Cathy O'Connor wrote:
> Actually, according to the USDA, mature human milk contains 4.380 grams of
> fat per 100 grams, vs. 1.019 grams in the same quantity of whole milk.

OK... I don't know exactly what "mature human milk" is being specified here,
but quoting from the Baby Book by William Sears, MD and Martha Sears,
RN & Lactation Consultant :  "The most changeable ingredients of breast
milk, fats vary according to the caloric needs of your growing baby.  The fat
content of your milk changes during a feeding, at various times during the
day, and as your infant grows, adjusting like a self-formulating fuel to the
energy needs of your baby....  The fat content of human milk lessens as
baby grows, automatically changing from 'whole milk' to 'low fat' during the
last half of the first year."   Maybe by "mature human milk" they meant as
breast milk first comes in after colustrum, but I don't know cause it is such a
variable thing.  So as human milk becomes 'low fat', I don't think those
figures would hold for a toddler.

> Actually, if you take a look below at the nutritional composition of
> cow's milk, you will see that not only does cow's milk have iron, but it
> also has a lot of other properties that are condusive to good health and
> development.

According to a carton of whole cow's milk the nutritional content of Iron is
0%.  You posted reference to it containing .015 mg / oz, but apparently that
is not considered significant enough to be included in the labeling of milk.
And as was stated in Kim's post, bioavailability of that iron is very low.  From
same source as previous quotes : "Only 10% of cow's milk iron and as little
as 4% in iron-fortified formulas gets into the blood.  Not terribly efficient.....
Babies and children need around .5 mg of iron per pound of body weight per
day (1.1 mg / kg of body weight)."

>  Can you
> look at its' composition and honestly say as you did that "it follows that
> a child drinking cow's milk also is not receiving  adequate nutrition."  I
> don't think so.  And that's not what I had said either.  Nor did I say, or
> imply, that all children should remain on formula until the age of
> two,only children who do not drink cow's milk or a nutritionally adequate
> substitute.

I didn't say that a child drinking cow's milk is necessarily not receiving
adequate nutrition, although if it is relied upon in excess I feel that they are
not.   But really my point has been that a child who is NOT drinking cow's
milk (the one's that we're concerned with here basically) CAN get adequate
nutrition without the use of infant formula.  And several members of this list
have accomplished this successfully through various means.  I do believe
formula can be another alternative method for these kids but just is not an
absolute.  And infant formula is 'designed' for complete nutrition for infants...
that is why they also make toddler formulas (in milk and soy forms, but not
readily in the protein hydrolysate form).

Denise