Breast milk can expose babies to chemicals
(archive.ph)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (28)
sorted by:
Ah yes, the CDC and the EPA. I'm sure these are completely neutral organizations that would never say things for duplicitous purposes like politics or business.
I don't doubt any of the things claimed here are possible or even a problem. But because of who is saying it I don't put much stock into it being a major problem and especially letting them present any solutions.
Especially as, the entire article is filled with scare words like "cancer-linked" to make you think these things are guaranteed death sentences but in reality are just vaguely sometimes related to sick people in ways we aren't willing to put our name on the line to say are for sure but certainly want your money to test and "treat."
Also the big lead is in the middle. The US isn't part of some Global Milk Monitor program and that's literally going to kill children. All of this is just to scare dumb people (the type who read Yahoo News) into trying to pressure us into joining another International Organization that Europe controls and letting them dictate basic facts of our life.
Again, all of this seems plausible as a problem but this article isn't about the problem. Its about scaring you with big words to let them take away your fear with Bigger Government that won't do a damn thing to solve the problem. All it will do is tell the majority of the world's women that they must pay huge dollars to buy "clean" milk or formula because theirs is so totally tainted with baddie bad chemicals.
Yep. When I see an alphabet agency is behind news like this, I immediately disregard anything they have to say.
In this case it's pretty much only the journalists doing the globalist bootlicking, so far.
The whole article is weasel worded from top to bottom. The CDC isn't actually recommending changing anything, The Hill just took the factual statement that PFAs can be passed through breastmilk and decided to ignore the recommendation to keep breastfeeding because it's still superior.
Likewise they had to cut out a tiny contextless quote from the doctor interviewed to push their propaganda. "And I wouldn't blame them" I.E "People might hear about these PFAs and be worried, and I wouldn't blame them, but the risk is minimal and we have decades of data showing that breastfeeding is still far more likely to give you a healthier baby than formula"
Also note the weasel wording "in mothers exposed to PFA", in a normal household your only likely exposure to PFAs is from non-stick cooking utensils surfaces like Teflon. They don't leech out but if you physically scratch the surface off and ingest it you could be exposed. So almost no-one meets that high levels of exposure qualifier anyway, except retards who keep ruining their pots and eating the flakes.
That's not to say we don't have a bunch of bullshit exposure to harmful substances that you should watch out for with your children. But replacing breast milk with some industrially manufactured inferior artificial substitute is absolutely not the way to avoid that. Even specifically from PFAs, I bet the odds of them using a non-stick surface in the manufacturing of formula is pretty high and it only takes one unlucky surface scratch to expose your child to more PFAs than they could ever get from milk.
You can never hate mainstream journalists enough. Not even close.
I think they've already conceded on that battle, because this article seems to be more pushing for a "globally controlled and monitored milk bank."
As in, you have to pay for other women's milk that has been "Tested and Approved," that you will never know what they've leaked into it.
Which is probably still better than purely formula, but I still have zero trust in it whatsoever.
I think what they're talking there was maintaining a bank of small samples taken from the populace over time so that chemical tests and other research can easily be retroactively performed. That whole section is about monitoring PFA levels in the general populace.
I don't think an actual human milk bank for consumer use would be physically possible, volume wise they would need to be milking a bunch of women like actual dairy cattle. And logistics wise the spoil time on breast milk for newborns is measured in hours at room temp and only 1 week to 1 month when frozen.
Don't give them any ideas.