And Giuliani on TV today confirmed another bit that Trump has denied, saying Trump did ask Comey to go easy on Flynn.
Who actually suggested Giulliani’s name for Trump’s legal team? Mike Pence?
ISTR this issue becoming of note in the '70s. There was the whole “Boycott Nestlē” bidness. I still avoid that company – my friends have told me that they got better, but they still look like a newt to me.
Useful or not, the US bullying smaller sponsor nations but not Russia is reprehensible foreign policy.
Agreed, hence the caveat that I wasn’t speaking to this specific case. I just don’t want this to get caught in the breastfeeding hysteria.
We’re ceding the message that Vladimir Putin owns controlling interest in the president, and a noticeable chunk of the Republican party.
It’s not internet conspiracy talk; it’s as plain as day that this is what’s happening. How much of this country’s strength is going to be sacrificed before the country finally awakens?
Just keep an eye on whosoever it might be loitering around the Reichstrump Building trying to look casual.
At the rate Giuliani keeps shooting himself in the foot, it’ll be a month or so before he goes on CNN and says “sure, we colluded with the Russians to win the election, it’s not that important”.
They didn’t get better. Their CEO said the idea that humans have a right to clean water is “extreme”.
.
Nestle is one of those companies which are in the market periodically looking for consultants in my field. The level of regularity is indicative of the kind of place which either works people to illness, hurts if you happen to have a conscience, or both. They pay high rates, but many of us are at the level of income where we can afford to choose “better living” over “higher earning”.
That’s the best they could come up with? They’re concerned that formula-buying women might get their feelings hurt?
It’s not that I expected the reason to be sincere or scientifically supported, of course, but to be so breathtakingly feeble…
Even though it is Kos, I felt that this one was worth mentioning. Just for the skin-crawl effect.
Bartiromo: Here we see your lovely press secretary getting asked to leave a …
“Lovely” press secretary. Ok, yeah it was on FuckNuts. The poster (“news corpse”) describes the interview as (have your brain bleach handy) a “tongue bath”. Eww.
But the central point of the posting was the part where CFSG said
I think some of the things that are said are terrible. And our people are so incredible. You know, there’s probably never been a base, in the history of politics in this country, a base like my base. [COLOR=“Black”]I hope the other side realizes that they better just take it easy. They better just take it easy because some of the language used, some of the words used, even some of the radical ideas, I really think they are very bad for the country. I think they’re actually very dangerous for the country.[/COLOR]
No, no, there is not any menacing going on there. Nor any effort at stochastic terrorism. That was just gentle advice from a very kind man. The kindest.
No they’re not. Human breastmilk contains a lot of biochemical that are immense value to the baby, and aren’t contained in bovine milk, formula, or even pasteurized human breast mil (because they’re destroyed by heat).
One of these is BSSL – Bile Salt Stimulated Lipase. This is an enzyme needed to digest milk fats. Adult humans make the same chemical (under the name Bile Salt-Dependent Lipase, or BSDL) in the pancreas, but babies can’t make it at all. They get it from their mother’s milk. Without it, the babies can’t digest a lot of the fat they are ingesting from milk or formula. There’s no BSSL in infant formula, cow milk, or even human milk from milk banks, because the Holder pasteurization process (needed because otherwise you’d be at risk for spreading disease via the banked milk) destroys the BSSL.
And that’s not all. unpasteurized human breast milk contains Alkaline Phosphatase (ALP), Immunoglobulin A (IgA), Lactoferrin, Lysozyme, and a host of other components, most of which contribute to immunity, digestion, or general health. Al are broken down by heat and are not present in the alternatives.
So babies that are breast fed are getting a lot of things they need and can’t get any other way. We’re not talking about babies simply being happier or avoiding obesity later in life. these are components the babies need immediately, and are much healthier for having.
We’re getting off topic for a “fuck Trump” thread, but when my kids were born there seemed to be a bit of a residual backlash against the “better living through chemistry” decades, when women perfectly capable of breastfeeding would choose formula because it was less icky, or would keep their breasts perky, or whatever. So we were encouraged that “breast is best” and told about all of these wonderful things that humans evolved to include in breastmilk, all of which seem vitally important. And yet, at the same time, we were told that kids raised on formula grew up to be completely healthy and normal, with no long term negative health effects, a fact which was pointed out repeatedly in order not to stigmatize women who couldn’t breastfeed.
As others have pointed out, I don’t know if that holds true in undeveloped countries with questionable formula and/or water, but it certainly seemed to me to be a confusing contradiction.
You can grow up healthy without being breastfed. I don’t think I was.
Some women can’t breastfeed, and it can be traumatic. I’ve known some such women.
But if you can breastfeed you should – it is definitely a better alternative for the baby.*
No contradictions there. There’s no need to feel stigmatized if you can’t breastfeed.
*IN case you’re wondering about why we have Human Breast Milk Banks – their biggest recipients are premature babies of women who can’t breastfeed. For preemies, human breast milk is a better choice.
Agreed that there’s no contradiction there, but that’s not what we were told. The message was, breastfeeding is great and you should totally do it, but there’s no proof that it’s better.
Obviously if there’s no proof that it’s better, why is there a preference for it? That’s the contradiction. So either there is proof that it’s better, and that proof was concealed from us in order to prevent any sort of stigma, or they weren’t concealing anything and the preference for breastfeeding was unjustified.
YM may have varied. I wasn’t about to argue with hospital staff.
Feeble? Yes. But it still plays better than “We got a giant check from a baby formula lobbyist.”
When Trump cut down the number of acres reserved in the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument, he said he was going to “give that power back to the states and to the people where it belongs.” Well, the people where it belongs turns out to be, surprise, surprise, a Canadian mining company.
https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5b0755ac365f02104c1b9097/t/5b2129fb2b6a285cc27de8f2/1528900092042/NRColtMesaAcquisition13June2018Final.pdf
They now want to open marine monuments to commercial fishing.
When our first kid was born breast feeding didn’t work. La Leche League came over to help - and basically told my wife that it was all her fault. That was the only trauma.
Which doesn’t contradict the clear science behind the benefit of breast feeding at all.
Now that the Trump Administration has come out against motherhood, can tariffs on Apple Pie be far behind?