For those of you not tired of the bfing debate

Yules

shakes:

bstrangely:

JoannaJes:

I'm having a hard time following you on your somewhat loose sense of logic here.

when you guys are freaking out about this sign, i understand that it's rude, but i don't understand why so many commenters are rejecting the information. i want to know what's best for my kid, even if i can't actually accomplish it. for example, i know it would have been "best" for my son to have been born vaginally. i had to have a c-section. seeing a sign saying, "choosing a c-section increases the risk of xyz" would have stung, but i still want to have the information so i can try for whatever would be best. and i really don't judge people who choose otherwise.

does that make more sense? i'm trying to talk to the people who are questioning the facts presented on the sign. 

Because they are NOT facts! Period! Even the douche that wrote the sign knows it's not fact as it says "may". As in, "lets write this and post it in hospitals to guilt and fear monger women into bf'ing, (instead of a positive, healthy, encouraging approach) and put "may" just incase someone takes issue with it and we get sued!

 

This. Especially the mention of cholera. It's an infectious disease the spores of which are not present in formula. To put that on the sign was retarded. 

Yules

President Camacho:

Yules:

President Camacho:

THIS IS BULLSH!T. EVERYBODY KNOW THE BEST THING TO GIVE A BABY IS BRAWNDO! IT'S FULL OF ELECTROLYTES.

Who are you? Because I love you. I'm about to go 'bating to your post.

But wait, do you know where the time machine is? 

I AM DWAYNE ELIZONDO MOUNTAIN DEW HERBERT CAMACHO. THE ONLY PRESIDENT WHO IS ALSO A WRESTLER AND A PORN STAR.

YOu're my kind of president. I bet you like slutty halloween costumes too.

sillypit

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

That's it, thread over, CG wins.

CinemaGoddess

Nobody is saying that FF is better than BF.  Quite the opposite, in fact.

But this sign is fear mongering at it's finest (worst?).  There are so many things wrong with telling a new mom, who may be having issues BFing, that if she doesn't succeed with BF she will cause her child to possibly contract cholera or cancer. 

bstrangely

shakes:

bstrangely:

JoannaJes:

I'm having a hard time following you on your somewhat loose sense of logic here.

when you guys are freaking out about this sign, i understand that it's rude, but i don't understand why so many commenters are rejecting the information. i want to know what's best for my kid, even if i can't actually accomplish it. for example, i know it would have been "best" for my son to have been born vaginally. i had to have a c-section. seeing a sign saying, "choosing a c-section increases the risk of xyz" would have stung, but i still want to have the information so i can try for whatever would be best. and i really don't judge people who choose otherwise.

does that make more sense? i'm trying to talk to the people who are questioning the facts presented on the sign. 

Because they are NOT facts! Period! Even the douche that wrote the sign knows it's not fact as it says "may". As in, "lets write this and post it in hospitals to guilt and fear monger women into bf'ing, (instead of a positive, healthy, encouraging approach) and put "may" just incase someone takes issue with it and we get sued!

 

dude, that is exactly what it says on my beer about birth defects. no one can predict that your kid will definitely have fetal alcohol syndrome if you drink 7 zimas a night. 

they are as close to facts as we can get right now, just like most everything in medicine. you can't predict who will have side effects to medication either, which is why all my pills say "may cause drowsiness etc."

are they trying to guilt me into not taking tylenol? i even said it was a tacky, guilt inducing sign, but what it ain't lying.

bstrangely

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

DaisyFull

Daisy was here.

CinemaGoddess

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm implying.  Exactly. 

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

shakes

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm implying.  Exactly. 

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

bstrangely

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm implying.  Exactly. 

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

the evidence is the same though. i don't get how someone who believes that smoking around babies is bad would go apeshit about this. i don't know why people take this as personally as they do. to me, it's pretty much the same as my failure to descend.  and you hear a TON about how evil drs are making women get c-sections. i'm over it. i know how hard i tried and that's all i needed from myself.

and for the millionth time, i already hated on the sign. it sucks. burn it with fire. but not around the baby. i hear he only likes menthols.

 

Smootchy

EllaHella:

WARNING: Using infant formula may increase the risk of a child developing Diabetes, Allergies, Ulcerative Colitis, Crohn?s Disease, Cholera, Ear Infections, SIDS, Childhood Cancer especially Lymphomas, and Hodgkins Disease

1. Diabetes- lifestyle is a huge factor as well, moreso than formula/breastmilk

fil BF has diabetes.

2. Allergies- genetic and environmental...too many factors to attribute to one specific thing like formula/breastmilk

niece BF has allergies. Other 2 niece FF no allergies... (different families)

3. Ear Infections- genetics also play a part as does the actual anatomy of the ear.  A child in daycare, specifically boys in daycare, are more prone. 

fil BF. TONS of ear infections. If he looks at a pool, ear infection. 

4.SIDS, Cancer and Lymphoma- too many factors and unknowns to attribute to one cause at this point in studies.

Brother, BF till 2 years old... Died of cancer at age 30

Fact. that poster is stupid.

RedWingsFan

DaisyFull:

Daisy was here.

 

::waves frantically at Daisy::

I cried when my oxen died on Oregon Trail. 

I played it on a Mac, and we played Spy Hunter on a Commodore 64.

 

shakes

mooshagirl:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm implying.  Exactly. 

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There are women who do not have the ability to breast feed, Period. They do not need to be made to feel like if their child develops hodgkins disease in 47 years that it was all their fault.

DaisyFull

A lot of "breast is best" campaigns are funded by state and government programs like WIC.

 

I wonder what WIC could possibly stand to gain in a scenario like this. Hmmm... 

 

I do have to give them props for "Cholera" though. That shiz is funny. 

CinemaGoddess

mooshagirl:

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There is a world of difference between encouraging a mother to breastfeed by telling her that breast is best and focusing on the positives of breastfeeding rather than the negatives of formula feeding.  Having a good supportive staff of LCs at the hospital is also a better way to encourage BF than putting up a sign telling them how a mom can screw up her kid from day one by giving him/her formula.   Especially when that mom is having issues with BF or can't BF for whatever reason. 

Formula feeding is not the devil.  It is not the worst possible thing that a child can eat.  It does not cause cancer. 

There is a direct link between the smoking of cigarettes and lung cancer.  There is no (known) direct link between formula feeding and lymphoma.  

 

DaisyFull

RedWingsFan:

DaisyFull:

Daisy was here.

 

::waves frantically at Daisy::

I cried when my oxen died on Oregon Trail. 

I played it on a Mac, and we played Spy Hunter on a Commodore 64.

 

Hi sweet thang!

We used to pick the boys that we had crushes on to be the men in our wagon. Who ever DIDN'T die of Cholera was who you were going to marry. Obvsly.

RedWingsFan

DaisyFull:

RedWingsFan:

DaisyFull:

Daisy was here.

 

::waves frantically at Daisy::

I cried when my oxen died on Oregon Trail. 

I played it on a Mac, and we played Spy Hunter on a Commodore 64.

 

Hi sweet thang!

We used to pick the boys that we had crushes on to be the men in our wagon. Who ever DIDN'T die of Cholera was who you were going to marry. Obvsly.

SO much more reliable than playing that "H O M E S" game on paper.

CinemaGoddess

RedWingsFan:

DaisyFull:

RedWingsFan:

DaisyFull:

Daisy was here.

 

::waves frantically at Daisy::

I cried when my oxen died on Oregon Trail. 

I played it on a Mac, and we played Spy Hunter on a Commodore 64.

 

Hi sweet thang!

We used to pick the boys that we had crushes on to be the men in our wagon. Who ever DIDN'T die of Cholera was who you were going to marry. Obvsly.

SO much more reliable than playing that "H O M E S" game on paper.

But only marginally less reliable than this game:

Kitiara5512

mooshagirl:

CinemaGoddess:

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

Um, so you are equivocating formula feeding with smoking cigarettes? Well, then, I should have let C starve, or poop blood on a daily basis and continue to be in enough pain that he couldn't sleep. Thanks for setting me straight.

There is a huge difference between the two. No one needs to smoke to survive, and nicotine is an addictive drug that affects not only the smoker, but others around the smoker. Formula is processed FOOD, intended for when bfing is, for whatever reason, not happening. HUGE DIFFERENCE!!!

DaisyFull

EllaHella:

I heard MASH gives you diptheria.  Just saying.

 Better than getting the herpes from a magic 8 ball...

Kitiara5512

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Okay, I see what you are saying.

bstrangely

CinemaGoddess:

mooshagirl:

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There is a world of difference between encouraging a mother to breastfeed by telling her that breast is best and focusing on the positives of breastfeeding rather than the negatives of formula feeding.  Having a good supportive staff of LCs at the hospital is also a better way to encourage BF than putting up a sign telling them how a mom can screw up her kid from day one by giving him/her formula.   Especially when that mom is having issues with BF or can't BF for whatever reason. 

Formula feeding is not the devil.  It is not the worst possible thing that a child can eat.  It does not cause cancer. 

There is a direct link between the smoking of cigarettes and lung cancer.  There is no (known) direct link between formula feeding and lymphoma.  

 

does this offend you? it's from the march of dimes.

"Thirdhand smoke
New research shows that thirdhand smoke is another health hazard. Thirdhand smoke is made up of the toxic gases and particles left behind from cigarette or cigar smoking. These toxic remains, which include lead, arsenic and carbon monoxide, cling to things like clothes, hair, couches and carpets well after the smoke from a cigarette or cigar has cleared the room. That?s why you often can tell a smoker by the smell of cigarettes or cigars that linger on his clothing or in his home or car. Things like cracking the car window down while you smoke or smoking in another room aren?t enough to keep others away from the harm caused by cigarettes or cigars.

Breathing in these toxins at an early age (babies and young children) may have devastating health problems like asthma and other breathing issues, learning disorders and cancer. It's important that expecting moms and their children do their best to keep away from places where people smoke."

so if i smoke, even away from home, my child could have a learning disability? peachy! 

and seriously, should they keep something like this a secret? incidentally, it also says go to college or your kid will get lymphoma.

yes or no? should they wait to comment on that kind of thing until we can show a mechanism? that's really what you mean when you say a direct link, isn't it? they've been studying it for almost 20 years, and there is a consistent link. that should not be reported?

 

carlab44

I'm very pro breastfeeding and find that sign offensive. However, I also have to say that those claiming these are only "theories" don't truly understand what goes into developing a scientific theory.

I do wonder how this sign would be received if rather than stating that formula increased the risk, it stated that breastfeeding reduced the risk of SIDS, diabetes, etc. 

CinemaGoddess

I'm still waiting for any proof that FF causes cancer. 

CinemaGoddess

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

mooshagirl:

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There is a world of difference between encouraging a mother to breastfeed by telling her that breast is best and focusing on the positives of breastfeeding rather than the negatives of formula feeding.  Having a good supportive staff of LCs at the hospital is also a better way to encourage BF than putting up a sign telling them how a mom can screw up her kid from day one by giving him/her formula.   Especially when that mom is having issues with BF or can't BF for whatever reason. 

Formula feeding is not the devil.  It is not the worst possible thing that a child can eat.  It does not cause cancer. 

There is a direct link between the smoking of cigarettes and lung cancer.  There is no (known) direct link between formula feeding and lymphoma.  

 

does this offend you? it's from the march of dimes.

"Thirdhand smoke
New research shows that thirdhand smoke is another health hazard. Thirdhand smoke is made up of the toxic gases and particles left behind from cigarette or cigar smoking. These toxic remains, which include lead, arsenic and carbon monoxide, cling to things like clothes, hair, couches and carpets well after the smoke from a cigarette or cigar has cleared the room. That?s why you often can tell a smoker by the smell of cigarettes or cigars that linger on his clothing or in his home or car. Things like cracking the car window down while you smoke or smoking in another room aren?t enough to keep others away from the harm caused by cigarettes or cigars.

Breathing in these toxins at an early age (babies and young children) may have devastating health problems like asthma and other breathing issues, learning disorders and cancer. It's important that expecting moms and their children do their best to keep away from places where people smoke."

so if i smoke, even away from home, my child could have a learning disability? peachy! 

and seriously, should they keep something like this a secret? incidentally, it also says go to college or your kid will get lymphoma.

yes or no? should they wait to comment on that kind of thing until we can show a mechanism? that's really what you mean when you say a direct link, isn't it? they've been studying it for almost 20 years, and there is a consistent link. that should not be reported?

 

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

CinemaGoddess

mooshagirl:

Okay, so we should just withold all the information out there about the benefits of breastfeeding because there are some women who are unable to do so.

Ok.

So you're planning to tell your kid that they need to get a college education otherwise they'll end up addicted to heroin and sleeping on the street in a puddle of their own urine?

Or are you going to tell your kid that he/she could get a college education so they can get a better job?

MegGary

We can argue all day what is fact & what is theory. The FACT remains that the sign's message is offensive. Not in it's statement but it's delivery. There is a way of educating mothers and than there is a way of quilting a woman when it's completly unnecessary to do so. Especailly in a hospital setting where a woman most likely just gave birth & her hormones are raging & the last thing she friggen needs is a big sign judging her on how she feeds her child. Way to go hospital. Really nice way of being a caring facility. 

I'm just a proponent of feeding babies. Formula or breast. Just do it & I don't really care.  

DaisyFull

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

mooshagirl:

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There is a world of difference between encouraging a mother to breastfeed by telling her that breast is best and focusing on the positives of breastfeeding rather than the negatives of formula feeding.  Having a good supportive staff of LCs at the hospital is also a better way to encourage BF than putting up a sign telling them how a mom can screw up her kid from day one by giving him/her formula.   Especially when that mom is having issues with BF or can't BF for whatever reason. 

Formula feeding is not the devil.  It is not the worst possible thing that a child can eat.  It does not cause cancer. 

There is a direct link between the smoking of cigarettes and lung cancer.  There is no (known) direct link between formula feeding and lymphoma.  

 

does this offend you? it's from the march of dimes.

"Thirdhand smoke
New research shows that thirdhand smoke is another health hazard. Thirdhand smoke is made up of the toxic gases and particles left behind from cigarette or cigar smoking. These toxic remains, which include lead, arsenic and carbon monoxide, cling to things like clothes, hair, couches and carpets well after the smoke from a cigarette or cigar has cleared the room. That?s why you often can tell a smoker by the smell of cigarettes or cigars that linger on his clothing or in his home or car. Things like cracking the car window down while you smoke or smoking in another room aren?t enough to keep others away from the harm caused by cigarettes or cigars.

Breathing in these toxins at an early age (babies and young children) may have devastating health problems like asthma and other breathing issues, learning disorders and cancer. It's important that expecting moms and their children do their best to keep away from places where people smoke."

so if i smoke, even away from home, my child could have a learning disability? peachy! 

and seriously, should they keep something like this a secret? incidentally, it also says go to college or your kid will get lymphoma.

yes or no? should they wait to comment on that kind of thing until we can show a mechanism? that's really what you mean when you say a direct link, isn't it? they've been studying it for almost 20 years, and there is a consistent link. that should not be reported?

 

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

Shocking.

DaisyFull

MegGary:

We can argue all day what is fact & what is theory. The FACT remains that the sign's message is offensive. Not in it's statement but it's delivery. There is a way of educating mothers and than there is a way of quilting a woman when it's completly unnecessary to do so. Especailly in a hospital setting where a woman most likely just gave birth & her hormones are raging & the last thing she friggen needs is a big sign judging her on how she feeds her child. Way to go hospital. Really nice way of being a caring facility. 

I'm just a proponent of feeding babies. Formula or breast. Just do it & I don't really care.  

 I'm not sure I'd say the sign is offensive. 

I personally think it's ignorant fear-mongering. And it's stupid. But I chose to FF, and it doesn't "offend" me because I think it's rubbish. Propaganda. If I had the time, I'd try to trace it back to the maker because I swear it's probably a welfare agency who can't afford to keep paying for formula.

bstrangely

CinemaGoddess:

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

just look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18449131

and this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11166151

eta this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8282392

this one questions whether the link was causal, but still determines an inverse association:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15986434

no one says that formula feeding causes cancer. but it's been known for a long time that breastfeeding offers some kind of protection. even if it's a tiny bit, what should we do with that information, since obviously it is so upsetting? and i don't know why. i don't get why people are so pissed off about being told that, even though this particular sign is awful.

wtf is it? 

 

DaisyFull

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

just look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18449131

and this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11166151

no one says that formula feeding causes cancer. but it's been known for a long time that breastfeeding offers some kind of protection. what should we do with that information, since obviously it is so upsetting? and i don't know why. i don't get why people are so pissed off about being told that, even though this particular sign is awful.

wtf is it? 

 

 

That information is not upsetting.

The sign is ridiculous, but what you just said is not what is  on the sign, so what's your point?

carlab44

CinemaGoddess:

I'm still waiting for any proof that FF causes cancer. 

There are studies out there that show that children who are never breast fed have a higher risk of certains kinds of cancer than those that were breast fed for 6 months or longer. Obviously this isn't "proof" and people can continue to argue about correlation/causation. But determining causation in any kind of epidemiological study can take a long, long time. It took decades for them to do enough studies to say that smoking causes lung cancer. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9876474?dopt=Abstract

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10528028

I want to stress again that I do not agree with having a sign like that up in a hospital - or anywhere. But I also don't think people should dismiss the benefits of breastfeeding as having no merit or proof.

CinemaGoddess

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

just look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18449131

and this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11166151

no one says that formula feeding causes cancer. but it's been known for a long time that breastfeeding offers some kind of protection. what should we do with that information, since obviously it is so upsetting? and i don't know why. i don't get why people are so pissed off about being told that, even though this particular sign is awful.

wtf is it? 

 

Those two links are about extended BFing, not FF. 

There are still no studies (based on my google searching) that shows that FF will cause cancer.  I really don't understand why that statement is difficult to understand. 

And anyone who does any research whatsoever knows that BFing provides added protection to the child.  It's known.  The majority of people who FF have done their research and are aware that breast is best for protecting a baby's immune system. 

shakes

mooshagirl:

shakes:

mooshagirl:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

why? it seems exactly the same to me. the studies are showing that women who did not bf had babies that experienced higher rates of disease.

I'd be interested to see where in the US there were higher incidences of cholera in FF babies. 

And Oregon Trail doesn't count. 

are you implying that no babies born in that hospital will travel abroad or move to other countries?

see how this works? if they're going to put anything on there, they got to put everything on there.

Yes, that's exactly what I'm implying.  Exactly. 

All they need to say is "breast is best". 

FF is not a pack of cigarettes. 

Really?  That's all they need to tell new mothers about breastfeeding?  Well, that will certainly motivate them.  I think we can all agree that the more information we provide, the better the chances are that more mother's will breastfeed.  Isn't that the whole point of these breastfeeding campaigns?  The surgeon general could just put "smoking is bad" on a pack of cigarettes, but I don't think that would get the message across very clearly.

There are women who do not have the ability to breast feed, Period. They do not need to be made to feel like if their child develops hodgkins disease in 47 years that it was all their fault.

Okay, so we should just withold all the information out there about the benefits of breastfeeding because there are some women who are unable to do so.

Yes! That's exactly what I mean

CinemaGoddess

carlab44:

CinemaGoddess:

I'm still waiting for any proof that FF causes cancer. 

There are studies out there that show that children who are never breast fed have a higher risk of certains kinds of cancer than those that were breast fed for 6 months or longer. Obviously this isn't "proof" and people can continue to argue about correlation/causation. But determining causation in any kind of epidemiological study can take a long, long time. It took decades for them to do enough studies to say that smoking causes lung cancer. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9876474?dopt=Abstract

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10528028

I want to stress again that I do not agree with having a sign like that up in a hospital - or anywhere. But I also don't think people should dismiss the benefits of breastfeeding as having no merit or proof.

Nobody in this thread has done this as far as I know. 

scoutkate

Scout wuz here. 

11/2/11.

DaisyFull

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

just look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18449131

and this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11166151

no one says that formula feeding causes cancer. but it's been known for a long time that breastfeeding offers some kind of protection. what should we do with that information, since obviously it is so upsetting? and i don't know why. i don't get why people are so pissed off about being told that, even though this particular sign is awful.

wtf is it? 

 

Those two links are about extended BFing, not FF. 

There are still no studies (based on my google searching) that shows that FF will cause cancer.  I really don't understand why that statement is difficult to understand. 

And anyone who does any research whatsoever knows that BFing provides added protection to the child.  It's known.  The majority of people who FF have done their research and are aware that breast is best for protecting a baby's immune system. 

It is known.

Also, I have to say this again - this issue is not in question; it's not what was on the sign. We can accept the knowledge that bf'ing has anti-cancer qualities to it, without saying FF "causes" Cancer. And, all while dismissing the validity of the fear-mongering sign!  WIN-WIN.

Intelligence: the ability to balance separate thoughts and ideas.

MegGary

DaisyFull:

MegGary:

We can argue all day what is fact & what is theory. The FACT remains that the sign's message is offensive. Not in it's statement but it's delivery. There is a way of educating mothers and than there is a way of quilting a woman when it's completly unnecessary to do so. Especailly in a hospital setting where a woman most likely just gave birth & her hormones are raging & the last thing she friggen needs is a big sign judging her on how she feeds her child. Way to go hospital. Really nice way of being a caring facility. 

I'm just a proponent of feeding babies. Formula or breast. Just do it & I don't really care.  

 I'm not sure I'd say the sign is offensive. 

I personally think it's ignorant fear-mongering. And it's stupid. But I chose to FF, and it doesn't "offend" me because I think it's rubbish. Propaganda. If I had the time, I'd try to trace it back to the maker because I swear it's probably a welfare agency who can't afford to keep paying for formula.

Than don't say it's offensive if it doesn't offend you. I just picture it this way, you're a mom who just gave birth & are a raging hormonal mess & are having trouble BFing or cannot for any number of reason & see that sign. Yeah I might feel offended. There is a better way of going about educating & guilt driven signage is not it. 

I chose to FF for my own reasons & felt guilt over it. It would have really upset me had I seen that sign at the time. 

carlab44

CinemaGoddess:

carlab44:

CinemaGoddess:

I'm still waiting for any proof that FF causes cancer. 

There are studies out there that show that children who are never breast fed have a higher risk of certains kinds of cancer than those that were breast fed for 6 months or longer. Obviously this isn't "proof" and people can continue to argue about correlation/causation. But determining causation in any kind of epidemiological study can take a long, long time. It took decades for them to do enough studies to say that smoking causes lung cancer. 

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9876474?dopt=Abstract

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10528028

I want to stress again that I do not agree with having a sign like that up in a hospital - or anywhere. But I also don't think people should dismiss the benefits of breastfeeding as having no merit or proof.

Nobody in this thread has done this as far as I know. 

Maybe I read it the wrong way, but earlier in the thread people were using a rather dismissive tone regarding the benefits of breast feedings (lower risk of SIDS, allergies, diabetes) being theories not facts.

bstrangely

CinemaGoddess:

bstrangely:

CinemaGoddess:

I don't know what you're talking about anymore. 

just look at this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18449131

and this:

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11166151

no one says that formula feeding causes cancer. but it's been known for a long time that breastfeeding offers some kind of protection. what should we do with that information, since obviously it is so upsetting? and i don't know why. i don't get why people are so pissed off about being told that, even though this particular sign is awful.

wtf is it? 

 

Those two links are about extended BFing, not FF. 

There are still no studies (based on my google searching) that shows that FF will cause cancer.  I really don't understand why that statement is difficult to understand. 

And anyone who does any research whatsoever knows that BFing provides added protection to the child.  It's known.  The majority of people who FF have done their research and are aware that breast is best for protecting a baby's immune system. 

see above? "no one says that formula feeding causes cancer." 

i don't know why you're bringing that up. no one said it. the end.