Swindled: The Ugly Side of Milk Donation

Wow.  This post sends my mind buzzing.  This is all new to me – I’m glad that I learned about this long before I was ever put in the position to donate breast milk.  Thank you so much for sharing.  It really shocks and frightens me how soulless some corporations are.

Thank you for taking the time to put this information here. 

This is a beautiful compilation of data about a really ugly thing. Thank you for putting it together so we can make informed donations.

It kind of reminds me about the revelations about the Red Cross post 9/11.

That’s some shenanigans you dug up right there.  Crikey.

Or, as my digital strategist of a marketing husband said, “Brilliant.  That’s brilliant.  It’s not NICE, not at all.  But wow, brilliant.”

is there anything that we can do?  if there is please somebody email me.  blakefernandez@live.com

it is so frustrating. 

I have been a donor for many years but I prefer mother to mother donation. 

As a mom of 4 preemies i really understand the unique needs of preemies, and am happy there are products specially made for them, but I do not like that the process exploits mamas.

[...] at Just West of Crunchy just posted Swindled: The Ugly Side of Milk Donation about Prolacta Biosciences and I think that everyone needs to go read it now. With breastmilk [...]

Thank you so much for sharing this!  I am actually a donor for San Gabriel, and I had no idea that this was an issue.  My certification runs out in a week and I hadn’t sent anything.  For whatever reason it hadn’t set right.  Now I know why!  I won’t be sending my milk to them.  

OMG this is disgusting! I had no idea! I need to come back and read the rest of your post, I only got about half way through and have to head out the door. Yikes!

Honestly I think this is an overreaction.  Blood banks do the same thing.  Anyone with a brain knows that while blood and milk are “free” to the person that donates, it takes money to collect, test, process, and distribute these resources.  Why shouldn’t the innovative company who has spent the money to develop this business plan make money on it?  Prolacta GAVE me a free very nice double electric breast pump, plus all the bottles to send in the milk, in exchange for my donations.  At the end of the day, the milk does help preemies.  I fail to see the scandal here.  

Honestly I think this is an overreaction.  Blood banks do the same thing.  Anyone with a brain knows that while blood and milk are “free” to the person that donates, it takes money to collect, test, process, and distribute these resources.  Why shouldn’t the innovative company who has spent the money to develop this business plan make money on it?  Prolacta GAVE me a free very nice double electric breast pump, plus all the bottles to send in the milk, in exchange for my donations.  At the end of the day, the milk does help preemies.  I fail to see the scandal here.  

Honestly I think this is an overreaction.  Blood banks do the same thing.  Anyone with a brain knows that while blood and milk are “free” to the person that donates, it takes money to collect, test, process, and distribute these resources.  Why shouldn’t the innovative company who has spent the money to develop this business plan make money on it?  Prolacta GAVE me a free very nice double electric breast pump, plus all the bottles to send in the milk, in exchange for my donations.  At the end of the day, the milk does help preemies.  I fail to see the scandal here.  

It’s not so much the for-profit business model. It’s the dishonest marketing
and the fact that they’re not forthcoming about their business model when
moms donate.

It’s not so much the for-profit business model. It’s the dishonest marketing
and the fact that they’re not forthcoming about their business model when
moms donate.

I agree that these sites are not being honest, but moms who “donate” to prolacta get a free double electric breast pump. Free – and theirs to keep, give away, sell. And Prolacta is providing a much needed product a breast milk “fortifier” made from all human milk – the commercial breast milk “fortifiers” made for preemies have high fructose corn syrup as their 1st ingredient. Would you give your preemie basically coca cola? Prolacta is no different than blood banks.

I believe that used to be the case, but isn’t any longer. From Prolacta’s
website:

“The milk bank will provide each donor with breast milk storage bags for
storing their expressed milk once the donor becomes qualified. Donors will
need to obtain a breast pump to express their milk for donation.”

Prolacta has the same business model as blood banks, but blood banks don’t
mislead donors in their marketing and donor recruitment. There’s a major
difference. Keep in mind that I’m not necessarily criticizing the for-profit
business model; I’m criticizing the fact that donors are led to believe
their milk is going to babies, not being passed through a middle-man as raw
material to create a product.

@ Leigh, you don’t see anything wrong with them making a profit? Did you read the entire article? This directly affects babies around the world as well as puts non-profit milk banks in jeopardy due to the direct “competition” from this horrible company that is partnered with the maker of Similac. All they’re seeing with their “research” is big dollar signs and a get rich scheme aimed at taking advantage of mothers and their babies. Now, tell me, is your electric breast pump really worth it? Yes, anyone with a “brain” understands it takes funds to support something such as a milk bank, but that’s where nonprofit comes in, they only charge what they have to in order to  support the process. They do not make a profit from it.

[...] out of their milk donations so that Prolacta Bioscience (formula company) can PROFIT from them. Swindled: The Ugly Side of Milk Donation Please become aware and do not get involved with any private milk banks that are selling breast [...]

[...] article that absolutely horrified me. Written by Amy on Just West of Crunchy, the article is called Swindled: The Ugly Side of Milk Donation. It’s US-based, rather than Irish, and I don’t think this issue applies to Ireland [...]

I’m confused about the blood bank comparison.  Blood banks are non-profit, they don’t pay their donors and they don’t make a profit.  There are costs involved with the collection, testing and distribution of blood that is collected and they charge a fee that covers those costs to the hosptials, individuals using it, but not enough to profit.

There are some for-profit plasma collection centers, but they pay their donors.  So we’re not comparing apples to apples.

As a doula and CLC I have been posting and complaining about this group of fake milk banks  for ages! 

 All of these for profit milk banks listed are shills for the formula companies. It’s a scam they run, and  they have some fancy corporate bullshit sales pitch that is very convincing when women question them.

Unsuspecting mothers donate their milk and these companies like Milkin Mamas resells it to the formula company.
 Everyone makes money but the mother whose donated the milk.
 
Sickening!

I think if my math is right, the milk that is shipped to Africa will feed just under 11 infants breastmilk for one year. Twenty five percent of 400,000 ounces=100,000 ounces. Divided by appx. 25 ounces per day=4000 days of milk. Divided by 365 days in a year, feeds 10.95 infants a year. That is wonderful for those almost 11 babies. But when you break it down it doesn’t seem like more than a token gesture to make them look good.

“Prolacta has the same business model as blood banks, but blood banks don’t

mislead donors in their marketing and donor recruitment. There’s a major

difference.”

EXACTLY. I think if you donated blood on a regular basis out of the goodness of your heart, believing it would go to people in need, being led to believe this was the case by the company taking the donations, and you found out later that the company was instead taking YOUR BLOOD and using it to create a product that was turning out profits, wouldn’t you be furious?

Please tell me this is all a horrible urban legend. “And then the moms woke up in the hotel bathtub with the pump still attached and “CALL 911″ written on the mirror.” Right? RIGHT???

Thanks for clearing that up and showing the distinction between the business
model blood banks use VS Prolacta’s. Much appreciated!

Just want to clarify here that Prolacta isn’t a formula company. They’ve
partnered with Abbott, which is, but I just want to be sure things are clear
and fair here.

Wow, Katie – THANK YOU for bringing this to my attention. I had no idea.
Looking into it further…

“Do you think Prolacta’s business model is fair to moms? Is it ethical?”
 
Formula companies are unscrupulous, ethical practices are never considered in the equation of their business practices.  Asking the question is a ridiculous inquiry. I’ll tell you why.
 
Similac formula the same parent company of Proclata (Abbott nutrition) is now fraudulently advertising that they  offer  ”lactation specialist” and “breastfeeding specialist” hot lines and web forums where some unqualified not a real lacation consultant or IBCLC they have giving information about breastfeeding problems.
They literally gave the fox the job of feeding the chickens in the coop! 
 
What is unethical is your expose is what the women running the for-profit Milk banks, what they are doing and their connection with Prolacta and formula industry. That is unethical selling  donated breatmilk to a Prolacta.
 
If only all those mom knew the truth that there milk was going to a formula company that resells the milk. Everyone making a profit form the kindness of lacation woman.
 
 
 
 

It does not work like a blood bank!
Real non-profit milk banks work like real blood banks.

The formula company makes a huge profit, and the cost to the hospital/insurance/consumers is 10x the cost of real milk bank prescribed milk!

Another major issue that you and these companies gloss over is that these for profit milk banks DO NOT follow the WHO International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes .

Yes, the world is made up of for-profit companies. These milk banks and Prolacta like to use that as a smoke screen that there is nothing wrong with making and needing  to earn profits. I agree, but  the big difference is they do not follow WHO. They are unscrupulous and unethical how they market!

I’m proud to be a for profit business that follows the WHO International Code of Marketing of Breast-Milk Substitutes.

Very good to know. I was looking at milk banks online just casually, I think if I had a freezer stash to donate though I would definitely try to donate informally, then donate the rest to a not-for-profit bank.

To clarify, I don’t believe Abbott is the parent company of Prolacta. The
two have partnered on marketing, but I don’t believe they are related beyond
that relationship.

I’m not sure how Prolacta is covered by WHO, as it doesn’t make or market
breast milk substitutes.

Abbott is *not* Prolacta’s parent company. The two otherwise separate companies have a co-marketing agreement under which Abbott reps market Prolacta products in NICUs.

The IBMP is very upfront about partnering with Prolacta and as a donor of 9 gallons to the IBMP, I knew exactly what was becoming of my milk. As it happens, the majority of the milk I donated to the IBMP, via Prolacta, ended up in South Africa because Prolacta “donated” their share. However, I would’ve been entirely delighted at only 25% of my milk making it to South Africa.  The IBMP had to turn away donors for a long time because they couldn’t afford to ship any more to South Africa. That’s milk not getting to HIV/AIDS orphans. I don’t want to place a value judgement on the lives of babies in need of breast milk, but I’m pretty comfortable with 1/4 going to HIV/AIDS orphans and 3/4 going to preemies. The IBMP has also managed to start milk banks locally in South Africa that Prolacta has no stake in.

As to HIV+ mothers nursing their babies… that happens, for those babies lucky enough to have a mother who is healthy enough to nurse them. Unfortunately, as many as ONE IN THREE South African mothers of newborns is HIV+, most with no access to ARVs. That spells an alarming number of babies orphaned in the first year of life, who received NO immunity from their mothers in the womb or through her milk.

Wow…that is sick.  I donate directly to another mama.  I KNOW where my  milk is going. 

And what do they mean when they say they’re only collecting surplus milk that would otherwise be poured down the drain?!  Who pumps milk just to dump it down the drain???

You’ve actually made my point: some of the money being donated to IMBP by
Prolacta could go to antiretrovirals, which are a far more efficient
treatment mechanism than donor breast milk; not to mention that they are a
boon to the health of the mother, where donor milk does nothing.

And it’s a stretch to say Prolacta has no stake in anything related to IMBP,
since they’re so heavily funded by Prolacta donations. I’m sure some
creative accounting could get that statement to work, but I think it would
be a farse.

So, yeah: ARVs for moms are a better solution than donor milk, if mom can
manage to breastfeed. I don’t know how much that can even be debated.

Exactly!

So what do we do to make this post come up on the first page of Google results when a momma searches for milk donation info?

Good question! Link to it from outside sites – lot of ‘em!! – that’d be a
good start.

I discovered just this thing when I was thinking about donating breast milk.  I rethought it and kept it in the freezer.  Fortunately, the women I know have an informal network when a mama is in need.

I really went out of my way to remove my personal opinion from this and not be hyperbolic; I hope it hasn’t come off that way.

I agree that their reasons for not paying moms are compelling.

My primary issue is not that they profit, but that they deceive moms in their marketing and recruiting. The existence of a middle man here (a buffer to keep moms from knowing where their milk is going, really) is also problematic. Why not just have moms donate directly to Prolacta?

I don’t understand how this is a bad thing. The company uses the breastmilk to feed infants that are dying. I donate my milk for babies that need it, how is this any different? What, they’re some terrible company because they need profit to pay for the research? Heaven forbid!!

This is terrible as ALL donor milk should be channeled free to the babies in need this PROLACTA should be exposed as the farce it is

So who should pay to test the donors, ship the milk and process it so it’s safe?

It’s fairly clear that you don’t understand the AIDS crisis in South Africa. Giving ARVs to moms is not like handing a mom a piece of candy and it’s all better. You need to provide a sustainable supply of ARVs. There’s a culture where HIV testing is a stigma, traditional “doctors” tell people not to take medicine (I’ve seen TB drugs discarded outside of a sangoma’s house), and ARVs don’t help the HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS of babies whose mothers are already dead. So yes, prevention is better than cure, but that doesn’t help the existing state of MILLIONS of HIV/AIDS orphans, many of whom are infants. Milk helps them, as do sustainable, local milk banks.

I believe that is a suspect relationship.
Partnering in marketing is a convenient way to not look like you are “owned” by a formula company.  Too cozy an agreement with a Formula Company.

Yikes! I’d be OUTRAGED! I know that when I donated milk it when to a large bank where it was pasturised and given to the babies in the NICU – I got a card from the NICU – hate the fact that now I have doubts … urgh …. No, this is not ethical – the justification that it’s excess milk is NOT valid. For me, donating was something I did – it had nothing to do with my breastfeeding BiP – yes, I had extra milk, BiP never took a bottle so I pumped and donated. The hours I spent doing that was worth it because I was a DONOR. It did take time to pump, then clean the pump etc … Grr this has made me ANGRY! 

I just wanted to thank you for this article, I was surprised to find this out. I have no issue with what is being made for premature babies nutrition, but as you, I have an issue with how they are going about getting their breastmilk supply. If I hadn’t had a blood transfusion in the days after my son’s birth (which elimates me as a donor) I would have been donating some of my milk and may have unknowingly used one of these sites without having known all this info…

Amy –
I don’t want to beat a dead horse, you did such a good job here . There is nothing kosher a about the “marketing only” relationship with Prolacta and Abbbott Nutrition. 
 This is what it says “Distributor” in the WHO 

International
Code of Marketing of Breast-milk
Substitutes

A person, corporation or any other entity

in the public or private sector engaged in

the business (whether directly or

indirectly) of marketing at the wholesale

or retail level a product within the scope

of this Code. A “primary distributor” is a

manufacturer’s sales agent, representative,

national distributor or broker. 

We absolutely must get this news out so mothers can make informed decisions when they donate their milk! Spread this article far and wide – please!

Mary Overfield, Raleigh, NC

If I understand correctly, the PROBLEM is that mothers are donating their milk in good conscience that it will go DIRECTLY to babies in need vis non-profit organizations at the lowest cost possible. Instead it is being processed into a “product” by a copany with ties to formula companies for PROFIT….because it seems the simple fact that less than 15% of American women breastfeeding past 6 months isn’t good enough. The multilillion dollar formula industry wasn’t profitable enough, now they have to have a hand in the “breastmilk industry”, as it has become? They’re taking donated milk and turning it into a commodity that they can profit off of without the knowledge of those who donated it….they refuse to lose a single dollar of formula sales to the good women who naively wanted to share their milk, so they find a clever way of “processing” and selling it to get their piece of the pie.

But their FAQs are very convincing, aren’t they? They’re so altruistic…..look at the history of their affiliates. They’ve NEVER done anything that wasn’t in the absolute best interests of their buyers. *eye roll*

I’m not against profiting. I’m against moms not knowing where their milk is
going, or that someone is profiting from it. That’s a major problem.

Nonprofits manage those issues – you can look into it more at hmbana.org.

I really do understand that you can’t just give a mom a month’s supply of
ARVs and be on your way.

But would it not be better to sustain the health of the mother and allow for
direct, at-breast feeding, than to just give donor milk, which only helps
the baby (who may well end up motherless)? Prolacta is a funding machine
for milk banks there, and what I’m saying is that it might be more prudent
to focus the majority of those funds on ARVs than donor milk.

That area certainly needs milk banks, but focusing only on donor milk just
perpetuates the problem of orphaned babies. I’m inclined to think that any
mother who’s willing to give her baby someone else’s breast milk, would be
willing to take ARVs, too (regarding stigmas and such). What am I missing?

Right, but I researched this pretty thoroughly and that never came up. I
think it really is just marketing. That’s not to say they aren’t sharing a
playbook, but on paper, they’re not affiliated beyond marketing.

You’re welcome. I’m hoping lots of moms will see this and be informed. If
they still want to donate to Prolacta,I just want them to do it with all the
information.

Thanks for quoting that!

I’m going to say that Prolacta gets a pass here, based on that information.
Abbott is hawking Prolacta products through their marketing reps, not
vice-versa, so no one at Prolacta is technically doing anything wrong.

That said, it’s SO shady, but I think that on paper, they’re on the up & up.
The lawyers at Prolacta are earning their keep!

Agreed! And thanks for sharing.

“The multilillion dollar formula industry wasn’t profitable enough, now they
have to have a hand in the “breastmilk industry”, as it has become? They’re
taking donated milk and turning it into a commodity that they can profit off
of without the knowledge of those who donated it….they refuse to lose a
single dollar of formula sales to the good women who naively wanted to share
their milk, so they find a clever way of “processing” and selling it to get
their piece of the pie.”

EXACTLY. This speaks volumes about breastfeeding advocacy, though. What
we’re doing is working!

ugh. I’m at a loss here. I’m so horrified at what I just read. I think I’d feel a little better about it, if they were at least donating to lower income hospitals free engineered premie milk that they’re making. Instead it’s ALL at a profit. Now all I can think about is that one lady I’d read in an article about how her premie died and she had a chest freezer full of pumped milk that she donated. I really hope she wasn’t swindled as well

Reading this again today reminded me of hair donation — very little hair goes to kids with cancer, wigs are not given free (prorated based on ability to pay), and a lot of hair is sold to other companies.

If you are a student of SEO padding/astroturfing, you should do some searches for the new skin care pyramid company “Rodan & Fields” I have NEVER seen a company bury criticism so effectively. Even if you type in search terms designed to find harsh reviews, you will find pages of returns for red herring articles that are really variations on their sales pitch. Impressive as this Prolacta example is, it does not hold a candle to what R&F have achieved. Great article btw, I had NO IDEA.

I milk share via Human Milk 4 Human Babies. The only thing that bothers me about what Prolacta is doing is that mothers may not know exactly where their milk is going. IMO giving human milk, pasturized, to premies or babies with HIV+mothers is a noble thing. I’m happy that these babies have access to human milk as opposed to formula. Hospitals charge insurance companies for everything, even straws and cups so it makes sense that there would ne a charge for human milk administered in a NICU setting. I’m not sure if this is the protocol for the non-profit milk banks.
I don’t necessarily think it is unethical, or unfair as long as mothers know and/or feel comfortable with where the milk is going. Id be fine with mine going to any of these cbabies in need. I wouldn’t be fine if it was going to weird men for weird sex stuff, however.

Amy-Before you wrote this, did you consider actually contacting a donor from any of these milk banks? Did you even consider calling and pretending to be a donor like a good investigative journalist would to get their contract?  Obviously not, because the contract *I have in hand* (and no, I did not ultimately donate because I use banned herbal supplements) CLEARLY STATES HOW THE MILK WILL BE USED.  So does the ALL the websites you so often reference. As the mom of a preemie, I resent the fact that just because you THINK donor moms are stupid and being misled, you’ve made all these other people think so, too.  The words PROLACTA BIOSCIENCE are all over these websites. ”The milk you donate will be used by Prolacta Bioscience to create nutritional therapies for critically ill and premature infants.”  How much clearer does it get?  I wanted to donate my milk to help preemies AND to donate to Susan G. Komen, not to get rich.  Do you ask for money to donate blood?  No?  Well guess what? Red Cross SELLS your blood to hospitals.  In fact, ALL of the centers that supply blood for transfusions—whether they’re part of the American Red Cross or not—sell their products to cover operating expenses. Next time, try a little research before you create so much hype.  And commenters-please read up before you comment, because you’ll see this is a non-issue that happens in blood banks every day.

Human Milk for Human Babies. it’s a group on fb and you can donate/recieve breastmilk from local moms!

Wow, the man can even steal & commodify our milk to make a buck. If anyone should make money off of breast milk, it should be the lactating mother (wet nursing has a long and proud history). 

Obviously this tripped a trigger with you.

I did thorough research on this. Go to http://www.nationalmilkbank.org/. See
if you can find any inkling that they’re linked to Prolacta. While you’re
there, check out their donor consent form, which also doesn’t name
Prolacta: https://breastmilkfirst.org/donors/mb_consent.pdf. So, in short:
yes, I did my research. I also found examples of moms in online forums who
were absolutely incensed that their milk had gone to Prolacta without their
knowledge.

So while you have *your* contract in hand, things aren’t so plain across the
board. Did you check out every consent form for every Prolacta bank before
you posted this?

And no, Prolacta’s name being on a website doesn’t mean that moms are being
informed of exactly what happens to their milk. Prolacta’s legal team and
copywriters are earning their keep, because the real process (the paying of
the middle-man milk banks, etc-) is concealed in language full of appeals to
pity and strawman arguments.

You might also want to read my post on Komen:
http://justwestofcrunchy.com/2011/06/03/susan-g-komen-for-the-cure-isnt-curing-anything/

Selling blood or donor milk through a nonprofit like the Red Cross or HMBANA
is standard practice. Prolacta is selling the same product, but at rates
that don’t just cover costs, but include profits. As the mom of a preemie,
surely you would have chosen donor milk from a nonprofit milk bank, over
that of a company that sells with higher margins to include profits?

And to clarify, I’m pro-capitalism. I’m anti-deceit, and Prolacta’s business
model deceives moms.

Right. You chose to pick the two banks NOT found on Prolacta’s site (http://www.prolacta.com/findamilkbank.php).  Why do you think those are related to Prolacta? Why would Prolacta hide just those two when they list all of the others who pointedly mention Prolacta? I really don’t know who to believe if they are related to them or not.  What I do know is that as a preemie mom, I would have done anything to save my baby.  I had many blood transfusions after his birth, and I certainly didn’t ask where those came from, either.  For-profit, non-profit, Abbott, whatever–you don’t care when you’re in the throes of NICU life.  Just bill my insurance and make him well.  And for those NICU parents I now volunteer with whose babies have used Prolacta’s products, they have been a god-send.  So while you may have the luxury of sitting in your ivory tower making donors think twice about their donations to make this product, many preemie parents are in NICUs hoping a donation like this will keep their babies alive.  I only wish I could have donated to help make this product.

Again: it’s not the product, it’s the business model. Period. The HMF
product is far superior to anything the formula companies are putting out.

That said, it doesn’t excuse the way they run their business. It dose not
excuse competing with nonprofit milk banks, who are having a hard enough
time making it. And it does *not* excuse deceiving moms.

And like I said, show me PROOF of *one* mom who has been deceived by the company after donating, and I’ll join your bandwagon, I promise. You’re backing off your original point-that moms are being swindled out of their milk on a “NATIONWIDE, WIDESPREAD BASIS.” You have provided no proof of that, yet have ignited a fire of fear.

Non-profit does *not* mean better.  I donated an old car through a “non-profit” agency, and got taken to the cleaners while they made a ton of money.  As a so-called journalist, please, as I’ve asked three times–you need to show me the facts you purport. So far, all I’ve seen is scare tactics.  

Really? As they say, “Let me Google that for you.”

I am in awe of all this fabulous research and well put together post Amy! Thank you for this information. I too am very concerned about Milkies having a site link on their product that leads to this Company. Interested in the follow-up.

Thanks for the kind words! A lot went into this post.

I have an email in to My Milkies, I’ll update with any information I find
out.

I’m sorry, I really don’t mean to be rude. I just want some proof. One mom does not a widespread nationwide epidemic make, and that’s the part I take exception to. In a Google search, I find only that one mom, as well.

I have two moms in my support group with babies using the product now to stay alive. I volunteer weekly with preemie moms whose babies would die without milk donors for both regular old fashioned human milk as well as these products. I think this article, while well intentioned, could cause moms to not donate either, all because of one well- intentioned mom who may have not read the fine print.

I’m sorry, I really don’t mean to be rude. I just want some proof. One mom does not a widespread nationwide epidemic make, and that’s the part I take exception to. In a Google search, I find only that one mom, as well.

I have two moms in my support group with babies using the product now to stay alive. I volunteer weekly with preemie moms whose babies would die without milk donors for both regular old fashioned human milk as well as these products. I think this article, while well intentioned, could cause moms to not donate either, all because of one well- intentioned mom who may have not read the fine print.

It’s not just one mom; that’s all the “proof” I have time to entertain you
with at the moment.

This keeps going back to the products and how vital they are, and again: *I
think HMF is an excellent product.*

If Prolacta wasn’t collecting this milk, moms would be donating exclusively
peer-to-peer or via HMBANA banks; preemies would still be getting milk.

And to really get into it: I’m fairly sure that Prolacta is the only party
that’s done any research validating the necessity of their products. There’s
no question that some preemies need extra nutrition, but there’s wide
variation in opinions on how to deliver that supplementation.

This isn’t all because of one mom. It’s because I took an objective look at
Prolacta’s business model and found it to be deceitful and problematic in a
variety of ways. I wrote about it and I stand by it. If we disagree, then
please: let’s just disagree.

Please remove. I’m not sure what this is. Thank you.

Lisa B. Singelyn
Director of Social Media and Communications
Counterintuity, LLC
818-848-1700

—–Original message—–

Get real, this milk is not providing more than a token feed to a handful of South African AIDS orphans. IMBP involvement is not sustainable or, frankly, all that meaningful. This is a relationship that has far greater benefit to Prolacta than any South African infant.

Oh THANKS. Posting about this right now.  It would seem that she’s a mole for Prolacta!

I first learned about Prolacta in my CLEC class at UC San Diego, and did a little research to figure out what their angle was.  When I learned that they get the milk for free and make profits in the hundreds of percentages, I was disgusted. And after reading your article on how they hide behind other companies (and send out social media “experts” to extol their efforts) I am even more so.

Amy, you are one hell of a whistle blower – THANK YOU for your work!
 

“I think this article, while well intentioned, could cause moms to not
donate either, all because of one well- intentioned mom who may have not
read the fine print.”

I think this article will not make a mom think twice about donating milk, but *will* make her think twice about donating milk to a Prolacta company!

Mole…Troll… Wow! I hope she wasn’t lying about volunteering with preemies and desperate parents, because that is just low.

[...] on June 25, 2011 There’s been one very persistent rogue commenter on my original post about Prolacta. She’s been insisting that Prolacta is doing great things, shaming me for writing the post, [...]

“One mom does not a widespread nationwide epidemic make, and that’s the part I take exception to.”

Nope, you promised! See?

“show me PROOF of *one* mom who has been deceived by the company after donating, and I’ll join your bandwagon, I promise.”

One mom*. Proof provided. Welcome to the bandwagon!

*And more to come, I’m sure, as the expose is still very new and getting out there, but that’s beside the point. One was all you required, and I’m sure it wasn’t just empty rhetoric, so, ta dah.

Added that troll bit to the post I just threw up about this:
http://justwestofcrunchy.com/2011/06/25/prolactas-mole/

Thanks!

<3 <3 <3 Aw thanks!!

If I am not mistaken, the reason that Prolacta comes up first on Google is because they paid for the advertising space.  This was a huge issue with my former job.  I worked at a nonprofit (credit counseling) and we would have to pay thousands and thousands of dollars a month to come up with in the top 10 if someone Googled credit card debt.  We were competing with for profit agencies who spent all their money on advertising and basically stole money from consumers.  

When I read this article, I automatically assumed that Prolacta (or Abbott if they are in charge of the marketing) is purchasing all of that ad space so their links come up first when someone Googles “milk donation”.  Again, if it’s anything like the company I worked for, they are paying thousands and thousands of dollars per month for each link and non profits do not have the funds to compete.  To me, this is wrong.  This is in no way, shape or form similar to blood banks – which are non profit and not competing with for profit agencies.   

ElisaP……Prolacta is not selling their product just to ,as you said “cover operating expenses”……NON-PROFIT milk banks charge only what they need to cover operating expenses and make ZERO profit.Prolacta is selling the milk at a higher price,more than what they need JUST to cover operatng expenses-so they can make money off it ! Don’t you think mothers donating their milk(which takes time to pump and also takes more out of you physically which then must be replenished by nutrition hydration and rest) would choose to donate to a true non-profit milk bank rather than a company who is making $$ off of their milk?Mothers give their milk out of true charity of heart!!!!! The question is not where it is ending up so much as the fact they are clearly being misleading in their advertising for donors about making profit off of women’s milk.Isn’t this sort of practice ultimately making the goal of one day having enough non-profit milk banks with enough DONATED milk to supply every baby who needs it AFFORDABLY ????? Because obviously they are driving up the price of donor milk if they are selling it at a higher price in order to profit.This is truly SAD SICKENING AND DISTURBING. SHAME on Prolacta

This article would never change my mind about milk donation, an act that I see as both selfless and inspirational. It would (if I weren’t already swayed in that direction), however, make me more inclined to donate through direct donation versus a milk bank.

To clarify, the HMBANA milk banks are great. There’s no problem there. The
issue is with the “banks” that are actually Prolacta’s middle-men.

blah blah

I’m on the board of a non-profit milk bank that belongs to the Human Milk Banking Association and I want to make one point. More and more doctors and new parents of preterm infants gave discovered the life saving benefits of Mothers’ milk. Demand us high and supply in not meeting demand. If you are a healthy mama and have a supply of extra milk, please donate to HMBANA milk bank, even before sharing with another mom. Your milk will help the most fragile of babies literally fight for their tiny lives.

The problem is that they are getting milk from women who think they are donating to a non-profit milk banks, but the milk is being sold to Prolacta instead.

 If a woman wants to donate directly to Prolacta, then no problem. This is what they tried before, but I guess they weren’t getting enough donations.

I doubt that more than10% of your milk went to S. Africa. It doesn’t take long to reach the 400,000 oz before Prolacta takes 90%. For a “large” non-profit bank (an oxymoron, really) without the luxury of hundreds of thousands of advertising dollars, it would take a little under a year to reach that number. I certainly understand the financial desperation the kind souls at IMBP feel, but I think the morality of working with a dishonest, misleading company like Prolacta must make it hard to sleep at night. I’d also like to see the research that donor milk is more cost effective in treating or preventing health problems associated with HIV than other medications or treatments. It costs a huge amount to ship milk and maintain the cold chain from N. America to Africa. We certainly know that human milk prevents death and disability in preemies at a very low cost right here in the US. Although that might not be true for long if moms are tricked into or choose to donate to a for-profit milk bank. Prolacta’s whole milk product costs $30/oz while the non-profit equivalent costs $3.50/oz. Without the milk or the financial means to compete with the juggernaut that is Prolacta,the low cost of non-profit milk (and it costs about $250/mo to protect a preemie) will be replaced by a cost in the thousands. All while donors contribute their milk freely. This is a dirty, dirty secret that needs to be exposed.

There’s no reason to believe a single word she says now that she’s been outed. OOPS!

In other news, I hear there’s a job opening in the Prolacta social media department . . .

Wow, I am not surprised by this at all and am glad to see someone pointing this out and shedding light on it.  Why don’t mother’s get paid for the milk they give up, it takes a lot of work to pump milk.  And, who pours their milk down the drain?????

[also just noting here for the record, since it's only in the other post, that "Guest" in this whole subthread read "ElisaP" originally.]

[...] West of Crunchy has been very busy examining what she calls the Ugly Side of Milk Donation.  She discusses the fact that Prolacta is profiting from turning donated mother’s milk into [...]

That “free” pump is ”free” word of mouth advertising for the company via moms who simply can’t believe that a company gives her such a nice “gift” can’t be bad.

Amy – Any update?  This is SHOCKING.  I sell Milkies, but will pull them from my shelves if they continue to promote Prolacta.  I can not believe I never noticed the ‘ad’ on the side of the boxes!!  I’ll be contacting Milkies and their US distributor as well….

A family member pointed out your blog to me, and I felt compelled to respond since Prolacta and the women who donated to them helped save the life of my daughter.  Do I care that it’s for profit?  No, absolutely not.  I appreciate what Prolacta and their donors have done for my child and I wish I could thank them individually.  I would have paid any amount of money for the product that those donors and Prolacta provided.  If it were your son/daughter fighting for his/her life, wouldn’t you have paid?  I think it’s a shame that someone (a blogger) who creates nothing, can try to tear down a company that does good.  I would urge all women who are considering donating, to look closely at the process that Prolacta uses, it’s research, it’s results and make an informed decision.  Don’t let one blogger make your opinion change, just do your own research.  It seems that people are judging Prolacta for being “for profit” and not clearly disclosing it.  I think the company’s website is clear that it is not a for-profit company.   I think it takes resources and research to provide a product with the quality and process that Prolacta provides.  Also, do you think that non-profits employees work for free?  Take a look and see what the people who run them get paid, most workers don’t work for free either.  Does this blog disclose that the owner is making a profit for selling advertising on it?  No it doesn’t.  It portrays itself as acting in the best interest of potential milk donors, by giving information that can be found on Prolacta’s website.  Why doesn’t the owner of the blog post the information for free, without any advertising?    

Thank you for posting this. Guess what I just got in the mail. A nice packet of info from Milkin’ Mamas asking for donations. A couple of shiny pamphlets and a magnet for my fridge. Prolacta’s name is listed in there, but the entire info packet is very carefully worded and pretty shady. If not for your post, I would never know it wasn’t a milk bank that specifically helped premies. Contact me if you would like me to send you the packet.

[...] three different posts about Prolacta, but then it seemed that we had a bit of a mole problem on the original post. You be the judge on that. If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, and talks like a [...]

Wow I feel like crap now! After the birth of my second I had 600 oz of milk stored in my freezer. My daughter would not take a bottle… What did I do? I donated to South Coast Milk Bank thinking I was doing a good thing.

The ex-nestle exec says it all.  Nestle was the company to promote formula as BETTER than breastmilk, making moms who couldn’t afford it feel like they were NOT giving their baby the best if they were breastfeeding.  Their shenanigans were so widespread and famous that I learned about it in my CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY class in college, years ago.   To me, a company that is supposed to be promoting breastfeeding shouldn’t be partnered up with people who made their money from NOT promoting breastfeeding.   This company should be ashamed…but they won’t be.  People who make that much money never care about anything but making more money.

Thanks for speaking up as someone who has personal experience with this! Much appreciated.

Exactly. It’s a marketing thing, not something altruistic.

From Helen Anderson, RN, CLC, who’s the co-founder of My Milkies:

“At Milkies we always try to partner with other companies that are just as committed to the best interests of maternal/infant health.  We had questions about the motivations of Prolacta and therefore severed our relationship with IBMP.  It was not easy for us because we believed the IBMP was a real global partner in the promotion of the life saving benefits of breast milk.  We also believe that infant lives were saved due to the milk sent by IBMP.”

What Jake said. 

I’d love to see that research, too.

Scott, thanks for your reply. See mine here: http://justwestofcrunchy.com/2011/06/28/prolacta-responds-to-swindled-the-ugly-side-of-milk-donation/

To be clear, it’s not a problemthat Prolacta is for-profit. The HMF that they make is far superior to its synthetic counterparts.  If you re-read, you’ll note that my issue is not with their for-profit status.

However, the way Prolacta comes by its milk donations is, in my opinion, deceitful. That’s a major problem, and one worth discussing.And I certainly wouldn’t say that as a blogger, I create nothing.  Also, our advertisements are clearly noted under headings that say “Love our Sponsors!” – I’d call that plain disclosure.  And we have sponsors because articles like this one (and the two that followed it!) take time, and my time is worth something. 

I do! Will email you. Thanks for letting me know!

You were doing a good thing, though! Prolacta’s product, HMF, is vastly superior to its synthetic alternatives. So from that POV, you absolutely did a great thing, mama! My issue is that Prolacta isn’t up front about how donations are processed and where they’re going.  In the end, your milk helped babies – and that’s awesome!

Thanks for posting these, Amber!

From Helen Anderson, RN, CLC, who’s the co-founder of My Milkies:”At Milkies we always try to partner with other companies that are just as committed to the best interests of maternal/infant health.  We had questions about the motivations of Prolacta and therefore severed our relationship with IBMP.  It was not easy for us because we believed the IBMP was a real global partner in the promotion of the life saving benefits of breast milk.  We also believe that infant lives were saved due to the milk sent by IBMP.”

[...] Prolacta Bioscience publishes a response to my post on them, “Swindled: The Ugly Side of Milk Donation“ [...]

The milk from the IBMP goes to the iThemba Lethu orphanage. It goes to babies who have already lost their mothers. Did you research the IBMP at all? The organization is fantastically transparent and has a sustainability model. Your original point was that there was some kind of obfuscation about
the IBMP’s donor enrollment and duping the donors out of their milk.
You’re wrong; the IBMP is transparent and I knew exactly where my milk
was going.

Fortunately it was my nine gallons of milk and I got to make the value judgement that it would be better used going to a critically-ill orphan in my home country than some fat, well-fed toddler through a milk sharing program or any of the myriad ways I could’ve used my milk.

The HIV/AIDS crisis in South Africa is an extremely complex issue that can’t be solved by ARVs or milk banks alone. There’s a social issue (women have no power in making decisions about sex), a violent crime issue (a woman has a 50% chance of being raped in her lifetime), an endemic poverty issue (do you give her ARVs or do you give her food?), a lack of healthcare services issue (watch the film Yesterday for an appreciation of what it takes to see a medical professional), a cultural issue (a taboo against HIV testing and condom use), and a political issue (the current president testified under oath that he took a shower after having sex with an HIV+ woman to avoid transmission). It’s hard for me not to see nearly 70,000 bottles of milk making it to orphaned babies as an incredible achievement that I’m proud to be a part of.

I’m glad you’re proud of your donation. Any mom who donates breast milk
should be, that’s a beautiful thing. I disagree that the IMBP is the best
way to bring breast milk to orphaned babies in Africa and I’ve stated the
reasons why in prior comments, so I’ll leave it at that.

My point was that Prolacta discloses that they are for profit, as well as you disclose that you are for profit with “love our sponsors”. 

I think that many of you need to research the blood banking industry a little better. You are sorely misinformed that there is no money made. It is a billion dollar industry.

Thanks for keeping track of this.  Nothing we haven’t seen before or are seeing now so your vigilence is truly appreciated.