Chill out, Princhester, you’re really going over the top.
What you said was:
I then gave a couple of examples where it was in fact NOT better for baby due to medical reasons (transmissible disease or necessary medication). Hence, my statement that while “breast is best” generally applies there are exceptions. Which is why we have baby formula. I don’t know why pointing this out upsets you so.
And there are people who really, really want to insist women breastfeed no matter what. Perhaps my viewpoint is somewhat skewed due to having worked at a clinic where we had many women who, for sound medical reasons, were told NOT to breastfeed as, in their case, it posed more risk to baby than formula did. Nothing quite like an already ill and troubled woman crying because some busybody came up to her and gave her shit for bottle-feeding her child and berated her for not using breast.
Recently there have been stories about women buying breastmilk on line and later testing finding that that milk is NOT healthy, contaminated by bacteria or chemicals. Seriously, what dairy cattle eat and are exposed to has to be carefully controlled, but it’s OK to buy human breast milk from random strangers? I know some places have milk banks where women can donate breast milk but the legitimate sources test that for contamination, the on line sources…? Og only knows. Seems to me formula carries less risk than that, what’s in formula is actually regulated, and what a breast milk source on line is doing is anyone’s guess. But hey, Breast Milk is Magic and an untested anonymous source has got to be better than a commercially produced formula made to a controlled recipe in sanitary conditions, right?
There’s also the matter of women who have to return to work and aren’t given space or appropriate breaks to breastfeed but let’s just stick to the medical for now.
Yes, breast is best but if a woman’s bottle-feeding it’s none of your damn business why. I’m just glad that we live in a time where it’s an option, unlike the Bad Old Days where if mom couldn’t produce sufficient milk and there wasn’t a wet nurse option the baby simply died.
The thread is about absurd food myths and rumors. TBG, myself, and likely others are discussing absurd myths and rumors about breast milk vs. formula. In other words, it’s not all about YOU, Princhester, it’s about a topic and a sub-topic.
So, who exactly is saying that formula is child abuse or that formula is poison or that it isn’t food? The answer, as I’m sure you know, is precisely no one participating in this thread, let alone me. That being the case, why did you say these things as if they were in response to anything I said?
Feel free to answer. Until you give an acceptable answer or apologise, I’m not interested in debate with you. You can debate with me respectfully or not at all.
It’s certainly a myth that breast milk provides health benefits.Or rather, it’s a distortion of how we phrase these things in scientific circles. Breast milk is the biological norm. Formula is medically and culinarily inferior which, like injected insulin, must sadly be opted for in some cases. But we’d be better off if instead of promoting formula in response to online private sales of milk, we promoted, supported and expanded *safe *milk shares and milk banks instead.That’s not myth, that’s science.
It’s also a huge freaking hijacking thread killer.
I’m not debating, I’m discussing. If you want to bow out, feel free. I am not required to give an answer YOU deem “acceptable”. I’m not going to apologize because I have nothing to apologize for.
I think we’d be better off removing the social obstacles to breast feeding, not limited to just allowing women to breast feed in public instead of in toilet cubicles.
When I worked in Big Bad Corporate America - office work, not retail - one of my co-workers was fired for taking “too many” breaks for breast feeding. She was taking all of two per day, in lieu of her lunch hour. That is, she was taking just as much break time as anyone else, but because she was splitting it into two breaks her boss found it “inconvenient” and insisted on replacing her. Yes, it was illegal AND against written company policy but it still happened. I also noted a class distinction - management level women took pumping breaks several times a day and were praised as good mothers. Less-than-management mothers gave up lunch to try to wedge two breaks into the day, their time strictly watched, and were disciplined harshly (up to termination) for and scolded for asking for “special treatment”.
I’m told women working retail in big box stores and the like have it even worse.
Society tries to push breast-feeding, then makes it horribly difficult/inconvenient for many women to actually do it. Breast-feeding is all too often seen as an indulgent luxury. Of course, a lot of work places also think employees should avoid such basic bodily needs as pissing and eating as well so why should we be surprised?
I think that’s important as well. But I suspect it’s a different audience. Families so adamant about breastmilk that they’re willing to buy from strangers online are unlikely to be those deterred from breastfeeding themselves by social rules and stigma. They’re far more likely to be the ones who really want to breastfeed but have medical contraindications or boobs that are for decorative purposes only.
My hypothesis, which fits all the studies I’ve read about, is that the taste of sugar (that is, sweetness) makes kids hyper. It works even when rather mediocre substitutes are used. I can’t think of a good way to test that hypothesis, though!
Got a cite for that? My understanding is that there are a few amino acids that are found only in animals. IIRC, one of these is required for the Krebs citrus cycle and can’t be synthesized by humans, so vegetarians rely on a backup path for cellular respiration. Admittedly, I learned that long ago, and it may no longer be considered fact.
That’s consistent with what Nick Lane says in “Power, Sex, and Suicide” (about mitochondria). I mentioned that here and someone pointed to more recent clinical trials that showed benefits to antioxidants. Sorry but I can’t recall the details. The science looked impressive to me, but I admit I’d be pretty easily fooled. Regardless, I have a hard time understanding why eating antioxidants would benefit us, since our cells actively maintain an oxidation level. Eating antioxidants wouldn’t increase our cellular oxidation level any more than eating hot foods would increase the temperature inside our cells.
Actually, I think one of the benefits of coconut oil was that you could get fat eating it despite high exercise levels. Thus its centrality in Polynesian diets, where extra pounds were favored by both sexual and natural selection.
How about the old standbys of “Green M&Ms make you horny” or “When I drink Tequila I am a mean drunk, but otherwise I am a nice drunk” Alcohol is alcohol.
I saw a poster on a lamp post that suggested salty food was poisonous and should be labelled as such.
Yes, too much salt is bad for you. Too much of anything is bad for you. In fact, too much water is bad, for the reason that it dilutes the salt in your body that the cells need to continue working!
Well, the tequila one is partially true, by placebo or self-fulfilling prophecy: if people are handed mixed drinks where you can’t taste the alcohol, they will act in ways consistent with what they are told is in it. If you make a vodka drink, they may become tequila-beligerent, sad or sentimental with gin, poetic and such with whiskey, or whatever it is that people think brandy does (start talking like a Wisconsinite?)
Never heard the M&M one. But I still eat them in a specific order as if they were Skittles, even though it doesn’t matter.
Me too- long before 1985. My big sister told it to me first, and I guess she’d heard it when she was in middle school, where all the girls would filter out and separate them, hoarding the green ones.
I think this all started because you italicized “in general.” I cannot remember hearing those two words emphasized except when I was being corrected. Thus Princhester took your initial response to him as a rebuttal–even though he had already admitted that the crazy stuff was not true.
I’m only pointing this out because, when I figured out the problem, it made me laugh at the absurdity. A fight started over use of italics!
Anyways, my big myths: that all outdated food is bad for you and must be thrown out ASAP. I actually profit from this one–the local Bent and Dent is my favorite shopping place for a lot of stuff that’s way too expensive elsewhere.
