NY Times (primary source), Vox, Gizdomo and some others report over a resolution to encourage breast-feeding, which was expected to be approved quickly and easily by the hundreds of government delegates who gathered in Geneva for the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly.
Vox:
[...] American officials surprised international delegates at the United Nations-affiliated World Health Assembly in May when they opposed a widely popular resolution to promote breastfeeding, according to a Sunday report by Andrew Jacobs for the New York Times. Specifically, they pushed to remove language asking governments to "protect, promote, and support breast-feeding." They also took issue with a passage that called for policymakers to restrict the promotion of food products that may harm children.
It appears that the administration of President Donald Trump sided with corporate interests — the $70 billion infant formula industry — over the health and well-being of kids around the globe. The baby food industry is primarily based in the US and Europe.
The Americans were so ardent in their opposition that they made serious threats to Ecuadorian delegates, who were going to introduce the resolution. According to the Times, the Americans said if Ecuador didn't drop the proposal, "Washington would unleash punishing trade measures and withdraw crucial military aid."
The resolution ultimately made its way through, as a result of Russian intervention. "We feel that it is wrong when a big country tries to push around some very small countries, especially on an issue that is really important for the rest of the world," a Russian delegate told the Times. The US did not make the same threats to Russia as it had to Ecuador, and the resolution was passed mostly in its original form.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:23AM (65 children)
It looks a lot like corporate kissup to the baby formula companies.
(Score: 3, Flamebait) by idiot_king on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:34AM (37 children)
There's nothing "crony" about it.
It's Capitalism.
And you people probably wonder why I rail on it all the time, don't you?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:41AM (21 children)
Sounds like its funded by taxes to me. I certainly don't believe any health/nutrition advice coming out of these government or super-government organizations, just look at the food pyramid which recommended almost the exact opposite of a healthy diet (basically both the base and pinnacle need to be cut off). It is all political.
Didn't Russia also supposedly intervene in recent elections? I think that could be the real purpose of this story. Are you for, or against, "Russian intervention"?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:48AM
Right. Hundred of countries wanted it, blame "Russian intervention" though... because bullshit creates an immediate reaction, right? And then everybody will forget what's important and will start fighting like schoolboys in the schoolyard.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Interesting) by black6host on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:57AM (5 children)
The point is this: breast feeding, in most cases is good for the child. Why should that not be promoted? Oh, commercial reasons. Screw that. Not promoting food products that "may" harm children could lead to some issues so why not make it "not promote food products that ARE harmful to children." Countries themselves determine what they consider harmful so not much in the way of loss there with respect to the US.
Really, this should go without saying. But here in the states, a lot of people have problems with breastfeeding in public. That's bullshit. People can be discrete and you can't tell an infant not to be hungry. Feed on mommas.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:01AM
Thanks for the permission, I will.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Bot on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:05AM (1 child)
> problems with breastfeeding in public
> burqa yea breastfeed nay
every time my AI determines you're hopeless, you meatbags go and further lower the bar.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 3, Informative) by RS3 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:34AM
I heard you only keep us around for your entertainment. We're doing our best.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:35AM
Not commercial reasons, per se, but imperial reasons. To wit, healthy mother-child bonding is anathema [violence.de] to belicose warfare, which is the USA's mandatory modus operandi.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:09PM
The resolution is not even asking for "in public". It is just promoting the very natural behavior that Mother Nature has evolved for tens of millions of years to the benefit of mother & child or (if you're a religious fanatic) that the Good Almighty Lord himself has intelligently designed as the one and only way babies should be fed during their initial time on this earth, his creation.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:03AM (9 children)
I'm just amused at the Trump World, in which Russia and China are regularly the sane and "good" guys.
How I long for the days when the worst thing was the charismatic guy banging his willing intern...
(Score: 0, Offtopic) by legont on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:12AM (1 child)
Pray you don't see Clinton sheWorld.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:57AM
So far this worldline is very similar. Instead of unilateral tariffs, President Clinton was able to enact TPP/TTIP/TISA. It was inspiring to see a woman lead the free world and pursuing pseudo-libertarian policies.
When she opened the FEMA concentration camps, jailing certain citizen journalists was something that we understood we needed to do, not because we wanted to, but because the formation of the BRICS central bank and the issuance of C-"Bits" was the first sign of the inevitable world war.
The CDC is one way to open concentration camps. In this timeline, it's another. These are truly mirror worlds.
Unless
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:31AM (2 children)
Those days didn't exist. The government has been violating our fundamental liberties and the Constitution since the beginning, and Clinton was only marginally better at best.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:37PM (1 child)
The only reason people think fondly on Bill Clinton's time in office was because he was handing out corporate giveaways like candy, in the form of de-regulation, which produced a speculative bubble. He managed to get out of office before it burst, but he is the one who set the stage for the economic reversals that came under W. W., of course, compounded all of that, as he would have done as a fellow teammate in the Uniparty. Obama, for his part, queued up the dagger thrust to the throat of the American middle class in the form of the Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Hillary was to have rammed home.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:41PM
In your comment about B. Clinton, you used the following words... candy, throat, burst, thrust, and rammed.
Hidden meaning?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:44AM (1 child)
Who said anything about this was good? These organizations shouldnt be making any recommendations about health/nutrition at all. They have a horrible track record.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:11PM
God himself designed women to feed their babies in this way.
His track record is impeccable.
(Score: 1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:37AM (1 child)
The "willing intern" is a national hero. If not for her the "charismatic guy" would have dismantled social security. It was next on his adjenda after filling prisons, dismantling the welfare system, deregulating wallstreet and sending all the jobs south to mexico.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:29AM
You got 4 of the top 5.
Bill Clinton's 5 Major Achievements Were Longstanding GOP Objectives [googleusercontent.com] (orig)[2] [truthout.org]
You left out the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the resultant $200B giveaway to Big Internet.
The $200 Billion Rip-Off: Our broadband future was stolen. [archive.li]
[1] It sounds like a j, but it takes a g.
...and there's only 1 d.
[2] truth-out recently became truthout, becoming an even bigger pile of page-building suckage. [w3.org]
-- OriginalOwner_ [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:31AM
Supposedly - yes. Actually - no!
I'm for neocon and neo-liberal heads exploding as their disgraceful legacy is burnt to the ground.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Mykl on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:52AM (1 child)
[Tromp tromp tromp!]
"Who's that Tromping over my bridge? I'll come up there and eat you!"
Thanks for your opinion, Troll. I like the way that you divert the question and create a wonderful false comparison to the food pyramid ("if they got one thing wrong, then everything they have ever done and will ever do must be wrong!") then somehow tie a WHO delegate's submission into the Russian collusion in the 2016 election ("interventions are either all good, or all bad!"). There's a promising career for you over at Fox News.
Back to the original question though - why do you hate babies so much?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:02AM
The other day my friend was like "the clock is broke its stuck at 4:30" Then 4:30 rolled around and he asked "who fixed the clock?"
(Score: 3, Insightful) by FatPhil on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:25PM
It was crony capitalism - specifically US crony capitalism - behind that.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:21AM
The rights of the corporate to govern for the corporate by the corporate shall not be infringed.... (2018 interpretation of ye ancient documents past their use-by date).
(Score: 0, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:03AM (1 child)
Um, no, we don't. We look at your rants, and then at your username, and say "He's the idiot_king. It's what he does."
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:32PM
I protest! It is not necessary to be a king to be an idiot!
The people who rely on government handouts and refuse to work should be kicked out of congress.
(Score: 2) by Bot on Tuesday July 10 2018, @07:21AM (9 children)
We are simply playing with words.
Free market capitalism:
Mother's milk, price 0, efficacy 100%
Commercial baby milk, price > 0, efficacy even in the negative
Winner: mother's milk.
Real world capitalism: who makes enough money corrupts who has enough power and together they fuck the rest.
Current capitalism: some guys are actually in charge of printing money from nothing.
Account abandoned.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:24PM (5 children)
Uhhhhh - no. Go visit your local grocery store. No matter where you live (if you're in the USA) milk on the shelf costs about $5.00. That is bovine milk, of course. Cows aren't fed especially well. Their health care doesn't preoccupy us, day in and day out. They don't take vacations, don't need cell phones, you don't have to buy them cars, dresses, makeup, or much of anything else. Cows are pretty damned cheap. If you happen to have adequate pasture, cows only cost you about a dollar a day. If you have to buy hay for them, cows might cost you five or ten dollars a day.
Women? Women are costly. If you have a daughter, wife, girlfriend, cousin - just think about what it costs to keep her in tight jeans, frilly blouse, and whatever the hell else she demands.
And groceries? It probably costs ten dollars worth of groceries for a woman to produce five dollars worth of milk. I never did the math - I'm not even sure where to start, but, DAYUM, pregnant and nursing women can be awfully demanding sometimes.
I haven't bought, or even priced formula in forever. I don't know what that crap costs. It seems to me that it was considerably more expensive than cow's milk. https://www.amazon.com/Similac-Advance-Infant-Formula-Powder/dp/B017RMGC3M [amazon.com] Amazon says $92 for a one month supply. Hmmmmmm . . . .
So, 45 x 3 = 135 six ounce bottles of formula.
135 x six ounces = 810 ounces of mixed formula
810 ounces / 128 = 6.3 gallon (for fun, we'll round that off to 6 1/2 gallons, because I say we can)
At $5/gallon, 6.5 gallons of milk costs about 32.50, vs $92 for an equal amount of milk.
Mother's milk? What does it cost you to keep a woman around?
Parenthetically - ladies, I'm not picking on you. Keeping a man around the house can be much more costly than keeping a woman - wrecked vehicles, destroyed doors, bail bonds, etc ad nauseum. I'm just trying to put things in perspective here.
Back to our "equation". What does it cost to feed a woman for a month? How much extra does she eat while nursing an infant? Not only how much extra, but what exactly does she eat? Most nursing mothers will insist on eating "healthy" instead of a steady diet of junk food that the pets won't even eat.
Mother's milk is considerably more costly than either cow's milk, or formula. But, still - any of us who aren't willing to pay the price have lost part of our humanity somewhere.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:44PM (1 child)
Last I checked, women husbandry is generally not done for the milk.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:59PM
Maybe you need to check again. And, maybe you should stop thinking like an incel.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:02PM (1 child)
wtf are you talking about.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:14PM
Repeat after me: WHOOOOSH!
(Score: 2) by krishnoid on Wednesday July 11 2018, @12:51AM
Whoa whoa whoa -- who said anything about women [youtube.com]?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by FatPhil on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:51PM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 11 2018, @12:08AM (1 child)
Not just the US, pal. The UK too.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Wednesday July 11 2018, @11:38AM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:43PM
This is ridiculous. If you have the strength and power to twist someone's arm on their back, it is totally superfluous to paddle anything to them in exchange for their ... for your money in their pockets!
Why bother making baby food anyway? Just threaten them, take their money and be done with it!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:31PM
Crony capitalism isn't the only form of capitalism. You seem to think it is?
(Score: 5, Informative) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:39AM (2 children)
Very likely but, as usual, one can't be certain.
NYTimes
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:55AM (1 child)
The baby-formula industry, like the RIAA, will consider every time a woman nurses her baby, that's a lost sale.
Honorable Law-Maker: Protect My Rights! Her doing that is in clear violation of my Business Model! These violations must be stopped! Pass Law! Thank you.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:09AM
In a normal world, I'd mod it +Funny.
But that's not a normal world, so an +Interesting will have to do.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:45AM (14 children)
Yep. Nothing much to see here.
Give women misinformation and withhold information so that somebody can profit. It's the American way.
Hypersexualize a body part that's meant for feeding infants and promote cosmetic surgery butchery as the "only!" way to address cosmetic issues with that body part. (I can elaborate if needed.) It's the American way.
How handy! Cosmetic butcher knives also remove important sensitivity and damage the capability to breastfeed, driving more profits. It's the American way.
And why? Because somebody might do something crazy like breastfeeding a sexual partner because for some women it just feels reaaaaaally fucking good, and we can't have that, because we're American puritans who hate sex and hate the female orgasm even more, especially when it doesn't involve a man's cock.
But mostly profits überalles!
*previews*
Holy shit, how did I start channeling radical feminism?
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:40AM (2 children)
You didn't. [youtube.com]
You just explained the financial incentive for the promotion of "transgenderism".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:11AM
wat
Oh, oh, sorry, your point was just sooo far out there that it took me a while to get it. Mikee, is that you?
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:42AM
Transgenderism is marketable, and its a moneymaker. And if marketdroids are really good at something, its making you feel that you are not complete until you have whatever it is they are peddling. The result for most of us is being in debt, depressed, and sick. We can never live up to that which is shown as what we are supposed to be striving to be.
Being happy with who you are and what you have is bad for business. Its not conducive to getting you to buy crap. So "they" try like the dickens to convince you that you are a loser, and you need to follow them to be a winner. Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt.
Learn to recognize it when you see them using it at you. Need practice? TV ads! Damn near every one of them is trying to make you feel you are missing out on life or you are being socially irresponsible if you fail to heed the advice coming from the talking head in the corner.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:26AM (6 children)
Because you're Azuma Hazuki.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:50AM (5 children)
LOL, nope, down here! :D And what kind of testosterone-poisoned mess has this place devolved into when plain common sense gets pegged as "radical feminism?" I really have to wonder if some of you people actually had mothers, or if you spawned in a damp disused locker from someone's abandoned jockstrap...
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:36AM (2 children)
I'll bet $50 that most of the people here, and all of the Anonymous Cowards, were not breast fed.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:20PM
Hey, it's cool. I've spent the bulk of my adult life sucking on titties to make up for it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:54PM
you'd lose that bet.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @07:40PM (1 child)
Thank goodness! I was seriously worried there for a moment when I thought I was channeling radical feminism! Indeed, what I wrote is merely common sense, and perhaps sometimes common sense seems radical to me after my perspective was so thoroughly warped both by reactionary feminism and fundamentalist Christianity.
(Score: 2) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 10 2018, @08:35PM
Yeah, the horseshoe effect makes weird bedfellows. I remember seeing a comic where two very butch-looking women were dumping on trans* people, and the last panel has one inviting the other to the local TERF meetup, to which she says something along the lines of "Wait, I'm not a feminist! I'm a hardcore Christian conservative!"
The common underlying factor is fear. Even if I agreed with TERF politics, I'd still distance myself from them as a matter of principle because of who they bed down with.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:48AM (3 children)
O~kay, this maaaaaay be a little TMI, but...there is a surprising amount of adult nursing and just plain breastplay among (ugh, I hate this acronym) WLW. I don't lactate, but my love has a bit in the way of mommy issues and finds pseudo-nursing very soothing. And yes, it feels *amazing.* I'm told that too varies by woman, and I think some of it is the emotional side sort of feeding back into the physical, but...yeah. I am all about this. Putting it into words is hard: it's just, like, amazingly womanly and amazingly woman-to-woman, very healing and excellent for bonding. Oxytocin may be involved somewhere? Would not surprise me at all.
As to channeling radical feminism...well, that's not radical. That isn't even necessarily feminism. That's plain common sense. No one says breasts can't be functional *and* sexual at the same time though :)
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @07:05AM (1 child)
when breastfeeding oxytocin is indeed released (I went to breastfeeding class with my wife).
in fact, breastfeeding in the first few days after birth is extremely beneficial for the mother, because oxytocin helps with recovery (uterus shrinks faster, therefore less blood is lost).
and yes, breastfeeding leads to serious bonding (I doubt it's essential, but it's a very pleasant way of bonding in the long term).
and, one more thing: actual breastfeeding hurts like hell, at least until the nipples harden and are less sensitive. it's not just that babies bite, it hurts when they suck hard enough for milk to come out (and during the first few days the uterus shrinking also hurts).
the best sign that it's actually a great experience: mothers do it. I have found that the "8 times a day in the first 2 weeks" is a myth: many babies clusterfeed and demand much more than this, and the mother doesn't really sleep properly.
in fact formula milk makes babies sleep longer and deeper, because it gets digested slower (I think nurses said "it sits longer on the stomach").
since mothers still do it despite all of this (and more), it's obviously pleasant.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:46PM
It hurts like hell at first, for the first baby, because women and babies don't know how to suckle properly out of the gate. There's a trick to getting the baby to latch on properly and form a seal. If they don't, they chew and chew on the nipple until it's chafed and painful. If you should find yourself in that situation, it is worth paying a lactation consultant. It's expensive, but the pay-off in being able to sleep and not having your child screaming because it's hungry is worth its weight in gold.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Tuesday July 10 2018, @09:14AM
Yeah! Come to think of it, penises too! Hypersexualize a body part that's meant for pissing!
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:12AM (8 children)
it looks like the US is being bullies, yet again.
I am sorry for the bad behavior for my country. please, world, realize that not all americans are stupid like our current GOVERNMENT is.
(I wish a citizen really could apologize on behalf of their gone-astray government.)
trump: we need him out of office asap. how much longer can we endure what he's doing to us, locally and world-view, wise?
sigh ;(
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Pslytely Psycho on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:38AM (4 children)
NO! Trump must serve his full term and be booted by vote, (Please D's if you can't do better than Hillary, promote the fucking janitor as your candidate) if Trump chickens out, gets bored, impeached, or worse, then we get PENCE.
The R's are afraid of Trump, but they would line up to suck Pences's cock.
Alex Jones lawyer inspires new TV series: CSI Moron Division.
(Score: 2) by acid andy on Tuesday July 10 2018, @09:17AM (3 children)
Bernie?
If a cat has kittens, does a rat have rittens, a bat bittens and a mat mittens?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:56PM (2 children)
Bernie has an even worse shot this time around than last time, because Hillary purged all but one of his supporters from the DNC. That means all the shenanigans they got up to stacking the deck for her would be multiplied.
Bernie, and people like Bernie, are much better off walking away from the Democratic Party and starting a new, real progressive party. All the progressives in the Democratic party who have not already walked away would jump ship immediately, instead of seething impotently at the corporate Dems and the party leadership which has aged into octogenarians and will not relinquish power.
That, in turn, would doom the DNC because the progressives comprise all those who do the ground work, get signatures to get on the ballot, run caucuses, canvas for campaigns, etc. The DNC would have to pay political operatives to do the massive, massive amount of labor those volunteers do for free, and they simply don't have the money to do that.
There would be a little bit of a financial hit without the corporate/PAC money the DNC rakes in, but in this day and age politicians have learned the power of small-dollar donations and how to do that economically, so they'd manage.
If something like that happened, they'd give Trump a real run for his money and probably beat him. But the DNC, as it is currently constituted, can't. They have no message beyond a primal scream of an Establishment that is terrified the cattle (us) are breaking out of the pen. The economy, most importantly the job market, are too strong for them to argue that what Trump is doing doesn't work. They can cry all they want to about how mean Trump is to certain classes of people, but humans are remarkably self-centered when the rubber meets the road; in other words, if things are going well for them they really don't care how badly things are going for hapless illegal immigrants from Central America or the Middle East, especially when those groups can be smeared as probably dangerous.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:37PM (1 child)
Bernie should run because he will be elected and win. Do you think Trump would lose to Bernie? I do.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday July 11 2018, @12:14AM
You need more mainstream appeal than an admitted socialist like Bernie to win a national election, and no, Hillary didn't have it either.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:19AM (2 children)
You just did. You can also apologize for all the other wayward governments of the world with equal sincerity.
Till roughly January 20, 2020. It's not much to ask.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:34AM
Repeal the 22nd! [laws.com] ;^)
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:47AM
(Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:08AM (2 children)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bush_legs [wikipedia.org]
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:47AM (1 child)
Interesting that they only shipped the legs. I always wonder why at chinese restaurants their "chicken wings" are actually wings, and only wings, and I can't buy a breast instead. I would just assume as a restaurant it would be cheaper for you buy the whole chickens.
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday July 11 2018, @02:37AM
Chicken legs, from American point of view, is a waste. They actually have negative value unless dumped on less developed countries. That's why the US is so sensitive to the issue.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by legont on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:10AM (2 children)
There got to be Assange here somewhere.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 3, Funny) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:26AM (1 child)
Yeah, I can see why US would have issues knowing Assange being pampered and breastfed, all the while TMB is banned from even seeing titties in public (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 3, Funny) by Azuma Hazuki on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:51AM
Something tells me Uzzard can see titties anytime he wants just by looking down the front of his shirt. Whether he's seen his feet or not in a while at that angle is another matter, LOL.
I am "that girl" your mother warned you about...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:16AM (50 children)
How in is that possibly a legitimate role for government?
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:32AM (44 children)
Like making sure their people have the best data available to made informed decision about the health of their children and thus reduce the cost of health care downstream? Yes, indeed, how dare they?
The people need to be... umm... milked by the corporations, 'cause everybody know the corporations are the ones that produce a harmonious society and balanced life-style - why, their piss trickling down is what feeds the population!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:54AM (42 children)
How in the world can people argue this after the food pyramid debacle? You are better off doing the opposite of whatever they say. Or best off just ignoring them altogether and doing what makes sense (breast feed if you can, but supplement with formula if you need to or are ill and cant find another mother to help out, etc).
(Score: 3, Touché) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:57AM (37 children)
Based on some billion of years of evolution, perhaps?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:03AM (36 children)
What does this mean? Are you saying that you trust people who have repeatedly given bad advice in the past because you were born that way?
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:07AM (35 children)
No, because I was breastfed. As my parents were. And my grandparents. And so on to the first mammalians. And we all survived Ok, thank you.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:11AM (34 children)
So what do you need the government to tell you this for? Their decision seems to be irrelevant to your decisions, its just on this one topic where on the surface this seems to align with what you already used common sense to figure out.
(Score: 2) by TheGratefulNet on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:14AM (9 children)
why do we need the government to FIGHT it, though? they are being asked to support a concept that is as old as mankind. and they said NO.
lets put it that way. what's the reason for the gov trying to avoid this subject?
well, one thing not mentioned: the converatards. they are offended by the human body. this is the elephant in the room (LOL)
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:20AM (1 child)
Governments seem to ruin anything and everything they get involved with because it becomes about politics and power games rather than ethics, honesty, efficiency, honor, (name any possible positive reason to do something)...
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:44AM
FTFY
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:29AM (6 children)
The OP nailed it.
Your argument is worthless. Why isn't the world protecting, promoting, and supporting wiping your ass after you shit?
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:50AM (4 children)
Lemme guess. Because, unlike breastfeeding, no corporation objected yet to ass wiping, and neither the US government? (grin)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:59AM (2 children)
https://www.yahoo.com/lifestyle/bidets-are-healthier-than-toilet-paper-so-why-111571549767.html [yahoo.com]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:26AM (1 child)
From the linked
Neither of those are corporation or US govt.
Besides, they don't say "let your ass dirty after using your toilet", but "washing seems to be better then wiping, but one can have too much of this better thing"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:52AM
You are being "culturally prepared" as we speak. You think yahoo news brings up bidets out of nowhere?
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/30/technology/personaltech/electronic-bidet-toilet-seat-is-the-luxury-you-wont-want-to-live-without.html [nytimes.com]
(Score: 2) by legont on Wednesday July 11 2018, @03:03AM
Yes they did. The biggest corporation - church - for example. There are countless examples. Say the fate of Hawaii population. Natives would shit into the ocean and wash their buts. Then missionaries came and forced locals to dig holes and shit in there without washing their asses. Soon, all locals died. When you see nice nuns remember that.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by tfried on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:48AM
You are right in a way. Breast-feeding is the obvious choice, and typically the only viable one in developing countries. A priori, you do not need anybody to tell you that.
However, what you need even less is (commercially) interested parties scaring young mothers away from breastfeeding, instead encouraging them to rely on commercial products, which they won't be able to afford, which they won't necessarily realize until it is too late (no more breast milk, baby no longer accepting breast).
So - what they'd really need to do is pass a resolution to ban promotion of formula. But that would have some real free speech issues, so, instead, they say it's important to restore a healthy balance to the discussion. As there is no money to be earned from mothers breastfeeding (except long term and on the societal level), it makes sense to turn to governments to promote that side.
--
BTW, on the topic of sanitation:
http://www.un.org/waterforlifedecade/human_right_to_water.shtml [un.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Toilet_Day [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 3, Insightful) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:18AM (8 children)
I don't. All the same, I don't need US govt/coprorations to tell me it's wrong.
And, if something needs to be said just in case others don't know, then I'd prefer to hear the truth ('breastfeeding is good for the health of the children') and not the corporations 'promoting the controversy yet again'.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:27AM (7 children)
And in 10 years this resolution you supported will be changed to read "newer baby formulas could also be ok", then in 20 years "baby formulas are just as good as breastfeeding under many circumstances", then in 40 years "baby formula is better than breast feeding". Why do I think this? Because this already happened, the fad has just swung the other way recently.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2684040/ [nih.gov]
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:36AM (4 children)
In 40 years, I'll be dead. I suppose it will be the responsibility of others to realise and tell the truth about breastfeeding.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:52AM (3 children)
They'll say that "In c0lo's time baby formula was deficient and not as good as breast milk, but now we have fortified baby formula with all the best stuff and it is much better". Then it will take another 40 years or so for people to decide this is wrong.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by bob_super on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:10AM (2 children)
At that point, the rich will buy super-formula to match their genetically-enhanced babies, and the 99% will have to breastfeed because the baby's delivery made them bankrupt, despite happening in the trailer instead of the hospital they can't afford.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:25AM
Yep, exactly what happened before. The rich bought the superformula which turned out to be bs.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:06PM
That is why we all must walk away from that timeline orthogonally.
Tons of scientific research establish breastfeeding as superior to formula. Common sense dictates that, too. So let's all take the action that matters and stop buying baby formula.
Voting with our dollars is the only vote that still matters in the world now, as corrupt and riddled with crony capitalism as it is, so let's do vote with them. If you don't like climate change and the carbon that the fossil fuel industries are dumping into the atmosphere, then stop driving and stop using fossil fuels. There was a time when it really wasn't practical or possible to do that, but now you can. Everyone can. There are solar and wind installations. There are energy retrofits for homes. There are electric cars. Also, we don't have to continue the consumer culture we have. We don't have to fill our homes and lives with piles of crap we don't need and will never use.
That's just one example, but changing how we do all that stuff comes with a lot of positive externalities beyond the immediate benefits.
I say everyone should, or they should shut the hell up about climate change, oil, etc., etc. and be good little slaves, because no government owned by those corporations is ever gonna change.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Mykl on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:44AM (1 child)
Yes, but why do you think that physicians and consumers "regarded" the use of formula so positively? Could it perhaps have had just a little to do with the manufacturers promoting and marketing the product in a certain way? Hmmm? This was also the era which said smoking was good for you BTW.
Your quoted comment is exactly why this WHO resolution was so important - to avoid the mistakes we made in the West from being duplicated in developing nations.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:49AM
Because thats what the organizations of experts told them.
The mistake was listening to the organization of experts rather than using common sense.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:32AM (6 children)
We need the government to tell us this because pervasive commercial propaganda able to change sociological patterns, causing non-angels to change their decisions in a way that does not align with their self-interest, is a consequence of both anarcho-capitalism and libertarianism. Therefore, there must be counter-propaganda from a warlord who has realized, perhaps based on data we will never see, that breastfeeding is a superior method to raise the armies of Ragnarök.
There are so few supreme warlords in the world these days, and they will do what warlords tend to do, no matter what the consequences for the planet.
We are all about to learn a harsh lesson on impermanence.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:55AM (5 children)
Ok, I agree things seem to work out the best when there are multiple forces competing (non-violently) for "the truth". So isnt there some church that can spread this message instead of governments? Let government be the biggest gang who keeps the peace.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by anubi on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:47AM (1 child)
The main problem I see with most churches is they are a church in name only - for tax purposes - but under the facade of the Cross, they are a business!
"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." [KJV: I Thessalonians 5:21]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:56AM
Who cares? As long as they can act as an independent source of authoritative claims its all good.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:49AM (2 children)
The churches aren't warlords any more. By logical extension of the nature of political power, only a warlord can fight another warlord on political matters.
Limiting warlords to solely the role of peacekeeper (viz. libertarianism with a strictly limited minarchist violently imposed monopoly) is not a stable configuration. It often decays into fascism, though increasingly exotic decays are also possible.
The decay happens quicker the more a given government resembles minarchism; as a government approaches anarchism, the rate of decay approaches instantaneous as a hyperbolic function, authoritarianism as the x-axis and rate of decay per unit time the y-axis. Angels are not mathematically possible, because the value of the hyperbola is undefined as the rate of decay per unit time approaches infinity and authoritarianism approaches zero.
At least, that seems to be how it is with the humans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:58AM (1 child)
Why is breast feeding suddenly a political matter?
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @04:58PM
Because of protestantism and catholism. In other words, christianity.
Our country was originally founded by mostly Deists (NOT Christians! despite the lies) a neutral, secular state, but christians are trying to take over the state and create a church-state. They've been trying to do so for a long time. From opposition to gay marriage (a directive of the church state) our country has been destroyed.
Don't believe the USA is being taken over by the church?
Our secular motto "E Pluribus Unum" was replaced by the Church-State with "In God We Trust".
Bans on abortion are based on religion.
Bans on gay marriage are based on religion.
Bans on pornography are based on religion.
Breastfeeding is opposed because in the view of the church-state women should cover up!
Nudity laws? Church state.
Literally >50% of the worst regulations are based on church-state takeover.
Protecting our secular nation is a war against the christian church-state that is corrupting it. Leave the rest of us alone, I'd say, but they wont have it. They want to force everyone to follow the moral laws of the sky fairy.
(Score: 5, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:19AM (7 children)
You clearly seem ignorant of the history of this issue. This current debate likely has less to do with whether formula is an adequate substitute (in most cases, it is, though breast-feeding may have minor benefits).
Instead, you need to look back to scandalous behavior of formula companies in the third world a few decades ago where they heavily prompted formula to new mothers in places like Africa by donating free products and convincing them this was better... But then the African mothers had no money to continue buying formula after they left the hospitals, and babies that become bottle-adjusted early tend to be difficult to train to breastfeed... So the poor mothers would take to feeding them less effective substitutes, watering down the little formula they could afford etc.. leading to malnourished babies.
THAT is what formula companies do when third world countries and the World Health Assembly aren't committed to breast feeding... And that presumably could happen again. So that's the likely the rationale for the statement here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @03:45AM (6 children)
Why dont they say this is the issue?
(Score: 5, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:24AM (5 children)
Well, perhaps not all sources provide the context, but the aggressive marketing of formula in developing countries is well-known and continuing.
A Guardian article on the current resolution [theguardian.com] clearly explains this context:
This is nothing new, as I discussed in my previous post. But in the investigation discussed in that link, it's clear formula makers are continuously finding new ways to skirt rules to get babies and mothers in developing countries hooked.
I'd say they could be compared to drug dealers offering free samples -- but even most drug dealers don't target infants.
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:34AM
Oh, I forgot the link to the investigation mentioned [theguardian.com].
If you think my comparison to drug dealers was harsh, I suggest you read that article and see the effects of formula marketing to poor people in developing nations...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:40AM (2 children)
Where does that say something about this resoultion being introduced to stop african hospitals to scamming their patients due to being paid off by baby formula companies?
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:54AM (1 child)
Try reading comprehension. The resolution was introduced by Ecuador, which (by the way) is not in Africa. I mentioned Africa because that's where the problem first appeared some 40 years ago (IIRC). It's an ongoing well-known problem in the developing world (the ongoing aspect is discussed in depth in my second link).
This is basically THE issue with formula promotion worldwide today. It's the main reason developing countries have been pushing for breast-feeding education for decades. Sorry if you've never heard of it before.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:51PM
Im guessing this is the resolution?
http://www.who.int/nutrition/publications/infantfeeding/manual-ending-inappropriate-promotion-food/en/ [who.int]
It says formulas are fine if provided and branded by an "official" organization:
(Score: 1) by exaeta on Tuesday July 10 2018, @05:10PM
Interesting. But wouldn't fly in the United States. SCOTUS has recently decided that commercial/corporate speech is subject to the same First Amendment protections as political and non-commercial speech. I see no chance of a reversal anytime soon. In the Supreme Court's view, you (or a corporation) should be able to talk about anything you want, as long as it isn't false or misleading. (With a small number of exceptions for "compelling interests", like nuclear secrets.)
So the government cannot regulate product advertisements without a "compelling governmental interest" as a result of the recent Supreme Court rulings such as Reed v Gilbert, et al. Restrictions on direct advertising to mothers are certainly beyond the authority of the US government to enforce. And under our system, treaties don't override constitutional protections (although they can override statutory law, under certain conditions).
The Government is a Bird
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:58AM
Or do it the American way... if it tastes good, eat it.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by ilPapa on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:43AM (2 children)
Easy one. The "food pyramid" was something cooked up by the USDA to promote the chemically-enhanced bullshit that our factory farms pump out. It was never meant to have anything to do with health. This resolution is something done by all countries (except the one with a useless jackoff as president). It has nothing to do with a "food pyramid" or corporate-run government programs.
The good news is that when Russia said they would re-submit the resolution in Ecuador's place, the US backed off its objection. Because Vladimir Putin calls the shots when the Trump administration is concerned.
I hope that clears up your confusion.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:53PM (1 child)
40 years ago the "experts" were recommending formula instead of breast feeding. In the future they will again. Watch.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Wednesday July 11 2018, @05:54AM
No, they weren't.
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by wisnoskij on Tuesday July 10 2018, @12:05PM
but they did not vote on a measure to provide their citizens with unbiased information. They voted on what was truth, legislation should not dictate what is truth, because it is possible they get it wrong.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Thexalon on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:34AM (4 children)
Public health efforts are nothing new for governments. The CDC, FDA, and other US agencies do this kind of thing all the time, and good for us that they do.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by c0lo on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:42AM
FTFY
I reckon that's up to (all of) you to make them last longer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday July 10 2018, @02:00AM
Nutrition and education were the first forays of the US government into research for the "public good" around/after ww2. Pretty much no progress has been made by them during these 70 years, instead they just go through a series of multi-decade fads.
(Score: 2) by ilPapa on Tuesday July 10 2018, @06:45AM (1 child)
Those were the days, but unfortunately, they are over. We're seeing first-hand what kind of people are being put in charge of those agencies now. [*coughScottPruittcough*]
You are still welcome on my lawn.
(Score: 2) by Phoenix666 on Tuesday July 10 2018, @01:13PM
It's been standard practice to put patsies into those positions since time immemorial. It's a plum you use to reward people who raised a lot of money for your campaign or who delivered the votes of one key constituency or another.
The difference now is that the rot has invaded the top echelons of those agencies also, through regulatory capture. The same people who are supposed to be regulating corporate behavior are in the revolving door with those corporations, such that they take well-paid, window seat jobs at those corporations when they're not in the government agency, and then rotate back to government after a time.
Long forgotten is the public interest.
Washington DC delenda est.