U.S. Study Shows Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative Does Not Work

by Christie del Castillo-Hegyi, M.D.

On October 14, 2019, the Journal of Pediatrics published astonishing findings regarding the effects of the Baby-Friendly hospital certification on sustained breastfeeding rates as defined by the 2020 Healthy People Goals of: 

  1. any breastfeeding at 6 and 12 months
  2. exclusive breastfeeding at 3 and 6 months. 

They did so by measuring the relationship between statewide breastfeeding initiation rates data and the above breastfeeding rates. They then measured the contribution of Baby-Friendly hospital designation on these same breastfeeding outcomes.

According to the study authors, the increase in hospital designation in the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) began in 2011 when the U.S. Surgeon General issued a call to action for maternity care practices throughout the U.S. to support breastfeeding. The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) became involved in promoting the BFHI policies in hospitals and health facilities, as breastfeeding was thought to be associated with lower rates of childhood obesity. The assumption was that by increasing breastfeeding rates through the BFHI, there would be a concomitant decline in childhood obesity. Upon initiation of this program, the CDC initiated surveillance of state-specific data on breastfeeding outcomes after discharge including BFHI designation rates. This data is made available to the public through the CDC Breastfeeding Report Card, which provides annual reports from 2007 through 2014 and biennial reports from 2014.

As expected, they found that states with higher breastfeeding initiation rates had higher rates of these sustained breastfeeding outcomes. You cannot have high breastfeeding rates unless mothers are given education and successfully initiate breastfeeding. However, when they measured the effects of Baby-Friendly certification, this is what they found.

“Baby-Friendly designation did not demonstrate a significant association with any post-discharge breastfeeding outcome (Figures 1, B and 2, B). There was no association between Baby-Friendly designation and breastfeeding initiation rates.” Continue reading

World Health Organization Revised Breastfeeding Guidelines Put Babies at Risk Despite Pleas from Experts—Informing the Public “Not a Top Priority”

By the Senior Advisory Board of the Fed is Best Foundation

A key recommendation of the 1989 World Health Organization Ten Steps to Successful Breastfeeding which guides the Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative (BFHI) is: “give infants no food or drink other than breast-milk, unless medically indicated.” This has led to serious complications from accidental starvation of babies, including dehydration, hyperbilirubinemia (jaundice) and hypoglycemia (low blood sugar) — known causes of infant brain injury and permanent disability. Last week, the WHO issued draft revised breastfeeding guidelines, failing to revise this recommendation. These guidelines define the standard of care for breastfeeding management in all healthcare facilities worldwide. Nearly 500 U.S. hospitals and birthing centers and thousands more worldwide that meet the criteria of the BFHI are certified as Baby-Friendly, adhering to the application of the WHO’s Ten Steps.

On Sept. 22, 2017, senior members of the Fed is Best Foundation, and guests including a neonatologist from a leading U.S. tertiary care hospital and a pediatric endocrinologist, Dr. Paul Thornton, M.D, from Cook Children’s Hospital Fort Worth, lead author of the Pediatric Endocrine Society’s newborn hypoglycemia guidelines, met via teleconference with top officials of the WHO Breastfeeding Program: Dr. Laurence Grummer-Strawn, Ph.D., Dr. Nigel Rollins, M.D. and Dr. Wilson Were, M.D. to express their concerns about the complications arising from the BFHI Ten Steps and to ask what, if any, monitoring, research, or public outreach the WHO has planned regarding the risks of accidental starvation of exclusively breastfed newborns. The Foundation members who attended were 1) Christie del Castillo-Hegyi, MD, Co-Founder, 2) Jody Segrave-Daly, RN, IBCLC, Co-Founder, 3) Julie Tibbets, JD, Partner at Alston & Bird, LLP, Pro-Bono Attorney for the Foundation, 4) Brian Symon, MD, Senior Advisor, and 5) Hillary Kuzdeba, MPH, former quality improvement program coordinator at a children’s hospital, managing infant feeding projects and Senior Advisor.

Emails confirming meeting between the WHO and the Fed is Best Foundation available here.

Continue reading

If I Had Given Him Just One Bottle, He Would Still Be Alive.

by Jillian Johnson with commentary from Dr. Christie del Castillo-Hegyi

Landon would be five today if he were still alive. It’s a very hard birthday–five. It’s a milestone birthday. Most kiddos would be starting kindergarten at this age. But not my little guy. I wanted to share for a long time about what happened to Landon, but I always feared what others would say and how I’d be judged. But I want people to know how much deeper the pain gets.

I share his story in hopes that no other family ever experiences the loss that we have.

Jarrod and I wanted what was best for Landon, as every parent does for their child. We took all of the classes. Bought and read all of the books. We were ready! Or so we thought….every class and book was geared toward breastfeeding and how it’s so important if you want a healthy child. Landon was born in a “Baby-Friendly” hospital. (What this means is everything is geared toward breastfeeding. Unless you’d had a breast augmentation or cancer or some serious medical reason as to why you couldn’t breastfeed, your baby would not be given formula unless the pediatrician wrote a prescription.)

Continue reading

My “Baby Friendly” Hospital Harmed My Baby: How Hospitals Can Do Better

Good information isn’t always enough to overcome bad systems.

By Sarah Christopherson

I wrote this article in late 2018, a few months after giving birth to my daughter. My experience at my “Baby Friendly” hospital was traumatic and it was painful to relive, but I felt like I could help other new parents by telling my story, and it seemed like a good match for the work I was doing professionally to dismantle coercive systems that deprive women of their autonomy.

At the time, I was the policy advocacy director for a national non-profit focused on empowering women as they navigate healthcare in the US. My article was printed in our organizational newsletter in early 2019 and published on our website.

It was shared by Fed Is Best, which also interviewed me. From time to time, I would send the link to expecting parents, not to scare them, but to empower them to stand up for themselves when they sensed that something wasn’t right. It helped me to help others. And telling my story made a difference.

A friend who gave birth in the same hospital texted me, “Your article helped me so much when I was having trouble breastfeeding. I look at the pictures of [my son’s] early days and think about how it would have gotten worse if I hadn’t talked to you and others. I started supplementing with formula early AND I signed that dumb form without blinking. The post-partum period exhausts you so that normal problems you would easily solve seem so much harder… and then you’re dealing with some of the most consequential decisions you’ve ever had to make. It was the things I’d already thought through a bit—like the stuff in your piece—that I was prepared to tackle.”

Eventually my non-profit changed leadership and I moved into a different policy field. My infant turned into a happy, healthy, precocious, and articulate 6-year-old bouncing ball of energy. And that’s where I thought things ended.

Until last week, when I discovered that without my knowledge or permission, my former organization had rewritten my article in January. They’d kept my name, my story, and the picture my husband took of me in a hospital gown holding my infant daughter on the day she was born. But they’d stripped out paragraph after paragraph that cautioned against breastfeeding coercion.

Gone was any mention of the scientific literature suggesting that the benefits of breastfeeding had been overhyped. Gone was Laura Dorwart’s first-person account of her own disturbing experience in a “baby friendly” hospital. Gone too was the brief nod to Hannah Rosin’s cautionary note that exclusive breastfeeding had played a role in creating lasting inequities in her marriage over caretaking responsibilities.

But cutting out what I wrote wasn’t enough. Their editors also put words in my mouth that I would never say: “Breastfeeding is still considered best for baby and mom, but feeding your baby formula will provide your baby with the same nutrients to thrive.” And sure, saying that makes sense after you’ve cut out every mention of where breastfeeding isn’t best for baby and mom.

Seeing this new article, this breastfeeding propaganda article, under the picture of my sweet little baby who became so dehydrated from breastfeeding coercion that the nurses had to slice and slice and slice her little heel and still couldn’t get enough blood to fill a pen cap… I started to sob, deep, wrenching sobs. I felt violated. I felt betrayed. I demanded that they take the article down immediately. They complied, and my story disappeared from the internet, as though it had never happened. Until today.

Originally Published: Feb 6, 2019

The decision to breast- or formula-feed is a highly personal one, with the right answer varying parent to parent. But this is not an article about the benefits of breastfeeding or about concerns that previous studies may have exaggerated those benefits.

This isn’t an overview of the long history of bad behavior by formula companies or the Trump administration’s politically motivated refusal to endorse a 2018 World Health Organization resolution promoting breastfeeding. Nor is it a discussion of the feminist case for formula-feeding made by Hanna Rosin and others.

Rather, this is a story about what happens when good information isn’t enough to overcome bad systems. But first, some background.

I’m white, middle-class, and well-educated—with all of the status and privilege that affords. This is my third child, I work in health policy, and I already had a pretty good sense of the medical literature on breastfeeding when I walked into the maternity ward.

Before joining the National Women’s Health Network, I spent a decade as a senior aide to two members of Congress, so I’ve had a lot of experience telling powerful people why they’re wrong. In short, there aren’t many patients better positioned to stand up for themselves and their children.

And yet, I didn’t. Or at least not until my daughter was so dehydrated she couldn’t give enough blood to fill a pen cap.

Arrival of the “Baby Friendly” Hospitals

When I gave birth for the first time, the “baby friendly hospital” movement was still in its infancy in the United States. It wasn’t until 2010 that the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services endorsed its ten principles, including:

#6 “give infants no food or drink other than breast-milk, unless medically indicated.”

#7 “practice rooming in” (the term for when a baby sleeps in the mother’s hospital room during her recovery instead of in the hospital nursery),

#9 “give no pacifiers or artificial nipples to breastfeeding infants,” and

(The WHO formally dropped their prohibition on pacifiers in a 2018 update, but as of this writing in 2019, the Americans haven’t caught up.)

However well-intentioned, these principles—imposed on exhausted parents by hospital staff and backed up by a tangle of bureaucratic rules and incentives—can quickly turn coercive in practice.

As the Washington Post reported in 2014, “If a mom wants to send her newborn [to the nursery], staff members often have to ask why and then fill out paperwork explaining the reason. … Formula may be provided, but only on request, and only after, in some instances, mothers sign a waiver acknowledging that using a bottle could impede breast-feeding. Lactation consultants roam the floor.” [emphases mine]

“full compliance with the 10 steps of the initiative may inadvertently be promoting potentially hazardous practices”

Writing in JAMA Pediatrics in 2016, pediatricians Joel L. Bass, Tina Gartley, and Ronald Kleinman warned that “there is now emerging evidence that full compliance with the 10 steps of the initiative may inadvertently be promoting potentially hazardous practices and/or having counterproductive outcomes.”

The article highlighted the dangers of mandatory rooming-in and unsupervised skin-to-skin contact when mothers are exhausted or medicated and called into question the practice of banning pacifiers when pacifiers have been shown to reduce the incidence of sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). It also raised concerns about coercing mothers into exclusive breastfeeding.

Starving My Baby

I first noticed things weren’t right 24 hours after giving birth. My daughter was too sleepy to nurse longer than a few weak tugs on my breast and none of the lactation consultant’s tricks would rouse her. With my other children, I’d satisfactorily supplemented nursing with formula during my hospital stay so I asked for a bottle.

WHC coercive formula form

The nurse was stern and disapproving. If I wanted to “give up” on breastfeeding, I’d have to sign a waiver acknowledging all of the risks associated with my terrible choice. “Reasons for supplementation” listed on the form include “mothers who are critically ill,” have “intolerable pain during feeding unrelieved by interventions,” or have “breast pathology.”

For mothers who simply choose to supplement, the form makes clear: “The American Academy of Pediatrics says that routine supplements of formula for breastfed newborns should not be used.”

Recovering from a C-section, I was dependent on hospital staff for my food and pain medication, and even assistance using the bathroom. Interrupted every hour for two straight days by a seemingly endless parade of doctors, residents, nurses, techs, and support staff—all with their own, uncoordinated schedule of rounds—I had the jellied zombie brain of a torture victim.

I signed their form… but then I didn’t use the formula!

Maybe I’d better speak to the pediatrician first, I thought, see if I’m overreacting to my baby’s listlessness before I give her an allergy, destroy my milk supply, or risk any of the other horrors of formula supplementation described on the waiver.

I asked to see the pediatrician, but the nurses sent me the lactation consultant instead.

And so I delayed for another day, with a signed form and a pack of ready-made formula within reach but too cowed to go against the hospital staff who controlled every aspect of my existence.

Looking back now, it’s incomprehensible to me. Dehydration in newborns can lead to blood clots, strokes, brain swelling, permanent brain damage, and death. I should have fed my baby right away, and I knew it, and yet somehow I didn’t do it.

“Cut, squeeze, repeat, while she screamed in pain and I watched helplessly.”

Fortunately for the two of us, jaundice set in first, and with it the need to draw blood for a bilirubin test. The nurses cut my daughter’s heel, she screamed weakly, they squeezed her little foot to express the blood, and collected a single drop. Then the cut quickly clotted closed.

So they had to do it again.

And again.

And again.

Cut, squeeze, repeat, while she screamed in pain and I watched helplessly.

They only needed to collect a tiny vial’s worth, smaller than a pen cap, but she was far too dehydrated. She’d lost 15% of her birthweight by then. After twenty agonizing minutes, they handed my tiny girl back to me. I flung open the cabinet and attached nipple to bottle with shaking hands. With that first sip, her eyes shot wide open and her tiny hands flew instinctively to the sides of the bottle. She responded like a starving person eating for the first time in her life. Which, of course, she was.

It Doesn’t Have to Be This Way

In the months since leaving the hospital, I’ve I thought a lot about how the hospital’s systems were structured, intentionally or not, to strip me of my own decision-making power. Good information is a necessary component of good health outcomes, but it’s not sufficient so long as patients aren’t empowered to follow through.

As Laura Dorwart wrote in The Week about her own experience in a “baby-friendly” hospital, the issue is one of “parental consent within a medical context that too often presents itself as a top-down hierarchy: hospital administration, doctor, nurse, baby — and mother last. Dead last.”

It doesn’t have to be this way. To ensure the well-being of both mother and child, hospitals should:

  • coordinate routine nighttime schedules to better support patient recovery since sleep-deprived patients can’t advocate for themselves as effectively
  • scrap policies that implicitly or explicitly punish staff—say, with extra paperwork—when a parent asks to use the nursery or wants to formula feed, ensuring instead that policies are bureaucratically neutral and let the patient lead
  • eliminate misleading and coercive forms and materialsthat exaggerate the harms of formula feeding while dismissing the potential harms of breastfeeding
  • prioritize the parent’s mental health and physical recoveryas highly as maintaining breastfeeding exclusivity

In my professional work, I train health providers on the need to listen to their patients to avoid the pitfalls of coercion. But it wasn’t until I fed my starving child for the first time that I really understood.

Sarah Christopherson was the Policy Advocacy Director for the National Women’s Health Network from 2016 to 2021.

 

I Learned To Prioritize My Well-Being Alongside My Baby’s and Shed the Suffocating Cloak of Societal Expectations and I was able to rebrand motherhood for myself

By Tina Cartwright, Founder of Rebranding Motherhood

My journey through childbirth and early motherhood was far from easy, but it was undeniably transformative. It taught me the importance of resilience, self-compassion, and the power of community in navigating motherhood’s most profound challenges. Before reaching this undeniable truth, my birth trauma thrust me into an arduous journey as I entered motherhood.

Birth trauma is tricky because society would love to put a clean, simple definition on it.  However, trauma is defined by the individual and what that experience led you to feel afterward. For me, my birth trauma started when I first held my baby. The elusive bond between mother and child didn’t materialize instantaneously for me, unlike the glossy portrayals Hollywood and social media would suggest.

This sanitized imagery further claimed I would be overwhelmed, almost washed over with the deepest levels of instant joy and admiration for my new baby. Within seconds of this stark realization hitting me,  I instantly began a silent inner panic that never quieted until I was ultimately diagnosed with PMAD (postpartum depression) and started a formal treatment plan.

Continue reading

Nurse Takes Formula Away From Parents Who Were Trying to Feed Their Hungry Baby In The Hospital

My feeding journey was not at all what I envisioned for my little one and me. When I was pregnant with my firstborn, I heard stories from my mom that she never used a bottle with my brother and me. When I researched breastfeeding, parents were told how wonderful and natural it is. I believed breastfeeding would come naturally. 

The day my son was born was a whirlwind. I had to have a c-section due to complications, but we were so excited to meet him. The first few days, I tried to get him to latch on, and he would stay for a little while and then unlatch. I felt uneasy that he wasn’t getting enough colostrum, but the medical staff told me I was doing great. My husband and I were so focused on getting breastfeeding down that I forgot to get pictures of me and my little one. My focus was getting him fed the right way. Sometimes, nursing hurt so much that I would dread it when it was time for feeding. The on-site lactation consultant came the day after the c-section. She was with me for an hour and told me everything was wonderful! 

After she left, my baby would cry, and I knew something wasn’t right. My husband and I decided it was time to ask for formula. When we asked, the nurse kept asking us if we were sure. As first-time parents, we questioned if we were doing the right thing.

I was so exhausted and needed rest that my husband decided to feed my little one formula. Another nurse came in and said, “Dad! Don’t! Breastfeeding is the way! Don’t do that to your little one. Your wife is doing great.” She grabbed the formula from my husband’s hands and stashed it in a cabinet. My husband and I looked at each other in shock, and I tried to breastfeed again.

We were discharged on a Friday, and over the weekend, my son cried a lot, and I thought he might be a fussy baby. On Monday morning, we saw that my son had orange urine in his diaper. I lost it. I remember holding him and crying, blaming myself. We went to the doctor’s office and were told that he was dehydrated. He also lost a lot of weight, more than he should have, and my doctor suggested it was time to supplement my baby with formula. 

Then came the day that changed my mental health forever. 

After that, I cried for hours, and I could not get over the guilt. I kept thinking: “Why didn’t I know he was hungry or not getting enough? How could I have let my baby starve?” The guilt stayed with me for months and was the catalyst for my debilitating postpartum depression and anxiety diagnosis. 

After that, I became obsessed with feeding my son. I would write down how many ounces of formula or breastmilk he had and at what times. I no longer breastfed, but I pumped, so I knew exactly how many ounces he was consuming. Even when he was a few months older, I would still wake him up to feed him because I thought he would become dehydrated again. I hated when my little one would cry because it would be a reminder of the terrible weekend of his life, and I would break down, and I would cry.

My husband and I hope to have another little one, and I know what I would do differently. I feel guilty that my little one had a rough start on his feeding journey, but I try to remember that we were both learning and following the advice of medical professionals in the hospital. 

I can’t tell you how much I appreciate Fed is Best  Foundation and their work. I honestly don’t know what would have happened to me without finding your support community. I got so emotional writing my story.  Thank you for being there for mothers and babies.

Warmly,

Maria

FREE infant feeding resources:

Knowing if Your Newborn is HUNGRY and Needs Urgent Evaluation / Supplementation – Fed Is Best

Safe Infant Feeding Resources (fedisbest.org)

Fed is Best Feeding Plan – Updated 2024 – Fed Is Best

Pre-order our new book being published June 25th, 2024 : Fed Is Best Book – Fed Is Best Book

The Process of Healing from Infant Feeding Trauma, Guilt, and Shame: When You Wanted to Breastfeed, but Couldn’t – Fed Is Best

How to Breastfeed During the First 2 Weeks of Life – The New York Times (nytimes.com)

Dangers of Insufficient Exclusive Breastfeeding Presented at the First Coast Neonatal Symposium – Fed Is Best

Contact Information – The Fed is Best Foundation

 

 

Frequent Feeding VS Cluster Feeding: How to Know If Your Baby Is Being Adequately Breastfed Before Lactogenesis II

Frequent breastfeeding and cluster feeding are often used interchangeably, creating confusion for parents. This educational blog will help parents clarify the differences between the two.

What are the differences between frequent breastfeeding and cluster feeding before lactogenesis II for newborns?

Frequent Feeding-Newborn babies feed frequently (every 2-3 hours) before lactogenesis II, the onset of copious milk production. Frequent feeding is expected and normal. 

Cluster Feeding-Cluster feeding occurs after the arrival of lactogenesis II and is defined as a series of short feeding sessions lasting 2-3 hours daily. 

The Academy of Breastfeeding Medicine supplementary feeding protocol states cluster feeding before lactogenesis II requires a prompt evaluation to determine if the baby is getting enough colostrum. 

Continue reading

The Fed Is Best Book: Protecting Infants and Empowering Choices

Sandra Stephany Lozoya combo-feeding her babies

In a world filled with parenting advice and conflicting messages, there emerges a beacon of wisdom and support – the upcoming release of the Fed Is Best book. Set to hit the shelves June 25, 2024, this transformative guide promises to navigate the intricate landscape of infant feeding choices, empowering parents with knowledge and judgment-free support. This highly anticipated book will reshape the conversation around infant nutrition, offering a comprehensive, science-backed, and inclusive perspective on the myriad ways families can safely and optimally nourish their babies.

Fed Is Best Book

What is the difference between this book and so many other breastfeeding manuals? The goal of the book is not to convince to feed your baby in one way or discourage you from feeding another by painting one type of feeding as ideal and the other as suboptimal or undesirable. The goal is to help you find the best way to feed your baby that fits your biology, your ability to produce milk, your baby’s needs, and the many social, economic, psychological, and practical factors that define what “best” infant feeding looks like for your family—which is different for every single family.

For too long, parents have had to accept a monolithic message that only exclusive breastfeeding provides the best for their infants. Mothers have been told that if they “perceive” that their milk is not enough, they are likely mistaken, under-educated, doing it wrong, or simply not trying hard enough. Little do they know that scientific research has shown that when measured by objective means, true insufficient milk supply is actually quite common. As a result, the message that insufficient milk is rare and supplementation is rarely necessary is putting many infants at risk and many mothers at risk postpartum mental health problems due to the faulty message that low milk supply is their fault. Little do parents know that health professionals have been witnessing a rise in complications of insufficient feeding of exclusively breastfed infants, like jaundice, dehydration, hypoglycemia, and failure to thrive, for as long as parents have been receiving this message.  And the most common victims are those who have diligently followed the guidelines they have found in parenting and breastfeeding manuals yet found that their milk supply was truly too low to safely exclusively breastfeed.

This comprehensive and compassionate guide gives you the raw truth of about breastfeeding and formula feeding, dissects the history and science of breast- and bottle-feeding, and helps you prepare to reach your feeding goals in a safe and practical way. It does this by teaching you how to be flexible and respond to problems while working towards your goal, whether it be exclusive breastfeeding, exclusive formula feeding, or combination feeding.

This groundbreaking work is divided into two distinct parts, each addressing crucial aspects of infant feeding.

Fed Is Best Book

Part 1: The History and Science of Infant Feeding

The first section of the book lays a solid foundation by exploring the complex history and science behind infant feeding practices. It starts with Chapter 1, delving into the evolution of breastfeeding, the role of supplemental feeding, and the development of infant formula, providing readers with a broad context to understand how current practices came to be.

In Chapter 2, the book challenges prevalent beliefs surrounding breastfeeding, debunking harmful myths and shedding light on inconvenient truths that often go unspoken in the discourse on infant nutrition. This chapter aims to foster a more nuanced understanding and encourage critical thinking about the information often presented to new parents.

Chapter 3 addresses the polarizing debate between breastfeeding and formula feeding, questioning the notion of a singular “best” method of infant feeding. It presents evidence-based insights that highlight the benefits and considerations of each method, promoting a balanced view that respects individual circumstances and needs.

The final chapter of this section, Chapter 4 defines optimal infant feeding through a scientific lens, arguing why “Fed Is Best” is a principle that supports the health and well-being of all infants, regardless of the feeding method chosen by their families.

Part 2: The Fed Is Best Guide to Safe and Optimal Infant Feeding

Transitioning from the why to the how, the second part of the book serves as a practical guide for expectant and new parents. Chapter 5 discusses preparations before birth to ensure that parents are equipped with the knowledge and resources needed for optimal infant feeding from day one.

Chapter 6 focuses on the critical first few days of an infant’s life, offering guidance on how to protect against insufficient feeding and ensure that newborns receive adequate nutrition for a healthy start.

Subsequent chapters delve into the specifics of various feeding methods. Chapter 7 through Chapter 11 cover breastfeeding, pumped milk feeding, formula feeding, combination feeding, and bottle feeding, each chapter providing detailed advice, troubleshooting tips, and support for the respective feeding method. The book emphasizes the importance of honoring and supporting all families and their chosen safe infant feeding practices in Chapter 12, advocating for a non-judgmental and inclusive approach to infant nutrition.

The “Fed Is Best” book promises to be an essential resource for parents, caregivers, and healthcare professionals alike, promoting a more informed, compassionate, and inclusive approach to infant feeding. By combining historical context, scientific evidence, and practical guidance, this book aims to empower families to make informed decisions that best suit their needs and circumstances, ensuring that every infant is fed with love and care. Click the button below to pre-order your copy.

Fed Is Best Book