It’s widely accepted that ‘breast is best’ when it comes to feeding babies. But the current hot topic is whether someone else’s breast could be just as good. The debate has been sparked by a recent TV documentary and is the talk of chat rooms and coffee mornings across Britain. So is any breast better than none? Arguments for Virtually all medical research into the subject supports the fact that breast milk is the best possible food for a baby. It contains essential antibodies and nutrients not found in formula milk. Babies who are given formula milk, on the other hand, are five times as likely to develop problems like gastroenteritis and ear infections. Historically the idea of wet nursing, or cross-feeding, is nothing new. Formula milk as we know it has only been available since the early 1900s. Before then it was common practice to use a wet nurse in situations where women were either unable, or unwilling, to breastfeed their own children. These days, more and more mothers are going back to work earlier after having a baby. Wet nursing can be seen as an ideal solution to the problem of maternity leave ending sooner than they would like to finish breastfeeding, if they know, or pay, someone who is breast-feeding their own child and willing to share. The practice has always gone on quietly in Britain, and still does today. Frowned upon by the authorities, it tends to be through informal arrangements. Elsewhere though hiring someone else to breastfeed your child is becoming increasingly popular. In China, where rich women generally do not work, employing a wet nurse is increasingly used as a status symbol among the upper ranks of society. In Hollywood, meanwhile, the number of mothers with breast implants is cited as one of the reasons behind an increase in demand for wet nurses there.