Executives in desperate need of donor breastmilk (Part 1)
Posted February 7, 2010
Part 1: The complex evolution of breastmilk
Human breast milk is not reproducible, but can be collected from donors.
Breast milk is full of active proteins and other complex biomolecules. As a scientist who struggles to purify stable, soluble, biologically active proteins (or even small fragments of them), I know how difficult and expensive it is to do this. Figuring out how to produce even one milligram of one protein that is still folded (shaped properly) and active (able to work like a tiny machine) can take a year.
The protein content listed on a formula label refers to what's left of once-active proteins that are now unfolded, inactive, and simply a source of amino acids. Formula provides protein as well as carbohydrate and fat for food calories, it's cheap and easy to produce, and it's nothing like breast milk.
Breast milk actually evolved as part of the immune system, not as a method for feeding. It started as an antimicrobial fluid, not a food. This ancestral substance was composed primarily of complex immune-related proteins and biomolecules and acted then as it does today - as a system for properly establishing the immune system of a newborn under the direct guidance of the parental immune system. Mammals now produce breastmilk that also contains lactose and lipids, which provide sustenance (a later evolutionary flourish).
Infant formula is not synthetic breastmilk. Creating synthetic breastmilk would be a feat comparable to making synthetic blood. Anyone who considers the problem will quickly realize that, like blood, there is only one way to get breast milk - from a donor.
Since breast milk is such a precious, useful substance I wasn't surprised to learn that, like Telacris and CSL Behring, companies that make therapeutics from blood plasma, another company has figured out what a commerical goldmine donor breast milk - processed and sold as a biotherapeutic - could be.
Enter Prolacta, a company that has spent an enormous amount of time and effort researching human breastmilk - what's in it, why it's medically important, how it can be effectively collected, safety checked, pasteurized, processed, and sold at a profit.
The work Prolacta does is good for breastfeeding science, and for the image of breast milk. Prolacta supports an excellent charity (the IMBP). It also helps a lot of severely premature babies, because they sell a breast milk version of human milk fortifier (HMF) - an additive that boosts the calories in milk fed to those babies in the NICU. Unfortunately, the way they get the milk is pretty devious.
Next:
Part 2. The Prolacta/IMBP Controversy Recap (this story broke in 2007) - preview this Lactivist article
Part 3. How much breastmilk donated for Haiti will actaully make it to Haiti?
Part 4. Paying moms for breastmilk (shudder) - could there be a silver lining?
Recent Posts
Comments
Can't wait to read your
Can't wait to read your criticism about Prolacta in Part II -- unless you yourself have had a preemie in the NICU or you have had a loved one with a preemie in the NICU, then you wouldn't know much about what Prolacta does in the collection process, which is more transparent then even the Red Cross, which collects blood without paying donors, yet sells blood and plasma to pharma for their development of blood products.
I guess it is "devious" if you don;t like Prolacta and the fact that they collect breast milk and use it to make "for-profit" lifesaving products. So why don;t you just say that?
Please Read On
Dear Lindsay,
Thanks for your comment. I certainly hope you will read the rest of the posts. As someone planning a career in pharmaceutical development, I am the last person to argue against for-profit lifesaving products. I believe that a for-profit captialstic model drives reasearch and innovation and brings us amazing biotherapeutics like Prolacta's HMF. The point of my posts is not to slam Prolacta. If you read them you will see that my ultimate thesis is not that Prolacta is hiding something bad and evil. It's that Prolacta is hiding something that does not need to be hidden. Being up front with potential donors and the public about exactly how donor milk is processed into a profitable biotherapeutic will allow mothers to be cognizant participants in this life saving process. It will also get the breastfeeding community used to the idea of Prolacta becoming more of a brand name - as it promises to become as their HMF products become more widely availble (to the benefit of many).
Heather
Hiding in plain sight?
Ok. I will read the rest of your posts. Primarily because i am intrigued since you indicate they are hiding something and are not being upfront with donors.....their website clearly indicates that they do not pay donors (and why); that they use the donated milk to make the human milk products; and that they are a for-profit company.
I guess i will never understand people who are breastfeeding advocates, and oppose using cow milk products for babies in the hospital - yet when a for profit company finally fills this void (because nonprofits have not been able to do this) - it is still not good enough.
For anyone who has held a preemie in their hands and seen how truly vulnerable they are: why are we fighting the only company that has been able to replace cow milk products - which has NO place in a NICU? If you have ever been in a NICU, please point out which drugs, machines, or services are provided by a nonprofit?