She couldn't live without Facebook

[devilof76]

What a cruel, rotten, and ignorant thing to say...

 

[Adoptedscot]

Everyone SHOULD breastfeed if they can,
because it is nature's design, that is the way that humanity and every other mammal evolved by. The validity of breastfeeding is beyond question across all mammals.
The problem is that people have bought into the marketing of the formula companies to believe that there is no difference between breastfeeding and formula, all so that formula companies can make more money, at the expense of human health.

Because breast milk can be put into bottles to be used in situations when the mother can't breastfeed the baby, you can have bottle feeding without using formula.

No technology will ever be better than breast milk for babies. Any idea to the contrary is motivated by profit and a misunderstanding of the perfection of breast feeding.

this leads people to use formula out of convenience or vanity because they had breast implants and therefore cannot breast feed.

As I said, if there is a real reason why a mother cannot produce enough healthy milk, only then should alternatives be sought out. To not breastfeed when one can is basically a form of child neglect, if not child abuse. It is to willfully neglect a woman's fundamental obligation to be a good mother. Any woman who could do it who would not should never get pregnant.

By the same token, anyone who doesn't have it in them to do everything that is best to raise a healthy child should not have children.
Poor people can't afford to have children.
Speaking of people who don't have it in them to raise children properly, this brings us back to the original story of this thread. The parents of this person really had no business having children. They were incompetent and clearly unwilling to commit 100% to good parenting. They did not know how to parent, and should have refrained from having any until such time as they were if they ever could be.

Who the hell do you think you are saying that if someone chooses an alternative to breast feeding it's child neglect.

I was gonna stay out of this as I always look upon your posts as mostly a pompous and judgemental diatribe of glossing everyone into a category or tarring everyone with the same brush, that is those that don't agree with what YOU think is best.

Quite frankly a woman can breast feed if she wants to, she is in no way under any obligation as a mother to do just that and is certainly not neglecting her child if she chooses a bottle over breast.
At the end of the day, if the child is fed, happy, loved and looked after - that is all that should matter. That is being a good mother (imo)

This last statement of yours about calling non-breast feeding is tantamount to child neglect has to be one of the most judgemental, ludicrous and down right ignorant thing you have ever posted, that I've seen so far (tho I don't always read your essay posts as they tend to bore me like a preacher does).

Get off your high horse for once and accept that all people are different and will act as they seem fit. Just because you don't agree with it and can spout off facts from Wiki at the drop of a hat, doesn't mean you should disrespect anyone by forcing your opinions on anyone.

What was this thread about again?, oh yeah a tragedy - not lectures on the necessity of breastfeeding and judging those women who don't.
Please just give it a rest, you have an opinion, we get it - don't be forcing it on others.

 

[hoodonit00]

Everyone SHOULD breastfeed if they can, because it is nature's design, that is the way that humanity and every other mammal evolved by. The validity of breastfeeding is beyond question across all mammals.
If a woman cannot breastfeed, then she should do the best she can.

The problem is that people have bought into the marketing of the formula companies to believe that there is no difference between breastfeeding and formula, all so that formula companies can make more money, at the expense of human health.

Because breast milk can be put into bottles to be used in situations when the mother can't breastfeed the baby, you can have bottle feeding without using formula.

No technology will ever be better than breast milk for babies. Any idea to the contrary is motivated by profit and a misunderstanding of the perfection of breast feeding.

this leads people to use formula out of convenience or vanity because they had breast implants and therefore cannot breast feed.

As I said, if there is a real reason why a mother cannot produce enough healthy milk, only then should alternatives be sought out. To not breastfeed when one can is basically a form of child neglect, if not child abuse. It is to willfully neglect a woman's fundamental obligation to be a good mother. Any woman who could do it who would not should never get pregnant.

By the same token, anyone who doesn't have it in them to do everything that is best to raise a healthy child should not have children.
Poor people can't afford to have children.
Speaking of people who don't have it in them to raise children properly, this brings us back to the original story of this thread. The parents of this person really had no business having children. They were incompetent and clearly unwilling to commit 100% to good parenting. They did not know how to parent, and should have refrained from having any until such time as they were if they ever could be.

Damn I am so sick of reading your smug, self-righteous, condescending bull****. Do you even have kids to be able to judge others on their parenting skills? And saying that women who don't breast feed are child abusers is ****ing stupid and pathetic. It's a new low for you. I wish I had the fortitude to block you but my damn curiosity to see what stupid **** you post next won't allow me to. Here's to you posting something so revolting that I can finally stop being a "no forum members blocked" virgin.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

What a cruel, rotten, and ignorant thing to say...

You sound shocked

 

[Blackthornone]

Who the hell do you think you are saying that if someone chooses an alternative to breast feeding it's child neglect.

I was gonna stay out of this as I always look upon your posts as mostly a pompous and judgemental diatribe of glossing everyone into a category or tarring everyone with the same brush, that is those that don't agree with what YOU think is best.

Quite frankly a woman can breast feed if she wants to, she is in no way under any obligation as a mother to do just that and is certainly not neglecting her child if she chooses a bottle over breast.
At the end of the day, if the child is fed, happy, loved and looked after - that is all that should matter. That is being a good mother (imo)

This last statement of yours about calling non-breast feeding is tantamount to child neglect has to be one of the most judgemental, ludicrous and down right ignorant thing you have ever posted, that I've seen so far (tho I don't always read your essay posts as they tend to bore me like a preacher does).

Get off your high horse for once and accept that all people are different and will act as they seem fit. Just because you don't agree with it and can spout off facts from Wiki at the drop of a hat, doesn't mean you should disrespect anyone by forcing your opinions on anyone.

What was this thread about again?, oh yeah a tragedy - not lectures on the necessity of breastfeeding and judging those women who don't.
Please just give it a rest, you have an opinion, we get it - don't be forcing it on others.

I said breastfeeding vs formula feeding. I mentioned that bottle feeding can be done with breastmilk in it.
Unfortunately a lot of people don't understand enough about how life works and are too busy being concerned about their own convenience to care, to the point at which they allow their own judgement to be compromised enough to actually believe that formula could ever be as good.
I suppose you believe that the best mothering is not the most important thing a mother can do. If you believe that the future of humanity isn't as important as personal taste, or convenience, then we will have to agree to disagree.

You should bother to learn more about the issue, beyond what marketing tells you about formula before you form an opinion about it, if you want to have a truly informed opinion.
The long term well being of humanity is too important to compromise. Obviously you believe differently.

We disagree.

Actually this thread was also about the result of bad parenting, or neglectful parenting, which resulted in a child committing suicide.
The parents erroneously believed that what they did was responsible and competent enough because it was what they were comfortable with doing, and that resulted in failure.

It is no wonder that children can be driven to suicide as a resuilt of bad and neglectful parenting when so many people actually believe that formula could ever be as good as breastmilk. Apparently people have lost touch so much with nature that they actually believe that technology can not only replace it, but improve on a natural substance such as mother's milk.
To believe that is to be misled.


My contention is that formula fed babies are indeed LESS well fed, LESS happy, LESS loved, and LESS well looked after.
Breastmilk is superior nutrition and the act of breasfeeding itself is FAR more intimate than feeding formula from a bottle. If you cannot at least understand that a more intimate form of feeding is more loving and more affectionate and caring than a less intimate one, than THAT is what is downright ignorant.
Speaking of downright ignorant, downright is one word, not two.

 

[Blackthornone]

Damn I am so sick of reading your smug, self-righteous, condescending bull****. Do you even have kids to be able to judge others on their parenting skills? And saying that women who don't breast feed are child abusers is ****ing stupid and pathetic. It's a new low for you. I wish I had the fortitude to block you but my damn curiosity to see what stupid **** you post next won't allow me to. Here's to you posting something so revolting that I can finally stop being a "no forum members blocked" virgin.

I said it was a form of child neglect, if not child abuse, indicating it could be a form of child abuse. Child abuse is a relative concept. There are many types and degrees of it.
It isn't like it is the same thing as beating children and breaking their bones of course, but it can still be a mild form of abuse.

This is only something you can grasp if you understand that that breast milk is best, and the mother's body produces it, and formula costs money, which means a woman must go out of her way to select an inferior food for her baby, which indicates a form of INTENTIONAL reduction of their well being.

Obviously if you cannot grasp that formula is inferior you won't understand.

If you cannot grasp that feeding a child an inferior product and spending money on it instead of feeding a PERFECT product for free indicates a cavalier attitude towards infant health, you won't understand what I'm saying.


Honestly, I had no idea that formula feeding was so accepted in society. I had no idea that such ignorance was so prevalent. I did not anticipate such resistance to my comments initially.

I wonder what other unhealthy things people do to their children that they think is normal. Woah.

 

[Blackthornone]

What a cruel, rotten, and ignorant thing to say...

Not as cruel, rotten and ignorant as saying that formula is just as good as breastmilk. If people CAN'T breastfeed, then I understand how someone would formula feed. You have to do the BEST you can.



The BEST you can when you CAN breasfeed is to breastfeed.
Apparently you don't believe that parents should do the BEST they can.
Second best is good enough for you, and you can even call second best, best, to rationalize doing second best.

 

[Nuka Cola Kidd]

Oh Black, always trying to sound the most intelligent in the room but somehow ends up sounding more ignorant and arrogant than intelligent.

 

[a-dev]

Suicide. Facebook. Breastfeeding..........k.

 

[Lejuan]

@ getting irate instead of putting that sanctimonious wanker on ignore

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

Words...lots of words

 

[devilof76]

Words that mean nothing.

Not as cruel, rotten and ignorant as saying that formula is just as good as breastmilk. If people CAN'T breastfeed, then I understand how someone would formula feed. You have to do the BEST you can.



The BEST you can when you CAN breasfeed is to breastfeed.
Apparently you don't believe that parents should do the BEST they can.
Second best is good enough for you, and you can even call second best, best, to rationalize doing second best.

I've moved on from breastfeeding. I'm talking about how you dare lay blame for this girl's suicide on her parents. I'm not going to explain why it's despicable. I'm familiar enough with your rationalizations to know you are impervious to reason.

There is nothing wrong with bottle feeding babies. Ever. The standard of what is best, that you are invoking, is arbitrary, hence irrelevant. These laws of nature you claim such faithfulness to are not rules. Breastfeeding is good. It is not necessary. If it is not necessary for one (women who cannot nurse), it is necessary for none. Plenty of people have taken pains to explain why this is, to you, but you would rather pontificate and condemn.

If only everyone would obey your wisdomn the world would be painless, sinless and perfect, huh? You who speak for nature, and its God who made the rules, right? Fortunately for the rest of us, nature is not the tyrant you wish it were. That's just you, projecting yourself on the universe. Nature does not have your sense of vindictiveness. Nature didn't give us (so to speak) choice so that we could use morality as a scourge. It gave us choice so that we could live independently of the boundaries we evolved from. It gave us choice so that we could live lives that were best for each of us, as individuals. It gave us the freedom to use our world in a way that makes us happy. It gave us the ability to know so that we could change it according to our own values.

It gave us none of this so that we could take what we got and live with whatever scraps our short lives threw down from the table. It gave us none of this so that we could be egoless slaves to inertia.

You do not speak for nature. You know nothing, and it shows.

 

[CelticPredator]

Breastmilk has fluoride. That shat is evvvilaaaalll......

 

[Blackthornone]

Suicide. Facebook. Breastfeeding..........k.

Snakedoc brought up breastfeeding. Blame him.

 

[devilof76]

No, we all blame you for setting up your pulpit and spitting your brimstone. Get a clue.

 

[Blackthornone]

Words that mean nothing.



I've moved on from breastfeeding. I'm talking about how you dare lay blame for this girl's suicide on her parents. I'm not going to explain why it's despicable. I'm familiar enough with your rationalizations to know you are impervious to reason.

There is nothing wrong with bottle feeding babies. Ever. The standard of what is best, that you are invoking, is arbitrary, hence irrelevant. These laws of nature you claim such faithfulness to are not rules. Breastfeeding is good. It is not necessary. If it is not necessary for one (women who cannot nurse), it is necessary for none. Plenty of people have taken pains to explain why this is, to you, but you would rather pontificate and condemn.

If only everyone would obey your wisdomn the world would be painless, sinless and perfect, huh? You who speak for nature, and its God who made the rules, right? Fortunately for the rest of us, nature is not the tyrant you wish it were. That's just you, projecting yourself on the universe. Nature does not have your sense of vindictiveness. Nature didn't give us (so to speak) choice so that we could use morality as a scourge. It gave us choice so that we could live independently of the boundaries we evolved from. It gave us choice so that we could live lives that were best for each of us, as individuals. It gave us the freedom to use our world in a way that makes us happy. It gave us the ability to know so that we could change it according to our own values.

It gave us none of this so that we could take what we got and live with whatever scraps our short lives threw down from the table. It gave us none of this so that we could be egoless slaves to inertia.

You do not speak for nature. You know nothing, and it shows.

A parent's job is to feed, cloth, shelter, protect, AND to actively provide enough guidance so that the child can grow up to be a fully capable human being.
The last one is the one many people deny that parents have any obligation to do. They are wrong.
The responsibility for lack of proper guidance falls on the parents, for the child killed herself because of a lack of proper guidance.
Do you deny that she lacked guidance?
If so, you don't know what guidance is, or you don't realize that proper guidance could prevent this from happening.
Punishment and discipline is inadequate.

Nature being a tyrant? It has rules, and the degree tp which they are broken is the degree to which one will fail. Break them a little, and suffer a little, break them a lot and suffer a lot.
The human body is resilient, but not invulnerable to the laws of cause and effect, which are nature's laws.

No one is independent from nature, and no one can be. Nature is the very foundation of life. nature is cause and effect, which you don't seem to understand.
Nature isn't really random. Nature is just complex.

No one really has the ability to change things to values which are unnatural.
People's real values ARE nature's values, however people's psyches can become distorted to believe that their values are independent from nature.

If nature gave you life, how can your values really differ than the values that gave you life, and therefore are the values upon which your life is based?

They can't. To try is an inherent contradiction.
It is illogical and you have failed to see that.
Nature is logic in the material form. Nature is living logic, and all life is based on it.

You cannot have happiness without life, and you cannot have life without nature.
Only natural things are alive.
Perhaps you forgot about that.

As far as truly living without nature, you cannot get there from here.

The more you try to divorce yourself from the natural mechanisms that keep you alive, you more you divorce yourself from life itself.

As a result, the more you alienate yourself from natural foods, the more you die.

Nature is logic as a living organism.

That is the big picture, which you ignore.
You can build things which don't involve nature so long as they don't directly impact your health.
You can make vehicles and housing and tools, but you can't synthesize breast milk without cost to life.

Even synthetic vitamin C doesn't work as well as natural vitamin C.
Vitamin c is far simpler than breastmilk, and THAT can't even be made as well as the natural vitamin.
You probably didn't know that either.

I could probably do a search on a study comparing breastmilk to formula and determine which is better based upon extensive epidemiological studies.

Would you care to bet on what the most extensive science will reveal as to which is superior?
I already showed the references on why cow's milk based formula is inferior, because it causes type 1 diabetes.

Maybe a person have type 1 diabetes is unimportant to you.
That is the implication of your assertion about there being no difference between breast feeding and formula.
As long as people can get insulin to shoot up, and a company can make money selling insulin, it's all good with you, right?

 

[Blackthornone]

Funny how people get irate about the idea that breastfeeding is best, and formula is inferior, yet they neglect to acknowledge the science that proves that cow's milk formula causes type 1 diabetes.


SO, question, to those who believe that formula feeding is just a personal choice and it is totally ok, is it also totally ok when your child develops type 1 diabetes as a result a direct result of that formula?

That's the kind of question I am asking. How much are you willing to risk in terms of your child's health to defend your personal choice to feed formula?

Answer THAT.
I REALLY want to hear your answer to that.

Science proves that formula can cause type 1 diabetes.
Of course, I suppose all you have to do is not know that, and then act as if feeding formula had nothing to do with a child having type 1 diabetes, just to make yourself feel better and causing your child to have disease.
Ignorance is bliss, except when your child has to take insulin for the rest of his life because you would RATHER feed formula when you could have breastfed.
Personal choice can come at a high price.

Once again, here are the references:

""The National Dairy Board's Slogan, 'Milk. It does a body good,' sounds a little hollow these days."

Scientific American, October, 1992

"Studies have suggested that bovine serum albumin is the milk protein responsible for the onset of diabetes... Patients with insulin- dependent diabetes mellitus produce antibodies to cow milk proteins that participate in the development of islet dysfunction... Taken as a whole, our findings suggest that an active response in patients with IDDM (to the bovine protein) is a feature of the autoimmune response."

New England Journal of Medicine, July 30, 1992

"In lieu of the recent evidence that cow's milk protein may be implicated in the pathogenesis of diabetes mellitus, we believe that the Committee on Nutrition should clarify whether cow's milk is ever appropriate for children and whether or not infant formulas that are based on cow's milk protein are appropriate alternatives to breast milk."

Pediatrics, July, 1992: 89

"Antibodies to bovine beta-casein are present in over a third of IDDM patients and relatively non-existent in healthy individuals."

LANCET, October, 1996, 348

"Cow's milk proteins are unique in one respect: in industrialized countries they are the first foreign proteins entering the infant gut, since most formulations for babies are cow milk-based. The first pilot stage of our IDD prevention study found that oral exposure to dairy milk proteins in infancy resulted in both cellular and immune response...this suggests the possible importance of the gut immune system to the pathogenesis of IDD."

LANCET, Dec 14, 1996

"Introduction of dairy products and high milk consumption during childhood may increase the child's risk of developing juvenile diabetes."

Diabetologia 1994;37(4):381-387

"These new studies, and more than 20 well-documented previous ones, have prompted one researcher to say the link between milk and juvenile diabetes is 'very solid'."

Diabetes Care 1994;17(12)
Maybe people think that not knowing that formula causes diabetes makes everything ok when it happens to their children. I'm sure that the doctor recommending it will make you feel even better still, since at that point, diabetes practically has the doctor's blessing, since his recommendation to use formula caused it.


Doesn't causing your child to have type 1 diabetes qualify as child abuse???
I think it does.

 

[Blackthornone]

I had no idea that causing a child to have diabetes and force them to inject themselves with a needle for the rest of their lives was such a loving act. I had no idea that such happiness could be had from it.

Not knowing that it was caused by feeding formula, wow, that really makes it all go away and absolves parents of all responsibility for such a thing.
That might be downright philanthropic.

 

[devilof76]

No one cares. **** off. Sanctimonious fool.

 

[Sweet Rabbit]

Are we really going to waste time on this?