Actually there's a metric fuck ton of scientific studies that say breast feeding gives the kids a biological headstart in shit.
Weird though cause that makes sense yet there are people all like, "but the mums might not wanna breastfeed, they might feel uncomfortable about it!"
Really? well too fucking bad, if you have tits and have a kid then you better god damn breast feed that titsucker cause you're the demon spawns god damned parent, you're responsible for that kid and breast feeding is a major contributing factor to a young kids health.
And if a woman is uncomfortable with breast feeding then what the fuck is she doing having kids?
[QUOTE=bravehat;29066887]Actually there's a metric fuck ton of scientific studies that say breast feeding gives the kids a biological headstart in shit.
Weird though cause that makes sense yet there are people all like, "but the mums might not wanna breastfeed, they might feel uncomfortable about it!"
Really? well too fucking bad, if you have tits and have a kid then you better god damn breast feed that titsucker cause you're the demon spawns god damned parent, you're responsible for that kid and breast feeding is a major contributing factor to a young kids health.[/QUOTE]
I never did deny breast milk is the ideal substance, I am however saying that people overact about the consequences of not breastfeeding.
The mother is still a person too and it is her body so she should have the right to choose. I do not believe that a non breast fed child is a sickly allergy-ridden wreck of a human, simply through what I see every day.
I am so glad I don't want children.
And I sure hope you guys who disagree end up with women who share your view.
I don't see any valid reason at all, whatsoever, for not breastfeeding, bearing in mind the situation assumes the mum has two fully functioning teets.
And I can only see it as formula is devoid of antibodies from the mother, which can pass on immunities, as well as being devoid of vitamins and minerals in the correct proportion and which may be missing from the formula.
Plus it helps build a stronger bond between the baby and the mum.
Also accidental ratings FTW!
[QUOTE=bravehat;29066963]I don't see any valid reason at all, whatsoever, for not breastfeeding, bearing in mind the situation assumes the mum has two fully functioning teets.
And I can only see it as formula is devoid of antibodies from the mother, which can pass on immunities, as well as being devoid of vitamins and minerals in the correct proportion and which may be missing from the formula.
Plus it helps build a stronger bond between the baby and the mum.
Also accidental ratings FTW![/QUOTE]
You have a point in the fact that it has its benefits and as I said before, it is the ideal substance for a baby as that is what it has been designed for in nature. I won't go on with anecdotal evidence but I just don't think the difference is great enough to make a woman who is just genuinely uncomfortable about it do it several times a day as it can't be good for the relationship between her and the baby if she loathes doing it so much.Some women just couldn't handle being the sole parent in charge of feeding, bottle feeding allows both parents to have equal responsibility over such an important thing.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion I just think it's unfair to declare someone as a bad parent overall if they don't breast feed, such attitudes make women who physically can't feel like they've failed their baby even.
LOL you're an idiot if you drink cow's milk. Humans aren't supposed to drink milk when they stop being babies anyway. Cow's milk has cow hormones and is for cows which have a much more complicated digestive system than we do.
Just because "everyone drinks it/the TV tells me to drink it/It's in the supermarket" doesn't mean that it's healthy us.
Apparently westerners even stink of milk to people who don't drink it. I've grown up on it so I wouldn't know though.
[QUOTE=xXDictatorXx;29066935]I never did deny breast milk is the ideal substance, I am however saying that people overact about the consequences of not breastfeeding.
The [b]mother is still a person too[/b] and it is her body so she should have the right to choose. I do not believe that a non breast fed child is a sickly allergy-ridden wreck of a human, simply through what I see every day.[/QUOTE]
...
This is fucked up.
[QUOTE=crackberry;29082873]This is fucked up.[/QUOTE]
It really isn't, we slightly alter a code of DNA which causes it to produce a desired chemical in the milk which humans need to help grow bones.
What's fucked up about it?
[QUOTE=crackberry;29082873]This is fucked up.[/QUOTE]
We've been GE'ing food and animals for a long time now, we've practically genetically engineered cows to produce more beef, why not have them produce healthier milk?
[QUOTE=Mr._N;28957972]Why don't we just do this instead?
[img_thumb]http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3143/2907603916_ae1e048f32.jpg[/img_thumb][/QUOTE]
I'd hit it.
Actually breastfeeding is turning out to be quite bad for the baby because the milk from the breast does not only let out nutrients, it also lets out toxins from the mother directly into the baby. Because of our rather not-very-friendly-for-cavehumans diet we have tons of toxins in our bodies and they go straight into the kid. The diet of a cow is fairly different from a human's and so it's quite understandable that some women would prefer to give their children milk that does not poison them.
Of course there's also women who cannot breastfeed or women who don't want to either because of the principle of it or solely cosmetic reasons. (The latter being a gigantic load of bullshit Imo)
If the cows don't suffer from being genetically modified I don't see the problem since they wouldn't ever feed their own calves anyway.
:foxnews: Has science gone to far? :foxnews:
What other Cow mods do we have going on?
Any risks running with the cows milk on actual babies?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
