Action Needed: Real Simple Magazine Falsely Representing Breastfeeding - Page 6 - Mothering Forums

Thread Tools
#151 of 155 Old 09-15-2003, 10:48 PM
DaryLLL's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Under a Chimpocracy
Posts: 13,153
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I just looked at the new issue in Borders. Did not buy it of course.

Saw the tiny sidebar in an article about a female pediatrician. Her first health tip for babies, breast-feed. Listing a few "benefits." Abt 6 of them out of the hundred or so. And of course, bfing is not beneficial, ABM feeding is hazardous.

Then she goes on to rec vaccines, downplaying side effects.

Saw the access code to the website hidden cleverly in the mag. CLOSET. Went to the webiste just now. Did not need access code.,00.html

Saw letters. Equal amt pro and con the original article. Letters embellished by---a photo of a baby being bottle fed!!!!

OK, maybe it was pumped human milk in the bottle. I am just wanting to believe this, but really, why did they do that?

One of the letters was from a sad mom with what seemed like real supply issues. She said LCs were "mercilessly egging her on" to nurse!

Even in the pro-bfing letters, the mag published ones with inaccurate bfing info!

This is so bad
DaryLLL is offline  
Sponsored Links
#152 of 155 Old 09-15-2003, 11:52 PM
abigailvr's Avatar
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Our own house, finally!
Posts: 3,165
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Not that it excuses it, but I believe that is the photo they used with the original article.

I am constantly baffled by women who say there is too much pressure to nurse. Too much pressure when there are bottles every where you look! Ridiculous.
abigailvr is offline  
#153 of 155 Old 09-16-2003, 08:53 AM
Justice2's Avatar
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Making tea
Posts: 2,643
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I am not sure which one, but it's either the first or the second "Thank you so much for your article" letter sounds incredibly similar to their form response that they sent to everyone....just trying to make women feel less guilty for trying and not being able to bf.....I am willing to bet that those letters were probably written by the same person that sent those form responses. Lord, do I sound cynical or what???
Justice2 is offline  
#154 of 155 Old 09-16-2003, 09:28 AM
reagan's Avatar
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Cleveland, Ohio
Posts: 16
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
just trying to make women feel less guilty for trying and not being able to bf.....

I have been keeping a PG Blog (, which helps keep friends/family updated on my pregnancy without inundating everyone with e-mails...

I posted on my blog about the Real Simple issue, including my letter to the magazine (and a link to Mothering! )

I received an e-mail from one friend in Australia (3 kids, all c-sections, all FF) saying that she agreed with the RS article; that she found BF to be too hard and too time-consuming; that FF made it so that her DH could help with feeds. She said she was glad to see that the magazine addressed FF-ing to make women who "couldn't BF" feel less-guilty.

As you know, here's the magazine's response on their Web site:

"But not all mothers are able to nurse for the 12 months recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics. The advice in the article is intended for those women — women who sincerely want to do the right thing but are defeated by circumstance and subsequently saddled by guilt. In no way are we suggesting that breast-feeding is a waste of time."
I excerpted this to my Aussie friend, and explained to her that, if RS truly wanted to offer comfort to these supposedly "defeated" or "guilt-ridden" women, then perhaps they should have written an insightful, sensitive article dedicated to the subject, instead of a 200-word blurb sandwiched between "What's the worst that can happen -- if you jaywalk?" or "if you sneak your own food into a movie theatre?" or "if you wash your dog with human shampoo?" Further, I explained that I view this as intellectual dishonesty, especially since the OB/GYN they used has taken fellowship monies from a company that makes infant formulas.... at the very least, he's a less-than-objective party.:

I think I was able to make the point that it isn't about BF vs. FF; it's how the matter was handled, from start to finish, by the magazine.
reagan is offline  
#155 of 155 Old 09-23-2003, 02:45 AM
ma2maya's Avatar
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dy-er's Paradise
Posts: 1,305
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
So this morning the editor(or one of them?) was on the Today Show doing a piece on home organizing. At the end of the piece she said that it was the mags goal to make life better for everybody(uh-huh). Although the piece had nothing to do with their uninformed and biased article in the August issue, I still wrote an email to NBC.
In the email I briefly mentioned the article and then went on to suggest that in the interest of public health and the well-being of our nations children, they should do a piece on the benefits of breastfeeding.
So what do you gals think? Maybe if we send in enough emails it might spark somebody's attention.
I sent my email to the following address and mentioned Real Simple Magazine in the Subject header.

Desert Dyeworks Hey, we like color and silk!
Check out our 10% multiple items discount!
ma2maya is offline  

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Online Users: 14,843

23 members and 14,820 guests
agentofchaos , beckyleeh , Bufomander , esg , girlspn , hillymum , IsaFrench , Kate_H21 , lisak1234 , MartinaTempleton , MarylandMommy , moominmamma , Motherof3already , NaturallyKait , RollerCoasterMama , rubelin , sciencemum , sren , vilongacarla , worthy , Xerxella
Most users ever online was 449,755, 06-25-2014 at 12:21 PM.