I've just watched the film Dark Waters. It's about PFOA contamination from the production of Teflon. DuPont knew in the 70's that PFOA had leached into the water system via waste dumping and that the chemical was causing terminal illnesses and birth defects among it's workforce. However, they continued production because it was so obscenely profitable.
DuPont finally settled 3,535 claims for $6,707M in 2017, but denied any wrongdoing.
It's estimated that virtually every living creature is contaminated with PFOA, including 99% of humans. There are another 600+ related 'forever chemicals' nearly all of which are unregulated.
I'm guessing that's just the tip of the iceberg with respect to chemical contamination.
Breast milk is a natural laxative, so it's rare for breastfed babes to be constipated. Breastfed babies do not need water until they start eating solids.
Breast milk has everythng the baby needs for the first approximately 6 months, but very often, not even midwives know enough to solve problems because breastfeeding became rare post 1950's.
The link above highlights some difficulties and solutions, but doesn't address scarcity of adult food, stress, exhaustion, or other factors affecting the mother.
My intention is not to guilt trip about bottle feeding, but to dispel breastfeeding myths. Formula milk is harder to digest so it frequently causes constipation, but aids sleeping through the night. Modern schedules can make it very difficult to breastfeed.
Adults' feelings being hurt are not more important than the physical and emotional well-being of children.
There is an ethical issue here of the man rejecting the children he has raised as his own. They will be deprived emotionally and financially, possibly to the point of destitution if the man rejects them and sues for childcare costs paid.
This is not just about a mother, it's about a father and children, too.
I am a grandmother of four, not just the two I am bilogically related to. I would like to be a grandmther of eight children who are in some way all connected to each other as siblings, if only some of the young adults would get over themselves. These children have an ethical right to know and have a relationship with each other, but adult butt hurt and ego has been prioritised.
Children are never, never, never a 'sub' issue. They are the issue.
To save Chen from shame, Ju becomes pregnant by another man, or men in secret, or arranges some kind of fertility treatment in secret. The process is horrible, but Yu is prepared to be humiliated herself, rather than have the man she loves humiliated by the knowledge of his infertility.
They have three daughters whom Chen loves as any father would love his own daughters, but Ju is partially discovered when trying to conceive for a fourth time, maybe in hope of a son to complete her husband's family and personal pride.
Now read Didi's original post again. Is it appropriate for Chen to shame his wife, reject her and his three (blameless) daughters and make them suffer financial hardship to save his own face?
Is it appropriate to make assumptions about Ju's behaviour, when we only have a couple of pieces of the story from Chen's perspective?
Or can't we get past thinking that everyone, especially women (the originators of sin), always have selfish, evil intentions in everything they do?
The moment there's a measurable amount of alchol in the blood stream, there's a measurable detriment in driving performance, specifically with respect to over-compensating.
80 milligrams per 100 millitres is way over that, so what is unreasonable, oblivious, or drunk?
Would I be less drunk at .08 if I were safely tucked up in bed with a good book and not driving, oblivious to the unreasonable risk I was taking?
Thinking about it, it's not just about power and control, it's about creating the magic and mystery that is the medium of power and control.
Transubstatiation is the part in a Catholic mass where 'magic' words are said to turn unleavened bread and wine into the actual, real body and blood of Christ. I touched on the artistic performance side earlier with my comment about transubstantiating Welch's pastuerised grape juice and how quickly the mystery can crumble.
It's one thing having symbolic rituals, but getting people to truly believe that a piece of rice paper is a bit of Jesus' body which they yaffle down without a thought of the cannabalistic implications is another.
Jewish and Christian rituals and stimming seem like autistic traits to me and maybe there's an element of self-soothing, or hypnosis to them. Alcohol is likewise self-soothing and in it's own way hypnotic. Perhaps in other religious practises alcohol interferes with inhibiting parts of the self and mindful meditation.
Fasting is another common trait of religions worth exploring. Hungry gaps happen in subsistence culture and fasting is a way of making sure scarce resources are eked out. It can also be healthfully cleansing and bring clarity to the mind which may be encouraged, or repurposed via religious practise.
Used, or misused, 'God's Law' is a legal system which manages community. The difference with the 'Law of the Land' (which is also ritualised in courts and other aspects of enforcement) is that it evolves slightly more readily under challenge.
The Britan doesn't have a codified constitution like US, our similar laws being dotted around within the whole system. It's interesting that the US legal and political culture is not only more religious, but their constitution is held as more sacred than our more diffuse written laws.
Ritual, laws, power, control, whatever it takes to create a smoothly functioning society with as little oppsition, or input from the main body of the community as possible.
I suspect MissC hasn't been banned because it's obvious there is no malice in what she says.
Some of us see that national anthem video for what it is, others won't. Posting it and not getting the full implications is not the same as posting it with malice.
Yeah, I'm just wondering if they'd improved over the last 30/40 years.
Forty years ago there was one palatable brand of soya milk, but most were vile. Now there are more pleasant plant milks than you can shake a stick at and I haven't stumbled on an unusable one in years.
I tried some 30 years ago and it was like they'd taken grape juice, made it into wine and then converted it back into grape juice with rancid undertones
I don't see the point of spirtless spirits either, which is why I was hoping someone had already wasted their money to satisfy my curiosity.
I've just read something online that would suggest most are sickly sweet. Imagine spending twenty-five quid on a glorified Panda pop.
Just re-posting the op in case any of us manages to make a relevant contribution.
I'm afraid I'm stumped with the 'acceptable to all' bit gven I doubt any organised religion would accept my hypothesis that the common theme is power and control.
My consultant rationed my alcohol intake due to medication that can cause liver damage. After six weeks of treatment I gleefully had a bottle of beer, but felt rubbish enough the next day to not want to repeat the exercise.
I don't see the point in spiritless spirits, or wine that's turned back into grape juice. I see beer as less reliant on alcohol for flavour and texture, but gluten-free suits me better.
Post-pandemic, a fair amount of alcohol-free wines and spirits have been appearing in shops and adverts. I'm guessing a market opportunity opened up either because people got into the enjoyable habit of tippling over here during lockdowns, because alcohol-free production has improved, or both.
Between illness and medication (I'm not sure which is worse) I'm having a fairly miserable time of it. The occasional treat wouldn't go amiss which is why I'm asking.
I think I might settle for a water carbonator, a fancy glass and an organic lime.
jac_the_gripper Forum Posts (5,363)
RE: What is wrong with babies?
I've just watched the film Dark Waters. It's about PFOA contamination from the production of Teflon. DuPont knew in the 70's that PFOA had leached into the water system via waste dumping and that the chemical was causing terminal illnesses and birth defects among it's workforce. However, they continued production because it was so obscenely profitable.DuPont finally settled 3,535 claims for $6,707M in 2017, but denied any wrongdoing.
It's estimated that virtually every living creature is contaminated with PFOA, including 99% of humans. There are another 600+ related 'forever chemicals' nearly all of which are unregulated.
I'm guessing that's just the tip of the iceberg with respect to chemical contamination.
It's hardly surprisng that people get sick.