There is a quote from the top of this article that is inaccurate:  "These antibodies have been shown to pass into breast milk, thus protecting the baby for at least six months from the date of vaccination."

"[...] thus protecting the baby" is not at all a conclusion or statement that can be made at this time, and is therefore incorrect to convey to the general public.  The presence of the referenced antibodies in breastmilk does not necessarily imply protection for the baby - that is yet to be proven.  In fact, the study referenced in this article explicitly states (**emphasis** mine):   "Infants of breastfeeding vaccinated women **could** be protected for at least six months after vaccination and serum determination of SARS-CoV-2 IgG-S1 could indicate the breastmilk levels of antibodies during this period."

This hypothetical *could* is very different than *thus protecting the baby.*  While it may turn out in the fullness of time to be proven that the antibodies in breastmilk do have protective properties for the infant, this statement should not be made as of yet until such data can support this conclusion.  This stance is shared among at least half a dozen to a dozen peer reviewed articles on similar topics that I have personally seen and is the current consensus.  The wording in this article does not reflect the current science in this sense, and implies a false sense of security for infants that is yet to be fully proven.