ArticleMaternal & child nutrition2021
An 'incredible community' or 'disgusting' and 'weird'? Representations of breastmilk sharing in worldwide news media.
Article in Maternal & child nutrition, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Views on wet nursing and expressing breastmilk for sharing and human milk bank donation among mothers in two parenting social media communities in Vietnam.Maternal & child nutrition · 2025Article
- An 'incredible community' or 'disgusting' and 'weird'? Representations of breastmilk sharing in worldwide news media.Maternal & child nutrition · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Breastmilk sharing via the internet has become more popular in recent years, with a resultant increase in media attention. It is actively discouraged by public health bodies in at least three countries. We undertook a qualitative analysis of worldwide English language news media (online newspaper articles and transcripts of television and radio pieces) focusing on peer-to-peer breastmilk sharing during a 24-month period (2015-2016). One hundred eleven news articles were analysed semiotically for positive (n = 49) and negative (n = 90) depictions of breastmilk sharing and the actors involved. Three countries published the majority of the articles: United States (n = 42), United Kingdom (n = 24) and Australia (n = 20). Topics associated with using shared breastmilk included perceived insufficiency, having surgery or taking medication, or the prematurity of the baby. Reports of women who gave and received breastmilk were largely positive although sometimes confused with women who sell breastmilk, who were demonised. The breastmilk itself, however, was considered as potentially contaminated and possibly dangerous; calls for action (n = 33) focused on increasing regulation and safety. Peer-to-peer milk sharing and the commercial availability of human milk are activities that occur within social and cultural contexts, and, as such, the ways in which they are represented in the news media reflect the ways in which they are also represented more widely in society. Increased understanding of normal infant feeding practices is needed, alongside guidance on how to better support breastfeeding. News media outlets can facilitate this through reporting risk in line with evidence. Further research should be undertaken to understand the safety of breastmilk sharing and the experience of those who participate.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.