Neocate May Be Viewed as a Dietary Supplement Rather Than a Sole Source of Infant Nutrition

At first glance, Neocate seems like the perfect solution for infants with milk allergies and soy intolerance

Saturday, October 27, 2018 - Nutricia, the maker of Neocate, markets the product as a designer, prescription food that suitable as a replacement for the animal protein found in cow's milk. Approximately 5% of infants have cow's milk allergies (CMA). An infant with CMA may develop a skin rash, redness, and dryness on the cheeks, vomiting, reflux, diarrhea, and constipation. Other CMA symptoms are crying, colic, wheezing, vomiting, and poor sleep. A mother can pass cow's milk to their children through breastfeeding.

A much more severe condition could develop when cow's milk is replaced with Neocate infant formula in spite of the fact that discontinuing feeding a baby cow's milk can alleviate these symptoms. Neocate should be considered as an alternative for children that are allergic to cow's milk but in no way is the infant formula complete nutrition. Neocate has been found to be deficient in sodium, phosphorous, and potassium and children that have been given Neocate as their sole means of nutrition suffer from deformities of the bones causing bow legs and a weakened bone structure that can lead to fractures of the arms and legs. Even the Neocate.com website acknowledges the formula's nutritional shortcomings on their homepage in a vague warning to consumers as follows: "Neocate is intended for the nutritional management of cow's milk allergy and other indications where an elemental diet is recommended and should be used under the direction of a healthcare professional. Neocate must be used under medical supervision after full consideration of all the feeding options, including breastmilk." In other words, if all other feeding options fail, consider using Neocate. The National Institute of Health confirms Neocate's nutrient deficiencies in a peer-reviewed journal written by the nation's leading nutritionists and entitled "Unexpected widespread hypophosphatemia and bone disease associated with elemental formula use in infants and children." The elemental formula most frequently used is Neocate.

The results of the NIH/Neocate study in question are chilling. The study identified 51 children in 17 separate locations that were fed Neocate products as their sole source of nutrition and found that: "Skeletal radiographs demonstrated fractures, undermineralization, or rickets in 94% of the cases. Although the skeletal disease had often been attributed to underlying disease, most all improved with the addition of supplemental phosphate or change to a different formula product." The study concluded that despite being fed an adequate quantity of the supplement, the infant's biochemical profiles indicated "deficient dietary supply or severe malabsorption of phosphate," as well as the children's skeletal normalities and biochemical profile showing significant improvement when Neocat was switched to a different infant formula. Scientists fear hypocalcemia, a lack of calcium in the bones could develop in children given Neocate infant formula as a sole source of diet.

Parents of children that have been given Neocate and whose children have suffered bone deformity or fractures may contact a Neocate infant formula attorney to see if they qualify to file a claim against the product's manufacturer for failing to adequately warn them of Neocate's nutritional deficiencies.

More Recent Neocate Baby Formula Lawsuit News:

No-Cost, No-Obligation Neocate Lawsuit Case Review If You or a Loved One Suffered from Neocate Bone Complications

OnderLaw, LLC is a St. Louis personal injury law firm handling serious injury and death claims across the country. Its mission is the pursuit of justice, no matter how complex the case or strenuous the effort. The Onder Law Firm has represented clients throughout the United States in pharmaceutical and medical device litigation such as Pradaxa, Lexapro and Yasmin/Yaz, where the firm's attorneys held significant leadership roles in the litigation, as well as Actos, DePuy, Risperdal and others. The Onder Law Firm won $197 million in three talcum powder ovarian cancer lawsuits in St. Louis in 2016 and other law firms throughout the nation often seek its experience and expertise on complex litigation.