Journal Reference: http://www.cell.com/cell-reports/supplemental/S2211-1247(17)...

Edit:

Also, I can't believe people are still getting away with not including scatter plots of x vs y when they claim x is correlated with (or causes) y. This paper needs a plot of daughter cell cycle length vs mother cell DNA damage.

Biology is not my forte so more background on what cell dividing is and when it happens can be found here:

https://ghr.nlm.nih.gov/primer/howgeneswork/cellsdivide

The process of the mother cells kicking the DNA damage down the road happens through the cell division stage according to the article. That is why I posted the above link.

I honestly don't understand why do some people think breast milk isn't superior to commercial formula milk.It took evolution eons to perfect it and here we humans think it's not good enough to opt for commercial product?

Um, do you know any of the people making the decision you're voicing an opinion on? I ask because when I've heard thoughts on this subject the thinking was nothing to do with the commercial product being "superior". Rather it was much more convenient, and also "good enough" to overcome any concerns about baby health and development.

Some people can't or do not want to take on the burden of providing breast milk. To make themselves feel better they sometimes demonize the choice of breast milk. Now in their minds they no longer have suffer the consequences of the choice they made for their child.

Pardon my ignorance, but what does this have to do with the article?

The "mother" cell in the article isn't referring to a literal mother, but rather, a mother cell that divides itself and creates two daughter' cells.