Posted on 06/14/2006 8:30:10 PM PDT by GeorgiaDawg32
Warning: Public health officials have determined that not breast-feeding may be hazardous to your baby's health.
There is no black-box label like that affixed to cans of infant formula or tucked into the corner of magazine advertisements, at least not yet. But that is the unambiguous message of a controversial government public health campaign encouraging new mothers to breast-feed for six months to protect their babies from colds, flu, ear infections, diarrhea and even obesity. In April, the World Health Organization, setting new international bench marks for children's growth, for the first time referred to breast-feeding as the biological norm.
"Just like it's risky to smoke during pregnancy, it's risky not to breast-feed after," said Suzanne Haynes, senior scientific adviser to the Office on Women's Health in the Department of Health and Human Services. "The whole notion of talking about risk is new in this field, but it's the only field of public health, except perhaps physical activity, where there is never talk about the risk."
(Excerpt) Read more at content.living.aol.com ...
just another example of the Left's war against science
Breastfeeding is good for mother, child, and society.
I'm all for breast feeding.
:-) HA!
Amazing isn't it?
Only thing that surprised me here is that no one, not even the NYT, seems to have recognized the La Leche League propaganda line at the root of the campaign.
Let me see, the modern mom takes aspirin to prevent a heart attack, diet pills to prevent obesity, tranquilizers to calm her nerves, caffeine to keep her going, antibiotics to fight her chronic infection, sleeping pills to help her sleep, all of which ends up in her breast milk which her baby will drink for 6 months or more. Yeh, they're right it's safer to drink mother's milk.
Weird comment.
Mother's milk is, as the Designer intended, best for her baby.
Sad that our society needs a government reminder of simple common sense.
It's not propagada. It's been shown to reduce food allergies in babies and breast cancer in women. Since when did any prepared store bought *better living through chemistry* "food" compare to anything natural?
If she does. And that chemical soup offered as an alternative is better? Ever read the label ingredients in formula? And what about the smell? The smell of that stuff always made me want to gag. How could someone feed their kid that stuff and really think they're doing them a favor?
Hmmm ~ we prefer reindeer milk despite the fact that this most natural of foods is generally slightly radioactive ~ but never mind, eh!
It does not take much propaganda to support breast feeding.
Its just true. The empirics of it are overwhelming.
More interesting is the propaganda supporting formula and other alternatives.
"The species" would survive better with more breastfeeding.
Notice the NYT does not urge workplaces to accommodate breastfeeding, we just need to accept the reality that women cannot breastfeed.
"Working" [mothering is not working??] is the "natural" woman for the NYT.
It is a wonder that this peculiar worldview can be rhetorically sustained at all.
Actually, ignorant comment. All the mothers I know that breast feed are meticulous about what they take and many suffer through illnesses rather than take any risk with their baby. And who that age takes asprin everysay for strokes, or antibiotics for 6+ months for an infection? That's pretty judgmental about people that someone never met, making all those assumptions; and you know what happens to people who *assume* things.
Who said anything about feeding your babies "The Formula". I would think that thinking Americans would feed their babies FOOD!!
That the belief is false does not dissuade them from continuing in it.
The designer never meant for mommy to be doped up with drugs of all sorts either, especially if she's nursing her baby. But what the heck; it's either kill your baby before it takes it's first breath, or kill it with chemicals in the mother's milk.
What else do you propose feeding a baby with no teeth who can't swallow properly if not breast milk? The milk of any mammal is best suited for it's young. For the baby, breast milk IS food.
It's a duplicate.
I breastfed my two middle children. No matter how hard I tried, it was a painful, nasty experience. When they reached 6 months, they went on the bottle. My last child was spitting up the blood she was ingesting from me. Carnation Good Start is a healthy alternative. So is goat's milk. I nursed a sick kitten with that.
I really hate to call another Freeper an idiot, but I must say you certainly sound like one.
Look, bub, I speak from experience. I breast-fed three babies who are all now healthy and intelligent adults. Intensely aware that anything I swallowed could affect my baby, I didn't even eat onions, much less take harmful medications, or "chemicals," as you call them.
Your assumption that a nursing mother's milk is polluted is just plain ignorant.
Someone just had to do it.
:-)
Yes, but are they conservative or liberal? There's the real power of breast milk.
:-)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.