Originally published September 27 2010
It's not the bugs in Similac that make me sick - let's recall the other ingredients (opinion)
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor
(NaturalNews) It has been a few days since Abbott Laboratories, makers of Similac infant formula, issued a recall after discovering some of its products may have been contaminated with beetles (and beetle larvae). The mainstream media ran with this story and parents everywhere suddenly got concerned that their babies might be drinking beetle parts.
But are beetles really the scariest thing in Similac? Not by a long shot if you know anything about nutrition.
I purchased a 24-oz container of Similac Go & Grow soy-based formula, emblazoned with a cute teddy bear on the front label and positioned towards "9 to 24 months." It comes with the claim "balanced nutrition for older babies." But is it really balanced nutrition?
42.6% corn syrup solidsThe very first ingredient, shown right on the label, is 42.6% CORN SYRUP SOLIDS.
I took a picture of the ingredients label so you can see it for yourself. Click here to see the pic: http://naturalnews.com/images/Similac-Label-...
Stop right there. Are they saying that Similac infant formula is 42.6% corn syrup solids? That's a form of highly processed sugar. Is this really what infants need -- nearly half their formula to be made of corn syrup sugars? Nutritionists would strongly disagree.
But it gets even better: The next ingredient is 14.7% SOY PROTEIN ISOLATE. Most soy protein, as NaturalNews readers already know, is derived from a hexane chemical extraction process that we've covered in previous articles: http://www.naturalnews.com/026303_soy_protei...
Beyond the hexane question, did you know that 91% of the soy fields grown in America contain genetically modified soy? The Similac can does not say "non-GMO soy" because it's not required to be put on the label (thanks to the FDA shell game). But Consumer Reports actually bought and tested infant formula for genetically engineered DNA and found that Similac was using GMO soy in their products. (http://www.consumersunion.org/food/gefny999....)
The next ingredient in the Similac can I bought is 11.5% HIGH OLEIC SAFFLOWER OIL, followed by 10.1% SUGAR (SUCROSE).
If you're doing the math on this, that makes Similac 52.7% sugar (corn syrup solids plus the sucrose) with soy protein. I can hardly think of a better way to raise diabetic, obese children than to feed them a diet that's over 50 percent sugar. It also seems like a great way to get infants addicted to sugar -- a curse that will haunt them through the rest of their lives.
Next on the list is 8.4% SOY OIL (most likely from GMO soybeans, too) and then 7.8% COCONUT OIL (which is, in my opinion, the only healthy ingredient in the entire product).
Basically, then, this Similac product is sugared-up soy protein with safflower and soy oil.
Plus it has some chemical "vitamins" on the label such as CYANOCOBALAMIN, the cheapest form of vitamin B-12 available to food manufacturers. It actually binds the vitamin to a cyanide molecule, just in case you were wondering.
As wikipedia explains, "B12 refers to a group of cobalt-containing vitamer compounds known as cobalamins: these include cyanocobalamin (an artifact formed as a result of the use of cyanide in the purification procedures)."
It then adds, "the cyanocobalamin form of B12 does not occur in nature normally, but is a byproduct of the fact that other forms of B12 are avid binders of cyanide (-CN) which they pick up in the process of activated charcoal purification of the vitamin after it is made by bacteria in the commercial process. Since the cyanocobalamin form of B12 is easy to crystallize and is not sensitive to air-oxidation, it is typically used as a form of B12 for food additives and in many common multivitamins." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vitamin_B12)
Why Similac should have been recalled long before the beetle incidentWith this in mind, what we really have with Similac infant formula is powered sugars, genetically modified soy protein, more sugar, safflower and soy oils, a bit of coconut oil and some vitamin chemicals made with cyanide molecules. They also throw in some DHA to make moms think it must somehow resemble breast milk fats.
Are you beginning to see why the beetles are the least of the problems with this product?
Keep in mind that ignorant moms are feeding this stuff to their babies every single day! They think it's good for their babies because they don't take the time to read ingredient labels (or they are unable to understand what the labels mean). But make no mistake: I can't think of a single informed nutritionist who would recommend feeding babies a powder that's more than 50% sugar combined with genetically modified soy protein. To do so is actually nutritional child abuse in my view.
That's why I say Similac should be recalled just based on what's on the label! In my opinion, this is a dangerous combination of sugars and genetically modified ingredients that are likely to promote diabetes, obesity and nutritional imbalances in babies. To feed this to babies is to nutritionally cause them harm, in my opinion... and to think that Abbott Laboratories is making money selling this sugared-up GMO soy protein to consumers just makes me sick.
I think their slogan should be something like, "Similac - Creating tomorrow's diabetics, one baby at a time."
See the ingredients label yourself right here: http://naturalnews.com/images/Similac-Label-...
Help spread the wordPlease share this story and send it to moms, dads and anyone who has an infant. Don't let them feed their babies sugars and GMO soy protein!
You have my permission to post this story in full, but please give credit back to this page on NaturalNews.com and cite Mike Adams as the author.
We need to reach all the parents who are buying Similac and unknowingly feeding their babies corn syrup solids, GMO soy protein, soy oil, sucrose and other ingredients that I consider to be "pure junk." No society should allow this junk to be fed to their babies, especially if they're trying to prevent obesity, diabetes, heart disease and other chronic health problems that are already bankrupting the nation.
In my opinion, Similac might be the perfect product to raise a generation of Big Pharma customers who will need a whole battery of prescription drugs to "treat" all the degenerative health conditions caused by eating dead, processed, sugared-up and genetically modified foods. To imagine that this could somehow be a replacement for the rich, complex nutritional abundance of mother's milk is nutritionally insane.
Ridiculously overpricedWith Similac, there's also the price issue. Considering how cheap these ingredients are, this product seems ridiculously overpriced. If you really wanted to feed your baby something almost identical to this, you could just buy your own table sugar (cheaper than dirt), isolated soy protein (also cheaper than dirt), safflower oil (almost cheaper than dirt) and some coconut oil or flax oil (not so cheap, but you don't need to use much) then mix it all up and add water.
But what mom in her right mind would do such a crazy thing? No mom in her right mind would mix up 50% table sugar in a bottle and feed it to her baby, but that's essentially what she's doing when feeding her baby this variety of Similac that I purchased.
Nutritional insanity has reached a new low with Similac, I submit, and the beetles are the least of the problems with this product line that borders on "nutritional child abuse."
There should seriously be a law against infant formula being made with corn syrup solids and sucrose, not to mention GMO ingredients.
Spread the word, folks. That's the only way people will find out the truth about this and start choosing something that's healthier for their babies. If we hope to have healthy adults in the future, we have to stop nutritionally abusing them when they're infants.
All content posted on this site is commentary or opinion and is protected under Free Speech. Truth Publishing LLC takes sole responsibility for all content. Truth Publishing sells no hard products and earns no money from the recommendation of products. NaturalNews.com is presented for educational and commentary purposes only and should not be construed as professional advice from any licensed practitioner. Truth Publishing assumes no responsibility for the use or misuse of this material. For the full terms of usage of this material, visit www.NaturalNews.com/terms.shtml