[link] U.S. delegates to this year`s gathering of the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, fought to weaken a resolution declaring that a mother`s breast milk is the best... Who's Online | Find Members | Private Messages
Questions
Quizzes
Articles
My Journal
Forums
Quests. | Journs. | Gen. | News | Quiz | Links | TV | Music | Movies | Games | Sports | Sug. | Lit. | Jokes | Artcls. | Newb | O.S.
Why would the U.S. fight a breastfeeding resolution?

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next (showing 1-25 of 170)

Back to Thread List
Bottom Last Post

9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:17:07 AM EST (GMT-5)
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/w...

U.S. delegates to this year's gathering of the decision-making body of the World Health Organization, fought to weaken a resolution declaring that a mother's breast milk is the best food for infants and discouraging misleading advertising for formula.

"We are stunned by reports of U.S. opposition to a resolution at the World Health Assembly this spring aimed at promoting breastfeeding," said Dr. Georges Benjamin, executive director of the American Public Health Association. "The scientific evidence overwhelmingly supports breastfeeding and its many health benefits for both child and mother."

But companies are deliberately trying to encourage women to buy products they do not need, Rundall said. She called it "a clash between the rights of corporations and the rights of humans."
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:18:45 AM EST (GMT-5)
Now, here's why, for once, I wholeheartedly AGREE with the Trump administration:

The problem with a breastfeeding -only ideology is that it shames women who are unable to breastfeed, and it endangers babies who are not able to get adequate nutrition through breastfeeding.

9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:19:54 AM EST (GMT-5)
When I had my son, I was 100% certain that I was going to breastfeed. Turns out, I did not, and COULD not, produce enough milk to meet his nutritional needs. I tried. I worked with nurses and breastfeeding specialists in the hospital. It wasn't working. It never worked. Two small drops, and they cheered that SOMETHING was happening. Meanwhile, my newborn was surviving on two drops every once in awhile. Nowhere near enough, but they refused to talk about potential alternatives for me because, as one nurse explained, they weren't allowed to because of their certification as a pro-breastfeeding hospital.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:20:12 AM EST (GMT-5)

So I'm feeling helpless and like a failure as a mother, all the while being spoken to sharply about how breastfeeding was best when I explained I just wanted to make sure my son had enough to eat. One lactation specialist in particular was extremely nasty, implying that it was somehow my fault for not wanting it bad enough.
It was supposed to be a happy time, and in most ways it was, but the pressure and shame that was out on me, as well as the worry that my son was hungry, put a dark cloud over it.

We need to stop forcing women to mother in the way we think is best and understand that not all women or mothers are the same, and stop judging people when we don't know their situations.

Breastfeeding is ideal, but it doesn't work for all women, and it doesn't make us bad mothers and we should not be shamed or denied alternatives.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:25:19 AM EST (GMT-5)
This was my comment on it when it was posted in the Trump thread.

On Sunday 7/8/18 - 10:35:23 PM birdsong4j wrote:
This really makes me so angry, mostly because of the absolute bullsh*t quote from HHS about how "we know many women are unable to breastfeed for various reasons and we shouldn't stigmatize them for it" It's just an incredibly bad-faith argument that tries to demonize breast-feeding advocates unnecessarily. None but a reactionary very tiny few would say that formula is bad for your baby ("fed is best" has essentially replaced "breast is best"), but they're being painted as these overzealous lactation nazis, just to benefit corporate interests.


9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:26:57 AM EST (GMT-5)
Also, a lot of countries where this BF initiative would be really important are also places where water quality (as in sanitation) is not great. Powdered formula is a TERRIBLE idea in those places, and that's the most common form that companies push there (because it's cheapest to make, cheapest to ship, etc.).
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:29:19 AM EST (GMT-5)
anyway, I am very sorry that you had those experiences. No one should make you feel "less than" for not breastfeeding, no matter the reason. The hospital you went to did not handle your situation well. But their reasons were not the reasons behind the US blocking this measure.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:32:05 AM EST (GMT-5)
But... it's 100% NOT bullsh*t that " many women are unable to breastfeed for various reasons and we shouldn't stigmatize them for it."

It is the truth, and it happened to me. They literally told me that they were not allowed to provide me even with information on alternatives even though I could not physically provide adequate nutrition for my baby.

Breast-feeding advocates are NOT demonized. They are the establishment, and they make people like myself feel like poo because of our own physical limitations, and also put babies in danger by refusing to educate mothers on the best ways to provide nutrition to them.

As for other countries, and here as well, I would always advocate for breast feeding WHEN POSSIBLE, but again, provide education on alternatives. Some women physically can not breast feed.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:33:59 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:29:19 AM birdsong4j wrote:
anyway, I am very sorry that you had those experiences. No one should make you feel "less than" for not breastfeeding, no matter the reason. The hospital you went to did not handle your situation well. But their reasons were not the reasons behind the US blocking this measure.


Yes, they were. They were part of WHO's “Baby-Friendly Hospital Initiative,” and were not allowed to discuss or provide alternative options to breast feeding or they would lose their certification.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM EST (GMT-5)
Yes, the statement is true. But it was very clearly made in bad faith, because the decision to not support this measure was based on the fact that doing so would hurt companies that make $$$$ on formula.

The biggest market (at least that I'm aware of) for these companies is lower and middle-income areas of sub-Saharan Africa. Guess where water quality is dangerous for human consumption (particularly infants). In those places, companies like Nestle are pushing formula not as an alternative to BF, but *in favor of* BF.

It's a cash grab, in short.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:41:02 AM EST (GMT-5)
Biggest new market, I should say.

Viewing this from a US perspective is the wrong way to go about the situation, imo.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:49:18 AM EST (GMT-5)
Btw, refusing formula at all costs is NOT a tenet of WHO baby-friendly hospital programs. They are supposed to show you how to safely supplement with formula when medically necessary…which includes if your newborn freakin' baby isn't getting enough calories because they won't latch or you don't produce or whatever.

So yeah, your hospital sucked and was pushy. But that's not (supposed to be) the norm.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:07:38 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Yes, the statement is true. But it was very clearly made in bad faith, because the decision to not support this measure was based on the fact that doing so would hurt companies that make $$$$ on formula.


Can you prove this?
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:11:24 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM birdsong4j wrote:
The biggest market (at least that I'm aware of) for these companies is lower and middle-income areas of sub-Saharan Africa. Guess where water quality is dangerous for human consumption (particularly infants). In those places, companies like Nestle are pushing formula not as an alternative to BF, but *in favor of* BF. It's a cash grab, in short.


Of course, if they are marketing formula as better than breastmilk, that's all kinds of wrong.

But because I've seen what's been done in this country, I am not convinced that what is being done in other places is right or wrong.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:13:38 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:49:18 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Btw, refusing formula at all costs is NOT a tenet of WHO baby-friendly hospital programs. They are supposed to show you how to safely supplement with formula when medically necessary…which includes if your newborn freakin' baby isn't getting enough calories because they won't latch or you don't produce or whatever. So yeah, your hospital sucked and was pushy. But that's not (supposed to be) the norm.


I was told, straight up, that because they were "baby friendly" they were breast-milk only. Supplementation was not an option. There was NO milk from my breasts (besides those precious two drops)
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:13:55 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Yes, the statement is true. But it was very clearly made in bad faith, because the decision to not support this measure was based on the fact that doing so would hurt companies that make $$$$ on formula.
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:07:38 AM DoYouWash wrote:
Can you prove this?

Does she really have too, has this administration suddenly become a beacon of altruistic humanitarianism?
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:15:51 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Yes, the statement is true. But it was very clearly made in bad faith, because the decision to not support this measure was based on the fact that doing so would hurt companies that make $$$$ on formula.
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:07:38 AM DoYouWash wrote:
Can you prove this?
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:13:55 AM michrich wrote:
Does she really have too, has this administration suddenly become a beacon of altruistic humanitarianism?


No, but even the worst get it right sometimes.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:16:44 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:40:03 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Yes, the statement is true. But it was very clearly made in bad faith, because the decision to not support this measure was based on the fact that doing so would hurt companies that make $$$$ on formula.
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:07:38 AM DoYouWash wrote:
Can you prove this?
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:13:55 AM michrich wrote:
Does she really have too, has this administration suddenly become a beacon of altruistic humanitarianism?


Like, people who are just like, "Trump sucks and anything he says or does is bad" do nothing to help our cause against him.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:17:39 AM EST (GMT-5)
And I'm not even a freakin' centrist. I hate most of what the Trump administration has done but I believe in picking my battles.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:18:05 AM EST (GMT-5)
This resolution has drawn worldwide condemnation.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:18:16 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 1:49:18 AM birdsong4j wrote:
Btw, refusing formula at all costs is NOT a tenet of WHO baby-friendly hospital programs. They are supposed to show you how to safely supplement with formula when medically necessary…which includes if your newborn freakin' baby isn't getting enough calories because they won't latch or you don't produce or whatever. So yeah, your hospital sucked and was pushy. But that's not (supposed to be) the norm.
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:13:38 AM DoYouWash wrote:
I was told, straight up, that because they were "baby friendly" they were breast-milk only. Supplementation was not an option. There was NO milk from my breasts (besides those precious two drops)

And I believe you that they said that. But it's still against guidelines, even for hospitals participating in that program.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:19:08 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:18:05 AM michrich wrote:
This resolution has drawn worldwide condemnation.


AND?

I should just blindly accept that and ignore my own experiences?
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:19:51 AM EST (GMT-5)
On Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:18:16 AM birdsong4j wrote:
And I believe you that they said that. But it's still against guidelines, even for hospitals participating in that program.


I'm glad to hear that, because it really put a damper on the otherwise wonderful experience of having my first child.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:20:12 AM EST (GMT-5)
* lack of support I meant.
9 days ago - Wednesday 7/11/18 - 2:22:34 AM EST (GMT-5)
The resolution was not anti-formula. It reinforced the fact that BF has certain measurable, positive health effects, and sought to restrict *inaccurate and misleading* promotion/marketing of supplements/formulas.

The US position was not some moral, "hey now, not everyone can BF" thing. They opposed stopping marketing that purposely misleads mothers in developing countries into believing that their breast milk is *inferior to formula*.

Prev 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next (showing 1-25 of 170)



You need to be logged in to post a reply

New to YT? Create a Free Account ~ Have an Account? Log In

Back to Thread List
Top

 
Edit