Started By
Message

re: U.S. Opposition to Breast-Feeding Resolution Stuns World Health Officials

Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:34 pm to
Posted by Adajax
Member since Nov 2015
6152 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:34 pm to
Breastfeeding is only healthy if the mother is healthy. Crackheads don't need to breastfeed. Neither do AIDS-infected third world mothers. My wife and I had four kids. Only two of them took to breastfeeding, the other two did fine on formula. It's not, and shouldn't be, an either or thing. I'm sure there's some sort of political agenda attached to the resolution.
Posted by HailHailtoMichigan!
Mission Viejo, CA
Member since Mar 2012
69377 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:36 pm to
quote:

I'm sure there's some sort of political agenda attached to the resolution.


The resolution called for a complete ban on formula and other artificial infant breast-milk alternatives. On economic freedom grounds alone, the resolution was indefensible.
Posted by Pussykat
South Louisiana
Member since Oct 2016
3889 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:37 pm to
quote:

Why is such a resolution considered necessary?


I'm with you, who's business is this besides the mothers' anyway?
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48331 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:38 pm to
quote:

The resolution called for a complete ban on formula and other artificial infant breast-milk alternatives.


Well that's good since a healthy percentage of women have anatomical or other issues that prevent healthy breastfeeding.

I guess those kids will just starve.
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:41 pm to
quote:

Why is such a resolution considered necessary?


To virtue signal.
Posted by notsince98
KC, MO
Member since Oct 2012
18081 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:41 pm to
quote:

99.999% of mothers would be delighted to successfully breast feed. Formula is expensive.


I agree for the most part but people in general are completely ignorant about how much healthier breast feeding is. It is tied to everything from immune health to brain development.

Same thing applies for vaginal vs c section births. Vaginal is so much better for many reasons but many have no clue.
Posted by Stacked
Member since Apr 2012
5675 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:46 pm to
Muh Vaginal Births
Posted by TigerBait1971
PTC GA
Member since Oct 2014
14865 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:48 pm to
We shouldn't be telling women what to do with their bodies, right? Right?
Posted by thebigmuffaletta
Member since Aug 2017
13013 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:49 pm to
It makes titties sag.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48331 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:53 pm to
quote:

I agree for the most part but people in general are completely ignorant about how much healthier breast feeding is. It is tied to everything from immune health to brain development.





You need to look at some of the most recent research. There are slight benefits for the child but they are really not all that staggering and really aren't apparent outside of immune system development.


quote:

Same thing applies for vaginal vs c section births. Vaginal is so much better for many reasons but many have no clue.


This is anti-science bullshite. Yes, vaginal delivers are better for the mother if everything is normal. But the C-Section is arguably the greatest innovation for women in history. It allows the safe delivery of a child that would otherwise pose extreme risk for both maternal and fetal demise. The risk of severe outcomes in C-Section is less than 1% higher than in a vaginal delivery when other factors are held constant. And both are extremely, extremely low. Prior to modern obstetrics, including C-sections, childbirth was the #1 killer of women with about 1.5-2% of all childbirths resulting in maternal demise.

Posted by TigerBait1971
PTC GA
Member since Oct 2014
14865 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 2:54 pm to
Antonio slinging facts up in here.
Posted by Purple Spoon
Hoth
Member since Feb 2005
17932 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:04 pm to
quote:

Antonio Moss


No facts bro. You know the rules
Posted by BamaGradinTn
Murfreesboro
Member since Dec 2008
26993 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:11 pm to
quote:

The resolution called for a complete ban on formula and other artificial infant breast-milk alternatives.


Really? Where in the article did it say that?



Posted by PsychTiger
Member since Jul 2004
99396 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:14 pm to
quote:

Muh breast milk



As a baby, Trump got two nipples while other babies only got one.
Posted by FooManChoo
Member since Dec 2012
41792 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:17 pm to
Boils down to this: a lot of socialists don't want to spend money on formula so they are pushing breastfeeding as the only legitimate source of infant nutrition.

There are a lot of women who can't breastfeed and shouldn't be treated as bad mothers because they use a substitute.

Also the article is very biased. They went on to trash the Trump admin for opposing modifications to patent law (saying it is due to being in the pockets of big business) while ignoring the incentives to pharma investment and research that patents provide.
Posted by cokebottleag
I’m a Santos Republican
Member since Aug 2011
24028 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:18 pm to
Don’t bring those facts here. What about muh anecdotal evidence?
Posted by Vols&Shaft83
Throbbing Member
Member since Dec 2012
69944 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:19 pm to
quote:

The resolution called for a complete ban on formula and other artificial infant breast-milk alternatives.



Jesus, if this is true, nuke the UN, they can't be saved.
Posted by Rex Feral
Athens
Member since Jan 2014
11445 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:22 pm to
quote:

But it encourages countries that don’t have freedom in the way we think of it, and often take for granted, to crack down on formula makers and specifically their ability to advertise their products.

Agreed. I’ve spent time in Honduras and the amount of advertisIng spent on formula is ridiculous. Breast milk is infinantly better than formula, but all the mothers give their children formula that they can’t afford. There is so much sugar in the formula that I didn’t see a toddler that still had any baby teeth leg . They’d all rotted out.
Posted by Antonio Moss
Baton Rouge
Member since Mar 2006
48331 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:26 pm to
quote:

Don’t bring those facts here. What about muh anecdotal evidence?


Sorry.


So, like, my doolah, who didn't graduate from high school but did get her online certification, she like, says that even though the doctor says that my baby is frank breech and his hearttones are deceling and we should do a crash that, like, we should instead just wait and do some breathing exercises to make everything zen and see how it all goes. Cause, like, I don't want my baby to come into a world of chaos and totally mess up his aura.
Posted by tiggerthetooth
Big Momma's House
Member since Oct 2010
61378 posts
Posted on 7/8/18 at 3:33 pm to
Why does this need a resolution? Educate people and let them decide for themselves.


Ugh. Liberals trying to put laws to everything.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 3Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram