I am not sure that I understand this. It is OK to make parents "feel guilty" about second hand smoke (even when the science isn't there), but it is butting into people's business and improperly making them feel guilty to say that children are better off being breast feed. I definitely don't think that the government should get involved in either case, but is it me or is it just that there is a bias against making women feel that they should stay home raising their kids? Child-rearing experts have long pointed to the benefits of breast-feeding. But critics say the new campaign has taken things too far and will make mothers who cannot breast-feed, or choose not to, feel guilty and inadequate. . . .
urging women to breast-feed exclusively is a tall order in a country where more than 60 percent of mothers of very young children work, federal law requires large companies to provide only 12 weeks' unpaid maternity leave and lactation leave is unheard of. Only a third of large companies provide a private, secure area where women can express breast milk during the workday, and only 7 percent offer on-site or near-site child care, according to a 2005 national study of employers by the nonprofit Families and Work Institute.
One could also add how having a child and breast-feeding, especially when the woman is at a relatively young age, reduces the risks of breast cancer. (This study doesn't differentiate by the age of the mother when she starts breast-feeding and this average effect hides the big benefit of doing it at younger ages.)The study involved 50,302 women with breast cancer and 96,973 without the disease. According to the study, a woman's risk for breast cancer decreased by about 4.3 percent for every 12 months she breast-fed. The risk went down 7 percent more for every child born.