The effect of pasteurization on trace elements in donor breast milk

OBJECTIVE: Premature infants often receive pasteurized donor human milk when mothers are unable to provide their own milk. This study aims to establish the effect of the pasteurization process on a range of trace elements in donor milk. STUDY DESIGN: Breast milk was collected from 16 mothers donating to the milk bank at the Royal Brisbane and Women’s Hospital. Samples were divided into pre- and post-pasteurization aliquots and were Holder pasteurized. Inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry was used to analyze the trace elements zinc (Zn), copper (Cu), selenium (Se), manganese (Mn), iodine (I), iron (Fe), molybdenum (Mo) and bromine (Br). Differences in trace elements pre- and post-pasteurization were analyzed. RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the trace elements tested pre- and post-pasteurization, except for Fe(P<0.05). The median (interquartile range, 25 to 75%; μg l− 1) of trace elements for pre- and post- pasteurization aliquots were—Zn: 1639 (888–4508), 1743 (878–4143), Cu: 360 (258–571), 367 (253–531), Se: 12.34 (11.73–17.60), 12.62 (11.94–16.64), Mn:(1.48 (1.01–1.75), 1.49 (1.11–1.75), I (153 (94–189), 158 (93–183), Fe (211 (171–277), 194 (153–253), Mo (1.46 (0.37–2.99), 1.42(0.29–3.73) and Br (1066 (834–1443), 989 (902–1396).CONCLUSIONS: Pasteurization had minimal effect on several trace elements in donor breast milk but high levels of inter-donor variability of trace elements were observed. The observed decrease in the iron content of pasteurized donor milk is, however, unlikely to be clinically relevant

A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation

In this paper, it is argued that the most fruitful approach to developing normative models of argument quality is one that combines the argumentation scheme approach with Bayesian argumentation. Three sample argumentation schemes from the literature are discussed: the argument from sign, the argument from expert opinion, and the appeal to popular opinion. Limitations of the scheme-based treatment of these argument forms are identified and it is shown how a Bayesian perspective may help to overcome these. At the same time, the contributions of the standard scheme-based approach are highlighted, and it is argued that only a combination of the insights of different traditions will yield a complete normative theory of argument quality