to your life.
Our beautiful template for infinite variety of greens and superfoods in your smoothies—print this and eliminate the need for recipes! Get it now for free!

Pediatrics Journal Disparages “Natural” Breastfeeding

Robyn Openshaw, MSW - Apr 11, 2016 - This Post May Contain Affiliate Links

You better have a really brilliant reason to mess with Mother Nature.

It’s not a goal at GreenSmoothieGirl to be a muckraker—calling attention to all the political issues and what’s wrong with the world. Mostly I like to inspire and educate you towards eating healthier. Towards eating more plants. Simply. Inexpensively. Deliciously.

But as a mama who learned the hard way that breastfeeding is much, much better than any man-made alternative, I was blown away by this article in the AAP Pediatrics Journal: Unintended Consequences of Invoking the “Natural” in Breastfeeding Promotion.

Medical researchers, Drs. Martucci and Barnhill, reprimand pediatricians for suggesting that anything “natural” is therefore better. They cite the example of breastfeeding—implying that 20-ingredient, processed-soy and cow’s milk-formulas are better for babies, I suppose?

I categorically reject that. Yeah, categorically.

God, through the human body, supplies the perfect substance. It changes, evolves, in response to the baby’s developmental stages. Lots of colostrum to boost immunity for a tiny infant, for example. It’s brilliant. A miracle. Nothing men have ever put in a package can hold a candle to what nature provides.

And what is the reason these researchers want to manipulate public policy and pediatrics practice? It’s even worse than their astonishing statement that we shouldn’t assume “natural” is better.

They are afraid that we natural weirdos won’t vaccinate on schedule. Or at all.

These researchers are upset that if we value all things natural, we might not want genetically modified foods. They’re worried we’ll think organic foods are better than conventionally pesticide-sprayed foods.

They’re afraid that we’ll vote against forced fluoridation (a petroleum industry byproduct) of our water, or that we’ll filter it out and won’t give our kids the pills.

Check. Check. Check. And check. I’m their worst nightmare.

The researchers don’t want mothers encouraged to breastfeed just because it’s “natural”—because then they might think for themselves and reject other unnatural practices. Practices in arenas such as “Which dead viruses and mercury-infused, formaldehyde-preserved vaccinations should I let the doc inject my little ones with?”

I’m so thankful that I was able to help my oldest son recover from becoming very sick on “infant formula” by eating whole foods. I’m glad that Utah law hasn’t prevented parents from opting out of immunizations, which is a growing national movement, state governments against choice.

I’m appreciative that labeling laws now let me opt out of GMO’s for my family. I’m thrilled that the county I live in doesn’t fluoridate the water, and that I have a water filter on my sink.

My $0.02 is that natural is, in fact, generally better. Although you can always find an exception, a rule of thumb is: You better have a really brilliant reason to mess with Mother Nature.

Posted in: Lifestyle, Relationships

15 thoughts on “Pediatrics Journal Disparages “Natural” Breastfeeding”

Leave a Comment
  1. Shellie says:

    I totally agree… but what is sad is that after watching the way some Mom’s eat… I’m looking at them going, “yeah, formula is probably better for your baby if you’re not going to at least drink more water than soda in a day and buy mac and cheese and ramen cause you’re ‘craving’ it.” There are still Mom’s out there that think the baby will just miraculously turn out perfect no matter what they eat during pregnancy and with breastfeeding.
    I feel your pain and frustration.

  2. Tracy says:

    Thank you for this, Robyn! Love and agree 100% with everything you just said. I’m thankful for your “voice” and that you can get this message out :))

  3. Kore says:

    I was with you until you started spewing the anti-vaccine bullshit. You do know what the concept behind vaccines is, right? A weakened or dead version of a disease/virus trains your immune system to fight it. The amount of “deadly” preservatives in the vaccines are so small, you would more likely get sick from driving a car than the vaccines. You do know that your body actually produces traces of formaldehyde and uses traces of mercury, right?
    Please, please, please, get a doctorate in medicine before you spout idiotic shit about vaccines being dangerous while not protecting your kids from Polio, Measles, Mumps, or Rubella. Trust me. Those diseases are much deadlier than what your pea-sized brain thinks is dangerous in vaccines.
    Unless of course, you’re a hard-core Darwinian. Then, please continue to let natural selection decide what children live and die.

    1. Jael says:

      If you can read, a medical degree is not necessary to access top researchers’ work.

      This statement about the POLIO vaccine alone is stunning:

      “Dr Salk developed the first commercial polio vaccine with virus found in ‘the pooled faeces of three healthy children in Cleveland. It was not found in the victims of polio.13”


      Two men claimed to have discovered the polio virus in 1908. How? By chopping up some spinal cord from a dead child (they have no idea what paralyzed him and caused his death) and injecting 1 to 2 cups of the solution into the brains of two living monkeys, one of whom became paralyzed and one died. They had no microscopes able to see any viruses back then, so when they “dissected the monkeys and found damage in their central nervous tissues similar to that found in human cases of infantile paralysis, Drs. Landsteiner and Popper claimed that they had found some sort of “invisible virus” that ultimately came to be known as the “poliovirus”.” (The electron microscope wasn’t invented until 1931, and wasn’t used to try to record images of this virus until 1953)

      “Reviewing these historical facts, three questions arise. The first is, “How did Drs. Landsteiner and Popper know that the 9-year old boy from which they had taken spinal cord fluid samples actually had polio?….The following list represents a few that could have been categorized and documented as polio prior to 1958: Enteroviruses such as Coxsackie and ECHO; Undiagnosed congenital syphilis; Arsenic and DDT toxicity; Transverse myelitis; Guillain-Barré syndrome; Provocation of limb paralysis by intramuscular injections of many types, including a variety of vaccines; Hand, foot, and mouth disease; Lead poisoning.”

      “Drs. Landsteiner and Popper diagnosed the boy as having a communicable viral infection that caused paralysis (eventually called polio). They assumed he had polio. But there was no way for them to scientifically demonstrate that the boy was infected with poliovirus. This leads to the second question, which is, “What caused one of the monkeys to die and the other to become paralyzed?”

      The first monkey became violently ill on the sixth day and died on the eighth. He lay on the floor of his cage and his power to move his limbs was not investigated. After death changes typical of anterior poliomyeletis were found. The second monkey was noted to have lost all power in the hind legs on the seventeenth day. No paralysis was present on the twelfth, although it may have been present before the seventeenth in some degree. He was killed on the nineteenth day and again typical pathological changes were found in the central nervous system. From the spinal cord of this monkey inoculations were made into two other monkeys with negative results. The conclusion of these authors is that ‘a so-called invisible virus, that is, one belonging to the class of the protozoa, is the cause of the disease.’…The fluid they injected must have contained much human cellular debris, any toxins involved in the child’s illness, and probably several kinds of viruses. So, it was no wonder the monkeys fell so desperately ill. Such a soup could in no way be considered an ‘isolate’ of the tiny organism we now call a virus. It was also strangely non-infectious for a so-called virus, for the monkeys were not paralysed when made to drink it or when one of their limbs was injected with it, nor did they pass it on to other monkeys. The experiment, in fact, shed no light on what had paralysed the monkeys, and for that matter, the children.6”

      “In his commencement address, at McGill University in Montreal, Canada in June 1990 titled “The Germ Theory of Disease and The Hunt for the Poliovirus,”13 John C. Polanyi, PhD, a Hungarian-Canadian chemist who won the 1986 Nobel Prize in Chemistry, questioned how any scientist could “credibly claim that injecting cellular debris into the skull of a monkey proves a virus to cause polio?”13

      The more I read of what are supposed to be the victories of polio research, the more I have been, quite frankly, appalled. During the 1920s and 1930s all kinds of biological materials-spinal cord, brain, faecal matter, even flies-were ground up and injected into monkey brains to induce paralysis, causing great harm to many animals—all in the hope that such experiments would explain why humans were getting summer polio.

      The method they used to exclude bacteria from their injected sample of backbone was also quite extraordinary. They put some of the backbone suspension into a dish and watched to see what happened. They reported: ‘If there was no [bacterial] growth after approximately 22 hours of incubation at 37 C., the specimen was considered suitable for inoculation into monkeys. This was not a sterility test, since growth would usually occur on longer incubation; it was rather an indication of the amount of bacterial contamination in the specimen.’ Slow growing bacteria were thus deliberately not removed—and no toxin was looked for —yet they knew these might well be present.13”


      This is just bits and pieces of the full article.

      And today, since we cannot hold vaccine companies accountable to ENSURE their vaccines are safe, they have no incentive to do so. And now, China has just been approved to start providing vaccines (

      Why not at the least develop a simple test so a child can be tested for life-threatening reactions to ingredients before any vaccines are administered? But hey, if they can force everyone to get the shots, why bother spending any money to prevent YOUR child from harm?

    2. Denise says:

      Wow, Rockefellow educated. I assume the main stream media. (Who by the way are really only owned by about a handful of corps around the world. Keep many people from the real causes of wellness and natural health. It’s sad we fight each other instead of going down the rabbit hole. Please research with a open mind. Have you heard of the latest movie Vaxxed? What about the vitamin movie? Heard of the health ranger Mike adams? Do you know many Doctors (holistic ) 12 who knew each other just recently died. Yeah all different causes some sudden deaths, some trajic accidents. Funny they shut up the doctor from the cdc up that was going forth with what was covered up.
      Oh a great free documentary is going on right now that is worth watching
      Cancer cures with Ty Bollinger

    3. Noelle says:

      Nobody forces you to read Robyn’s work, if you want to immunize your children I don’t judge you why is it ok to slam those who don’t. I have read and researched my choice to not vaccinate which is my choice God gave my children to me to make that choice. Why do you have to curse and and try to tear people down to make your point? Kind of takes away from the validity of it and makes you sound angry and ignorant. Just don’t read her stuff…….

    4. Joanna Durrant says:

      Why so rude? It never ceases to amaze me thinking you know so many empirical details and then learning new truths that contradict what you thought you knew. Do some research beyond the pharmas message you deliver, because quite frankly there’s a lot more to know. MMR landed my little one a weeks stay in the hospital.

      1. Robyn says:

        joanna, oh honey, i’m so sorry. 🙁 i had a neighbor whose daughter died 2.5 days after her immunization. it was her only daughter, and she was 4 1/2 months old, and they called it SIDS. no one ever even connected it to the vaccine—i just happened to have asked. and as i found out, VAERS only “counts” it against the vaccine if the death or reaction is within 48 hours. if it’s 49 hours? clearly didn’t have anything to do with the vaccine, and not eligible to make a claim. makes no sense. another neighbor had her daughter immunized on the schedule, and ALL THREE vaccine sets, that first 18 months of her life, resulted in seizures, diarrhea and vomiting for a month. one of my tennis teammates has three autistic sons, and each one stopped talking and autism signs started showing up, after normal development to that point, after a vaccine.

  4. Kore,

    You may want to check the vaccine websites themselves. They do not deny, (Because legally they are no longer allowed to) that vaccine injury is very real, and 3 million is paid out yearly to families that suffer from these very real and sometimes deadly reactions. You are clearly passionate about your stance, which I can respect, as I am passionate that a choice be allowed being the aunt of a vaccine injured nephew who will live with very real and painful side effects the rest of his life. I would love to believe in vaccines, and believe that they were derived from good. Sadly, they have been bought, and are now being pushed by companies and corporations, rather than scientists and doctors. You can continue to spew hate at those unafraid to call out what is happening…or you can do a very small bit of research and realize the reality that is in fact on the vaccine websites and the studies, and the court cases, and the experts who are now coming forward. This is no longer a hippie mentality. This is truth. I am happy to send you a lot of really interesting and informative information if you are interested. Cheers.

    1. Julie says:

      People can check out Dr. Sherry Tenpenny for more information on vaccines.

    2. Denise says:

      Thank you curlyslizzy
      Yes. When you sign the paperwork for approval to taking the vaccine. You’ve signed your rights away. They are Not responsible for side affects. Something for mothers to think about. So much grief with the way our medical establishment is ran. What we are told. We are supposed to trust the FDA. They are sleeping with the ones who pays the bills big pharma!!!

  5. Cathy Weigeldt says:

    I was drawn to this site as a breastfeeding new mom looking at inspiring natural health topics. My family focuses on wholesome foods, avoids sugar, we thrive and keep active in the outdoors, respecting the environment…
    There are good arguments for and against vaccinating. I live in a community where many parents chose/choose not to vaccinate. As a community we are now faced with outbreaks of whooping cough which can be very serious for infants too young to be vaccinated or children who cannot be vaccinated due to health/allergic reasons.
    I despise pharmaceutical corporate bullying, but vaccinations are to thank for abolishing some horrifying diseases.. like Polio. As a parent could you imagine ever having to watch your precious lovely child suffer through that disease? As americans we don’t have to thanks to vaccinations!

    1. Robyn says:

      Hi Cathy! I used to believe the same thing. Then I studied a lot of data, when my children were small, showing how the eradication of polio and smallpox, for instance, happened faster in non-immunizing countries, than immunizing countries, and that the disappearance of many diseases has everything to do with sanitation advances. I could write lots more, but there are some good books for you to read on this subject. So many things to examine, like how Japan’s SIDS rate dropped by 80% when they stopped immunizing under the age of 2. How big the risk is, of immunizing an immune compromised kid, like one with asthma. Especially the pertussis vaccine. What a huge percentage of adverse events aren’t reported to VAERS, and how the CDC isn’t protecting our interests.

  6. nanciel says:

    So many things are just simple common sense…how can it be good or helpful to totally overload a small child’s system with a cocktail of multiple vaccines infused with things like mercury which is known to be poisonous in very small quantities? This is setting the body up for failure.
    Dogs have it even worse…they not only are given these vaccines at a very early age, but then the shots are administered thereafter on a yearly basis until death. A 7 pound dog is given the same dose as an 85 pound dog. Because I refuse to follow the vaccination schedule with my dog, I am shamed by the staff whenever I bring him in. So be it.

  7. Cyndi says:

    Yea!!!! Robyn!!!! Thanks for voicing all this!!!! We whole hardily agree with you!!! People need to know!!!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.