History Of Baby Formula: Mother Of Recent Pandemic so

I have discovered recently that baby formula may be the single most influential catalyst that laid foundation for many of the so called pandemics and epidemics of the last couple centuries (polio, coronavirus, etc.). This is a very controversial subject, and I will do my best to convey information that will benefit all of mankind. I will not submit my logic or common sense in this approach.

So, with that out of the way…

How did we get here?

It is my understanding that the powers that be (corporations, the elite, whatever you may call them) have one specific goal, and that goal is to disrupt the natural order of things as much as possible, while still being able to somewhat maintain life (albeit a very dumbed down, narrow interpretation of life) and not having tons of people drop dead.

When my girlfriend became pregnant; I made the effort to learn the benefits breastmilk has over formula, and didn’t feel the need to actually dive deep into the subject because I thought it was somewhat simple. Everywhere in nature, the mother feeds the offspring using the milk from their body. But it wasn’t so easy for me to decipher everything that comes with it, until everyone around the globe world declared a pandemic.

Historical Timeline According to “official” Sources

If you were to lookup the history of the “baby bottle” on google, Wikipedia would be the first result, and you will see this on that page. The odd thing about this is that if you are like me and you are really honestly trying to find the truth, then you would actually read a little further than the pretty pages on Wikipedia.

It is claimed that there were several different contraptions that people were using to feed their babies thousands of years ago.

baby-bottle-history-wikipedia

So being the guy that I am, I decided to click their references…

Bottles with hard spouts date to early in recorded time, as evidence by archeological finds (see image).[23][24][25]

[23] [24] Both bring us to “Error 404 Pages”, with one archived on archive.org and another linking to an article on Nature.com

baby-bottle-24
So out of 3 references sugggesting the origin of baby bottles being thousands of years old, only one of them are still online? Seems odd to me. I think they are changing the narrative, in order to make everybody believe that it was common practice for infants to not be raised on milk from a human.

It is reported that people had been feeding babies something called “pap”. Some places even mention that they force fed their babies by pouring this mixture of pap down their throats.

Caregivers also fed infants pap, a thick mixture of bread, flour, sugar and Castile soap (said to aid digestion) and sometimes milk, out of porcelain or silver dishes that resembled gravy boats, or from spoons with a hollow stem you could blow through to push the slurry down the baby’s throat (not unlike geese force-fed for foie gras.) - Vanessa Hua: Building a Better Baby Bottle

I have also came across some sources that mention they would mix honey with other animal milk and feed them that. While I do not doubt that it has happened in the past, I do believe that there is some misinformation going on somewhere regarding all of it.

I know that we have tried a few different baby bottles for my daughter, bottles that have rubber nipples. My wonderful girlfriend has been breastfeeding since day one, we didn’t even introduce a bottle or a pacifier until weeks into the process. It has been one hell of a ride trying to get my daughter to even latch onto a rubber nipple, and that actually provides some suction and resemblance to a human nipple. I couldn’t even imagine trying to get her to latch onto a clay pot with a spout. Or pouring liquid from an odd shaped bowl down the babies throat.

I just do not accept the notion that hundreds of years ago EVERY baby was not breastfed from the mother or a wet nurse. I can believe that they were fed this pap mixture after they were a little older along with mothers milk, but will not believe the lie that mothers were feeding this garbage to their kids instead of their own milk, for thousands of years.

I think a very intelligent and delicate plan was needed in order to switch the consumers perception of what they should feed their baby, ignoring all their natural instincts.

Enter Baby Formula

The official story from Wikipedia states…

In 1865, the first infant food was invented.

Throughout history, mothers who could not breastfeed their babies either employed a wet nurse or, less frequently, prepared food for their babies, a process known as “dry nursing”. Baby food composition varied according to region and economic status. In Europe and North America during the early 19th century, the prevalence of wet nursing began to decrease, while the practice of feeding babies mixtures based on animal milk rose in popularity.

During these very early days, there weren’t many people that would be ok with feeding their baby something that came out of a can, or came in powdered form that they needed to add water to. Things were much different back then and people were very leary to trust a company trying to sell something they claimed was food, from a box or can.

There is record of this back in 1933 when the Duff company created the first “just add water” boxed cake mix. People weren’t buying their products because they knew it wasn’t as good as the real thing. They later changed the recipe and the new recipe required the consumer to add eggs to the mix. This was a genius marketing technique that came from the man that likely did the most to change the world’s belief systems. Edward Bernays.

The baby formula businesses employed his techniques a little later in the 1900’s and these companies were able to change the public perception of many things. This guy was great at what he did, he was pretty much the main reason the whole disposable cups thing got as massive as it is, he was also the man that was most influential in making everyone believe breakfast is “the most important meal of the day”. This man could have an encyclopedia written and it still wouldn’t cover all the atrocities he was responsible for, but that’s another topic.

I don’t see how anyone would be ok with feeding this baby formula to their children, 70 years before Duff discovered that their product was too “ready made” and had to change their formula to make it seem more healthy.

“The housewife and the purchasing public in general seem to prefer fresh eggs and hence the use of dried or powdered eggs is somewhat of a handicap from a psychological standpoint,” Duff wrote in the application.

It was not an easy transition for people to be accepting and purchase this product. It was a result of very effective brainwashing techniques.

Nestlé_Food_advertisement,_1915

This advertisement is from 1915, and was reportedly the first major breakthrough in the baby formula business. Going from the available information regarding Duff, it’s safe to say that this wasn’t selling until they employed a different marketing campaign. They began using science as a means to convince the public. The top paragraph in this picture is interesting, because they recommend using Boric Acid on baby gums even though Boric Acid has a very high toxicity in babies. This shows how little these companies care about public health.

It is claimed that there were many women that weren’t able to produce milk for their children over the course of history. But i seriously believe that all of the figures that claim this, are fabricated in order to change the perception people have regarding baby formula. I however, believe that EVERY mother can produce milk for their children, if they aren’t suffering from some kind of medical issue (toxicity overload).

There are numerous resources available that claim that many babies had medical issues (many died) as a direct result of using baby formula.

At the dawn of the 20th century in the United States, most infants were breastfed, although many received some formula feeding as well. Home-made “percentage method” formulas were more commonly used than commercial formulas in both Europe and the United States. They were less expensive and were widely believed to be healthier. However, formula-fed babies exhibited more diet-associated medical problems, such as scurvy, rickets and bacterial infections than breastfed babies. - Wikipedia: Infant Formula

But why was this happening, what was the reason all these babies were getting deathly sick?
The scientific and medical establishments have said that antibodies are transferred from the mother to baby through breast milk, along with other things like traveling through the birth canal. But I’m sure there is much more to it than that.

There is in milk, beside the different nutritious principles, an invisible element, the element of life itself, a fugitive gas which is so volatile that it escapes as soon as the milk is in contact with the air. This is why it is impossible to rear infants with animal milk or with milk which has been expressed from the breast. - Alfonse Le Roy (British Medical Journal: A HISTORY OF INFANT FEEDING)

There is definitely enough evidence to support that depriving infants of breast milk, creates sick babies that are unable to withstand circumstances that a breastfed baby would handle with ease.

Timeline Of Formula Adoption

By 1883, there were 27 patented brands of infant food (Fomon, 2001). These commercial products came in powdered form and consisted of carbohydrates such as sugars, starches, and dextrins that were to be added to milk. Name brands for the products included “Nestlé’s Food®, Horlick’s Malted Milk®, Hill’s Malted Biscuit Powder®, Mellin’s Food®, Eskay’s Food®, Imperial Granum®, and Robinson’s Patent Barley®” (Radbill, 1981, p. 619). The foods were fattening but lacked valuable nutrients like protein, vitamins, and minerals. Over time, the nutrients were individually added (Radbill, 1981). - NCBI: The History Of Infant Feeding

So let’s just assume that Nestle’s marketing campaign worked with their release of their formula in 1915. So from 1915 onwards, more and more babies were being raised on formulas. I can logically deduce that the increasing number of “outbreaks” were heavily influenced by the mass adoption of formula.

A survey of a number of urban centers in 1912–1919 indicated that at 12 mo of age, 13% of infants were exclusively breast-fed and 45% were partially breast-fed (Yankauer 1994).

Data from the National Fertility Study, indicate that

  • 1931 to 1935, >70% of first-born infants and a somewhat lesser percentage of second-born infants were initially breast-fed and 40% of infants were breast-fed for at least 6 mo.

1935 - 60% formula fed after 6 months

  • By 1946–1950, initial breast-feeding of first-born infants had decreased to 50% and only 20% were breast-fed for at least 6 mo.

1950 - 80% Formula fed after 6 months

  • During the 1950s and 1960s, the trend in breast-feeding was steadily downward, and by the early 1970s, only ∼25% of infants were breast-fed at age 1 wk and only 14% between 2 and 3 mo of age

1970 - 86% Formula fed after 3 months.

This is crazy, because in less than 50 years, practically nobody was breastfeeding anymore. Nobody seems to bring this up when everyone is screaming and shouting about needing protection from viruses via vaccines.

So at the very least we could say that after 1931, there should have been a huge influx of disease. Using logic and statistics, it would gradually continue getting worse and worse.

Pandemics Of The 1900s

So from the information I’ve been able to gather… By the year 1900, people were using formula enough for there to be 27 patented brands. By 1935, 60% of babies were not getting breastmilk after 6 months of age.

  • 1916 - Polio: More than 7,000 were reportedly killed in America

  • 1918-1920 - Spanish Flu wiped out 675,000 Americans (reportedly) and 17,000,000 to 100,000,000 worldwide, which is a huge variance.

  • 1921-1925 - Diphtheria killed 206,000 in America (and isn’t even listed on Wikipedia).

  • 1946 - Polio: 1,875 in America.

So this is only a very tiny portion of time when looking at the entire history of pandemics. The weird thing about this is that other than the flu (spanish flu or H1N1) none of these particular diseases had ever caused a pandemic (reportedly) before, so my question is what changed?

People had been living in largely populated cities a century before. Beijing, China had 1.1 Million, London had a population of 1 million, and there are numerous other cities that had pretty large populations. But it wasn’t until after the 1900’s that all these new diseases started to pop up and wipe out all these people.

There are obviously many different factors at play here, like pesticides and synthetic ingredients being used in foods and beauty products. We all should know by now, that buildup of toxins is the main reason for sickness and disease. I would bet that these things would be affecting people much less, if they were able to obtain the life force transferred to baby via breastfeeding, and the absense of toxins that naturally comes with it.

After all, baby formula has been filled with toxins from the very beginning, and I would bet money on this following statement.

If there were half as many babies being fed formula, then the number of people that died during these pandemics would be much less than they were.

But at the very least, it should be realized after seeing the information here, that the diseases that have plagued the recent past, have been created as a direct result of man seperating himself from nature, and attempting to improve on it.

Feeding your baby from a can is literally disturbing nature.

And if you haven’t learned about what truly makes us sick, here is more info.

Germ Theory Hoax: Coronavirus Can’t Make You Sick and Vaccines Don’t Work (Part 1)

2 Likes

Great work! I had never thought about this topic. All I thought at first was, how can people not feed their babies milk from the mother, seems so logical, but then I remembered the popularity of these baby formula products from the shops, tv, etc. It would be interesting to see the statistics of this century, if there are some.

3 Likes

Yes Great work ohellno!
Removing us from Nature, by trying to improve it. And man did they do a good job at it. All we have to do is look around us to see how it worked. And of course, look at our own individual life up. Untill this moment.
Of course they would start it in our infancy what better way. What deception . They also convinced mothers to not hold there babies and that is was good for them… Because they had so much work to do around the home, therefore, distancing us from our children, our babies. removing our own maternal instincts , and leading woman into consumerism right?! They most likely had already planned out, the future of woman. , mothers in the outside work force. We have been manipulated in every aspect of living.

2 Likes

Nice point mentioning Edward Bernays,I also see his uncle was Sigmund Freud so id have to also read more on him.

He was also the man that was most influential in making everyone believe breakfast is “the most important meal of the day”.

whoah that’s new,do you believe all meals weigh an equal weight in helping our bodies,and in so none more important than the other? @ohellno

along with other things like traveling through the birth canal. But I’m sure there is much more to it than that.

you should definitely write on this,its intriguing to know about the benefits of birth via the birth canal.

good point on creating the pandemics and the sabotage of natural balanced life right from the moment of birth.

2 Likes

@Subject1 Yeah I haven’t looked too far past the 1950’s, but from what I’ve gathered it just kept rising until a little later in the early 2000’s or so, now the numbers of breastfed babies is on a steady increase. Which should tell you something about whether or not it truly is as good as they say it is. Here’s a more recent article which states they are increasing.

@Pmugridge Yeah I can’t believe people would actually believe that, I’ve seen the suggestion for parents to not look into their children’s eyes for some reason (I don’t remember why). But the craziest part of all of this deception, is that people seem happy to eat it all up!

@ids Yeah that’s awesome you have heard who he was, I almost mentioned his uncle in this article but didn’t end up doing it. Both of them were geniuses and could have done so much good in the world, had they aimed to do that.

I think maybe some day I will write a little more on the whole process of birth and how the medical system has destroyed the process of natural births. I learned a lot during my girlfriends pregnancy about this and I am positive that the main goal of all the planned c-sections and induced births, is to take something that is usually pretty random, and be able to schedule them. It’s crazy and shouldn’t even be legal!

Thanks for the comments everyone!

2 Likes

Looking into baby’s eyes. I just seen an episode of modern family where the daughter was trying to put her twin babies to sleep. And told the mpm " no eye contact because it would cause them to stay awake. Stimulate them Is my guess. I’m betting its just the opposite. This reminds me of more info suggesting, babies sleeping with mom keeps them up through the night. This seperation seemed to work for Zara. But not with Aiva.

Can we republish this?

1 Like

Hi, and welcome to the forum. Everything posted here is copyrighted (All Rights Reserved) by the original creator immediately upon posting unless otherwise stated in the post.

So you can quote a portion of it and link here to the original, but not republish the entire thing. Where are you wanting to republish?

I was born in the 50’s and my mother was a modern woman and believed breastfeeding was backwards. I’m eternally grateful for my paternal grandmother! She gently shared with me her experiences breastfeeding my dad and aunt. She created a desire in me to experience what she had experienced with her children. Watching them look in your eyes as you feed them. Talking to them and see their smile as they drink. There is a bond that happens when a woman breastfeeds her baby. So impressed to hear your girlfriend is breastfeeding her babies. Blessed babies indeed!

1 Like

Yeah I was sorta jealous at the beginning because I couldn’t even calm my daughter down until probably the second or third month and all she had to do was put her on her boob.

I think it definitely took longer for us to get a bond because she is. But yeah I do believe the older generation (my grandmother’s) were definitely a lot closer to nature and sometimes I wish I could have lived back then.

That’s great that she shared those experiences with you. The propaganda around breastfeeding is so crazy. All these people upset that a woman is naturally feeding her baby on a park bench but yet they can scarf down a big mac and supersize fries.

I’m convinced that the only reason people have even mentioned it being not publicly acceptable was propaganda and manipulation by the formula companies. It is absolute madness.

But yeah, the people living back then had it right. They were smarter, more talented and much more capable human beings altogether.
Regardless of what they say the average lifespan was back then, I can assure you that they were most definitely living longer than were are today. They say it just keeps increasing but how is that possible when they are all organic food, had much cleaner air because nobody was spraying chem trails and people weren’t stationary all day in front of the TV all day.

© Copyright 2020 ParentOfSociety, Inc. All rights reserved.