How could anyone be against promoting benefits of breast feeding? Oh wait, trump rather protect the manufacturers who make money off synthetic milk.
This all seems like more just political leftist/progressive hysteria. “The failing NY Times Fake News story today about breast feeding must be called out. The U.S. strongly supports breast feeding but we don’t believe women should be denied access to formula. Many women need this option because of malnutrition and poverty.” - Trump Is that so horrible? From what I can read, it seems like people are being EXTREMELY authoritarian as they are not allowing synthetic breast milk to be used. This is more authoritarian BS from an article like the New York Times and the Leftists who support it. These authoritarian laws are so ridiculous, and to try to guilt someone into NOT making something illegal is disgusting. If you are trying to use this to attack Trump, you are an authoritarian Fascist, or you are just a flat out liar looking for something to attack Trump with..... like the New York Times apparantly.
It's not, the article and the entire argument are flat out lies. The WHO is going so far as to try to limit and in many cases flatout disallow formula. It basically states that formula is "the cause of deaths in many areas especially poor ares where synthetic milk is more abundant." So let's get this straight.... Women come "stock" with breast milk, yet they are chosing synthetic formula for whatever reason. The WHO wants to take steps to stop that, going so far as to limit availability. Trump disagreed with that, he wanted women to have their own choice as to how to feed their babies. Now, articles like the New York Times and all the stupid idiot Leftists are just going along with the show without knowing anything about what they are actually arguing. God, it sickens me how Progressives/Leftists have become absolute authoritarians, they are basically borderline fascists now.
if Trump said electrolytes should replace breast milk, I think many trump supporters would find it as gospel
You do realize that you are arguing for a lie, did you actually take a look at the situation or did you just agree with the mainstream media and decide it was a good way to hate the President? The WHO wanted to mandate choices away from women and the US administration wanted to leave the decision to the women instead of the bureaucrats. Why are you against women having free choice?
I am basing my opinion on Trump's actions and his supports they were giving a option, not creating law, it is better to use breast milk when possible, that is common sense - no one was trying to take a women's choice away, but glad to see you are pro-choice
Ok, let me honestly try to describe what Trump supporters and a lot of us in the middle are afraid is going on. In the last 50 years, large bureaucratic organizations have gathered more and more power to the point of having MASSIVE control. There are a lot of laws going around the "Western World" that are attempting to litigate how we hear messages, how we see marketing and how we learn about studies. These organizations have been shown to have MULTIPLE situations where they discard data they don't like, change results as they see fit and bend testing to fit their parameters. With this, there is a really healthy distrust for these organizations. The term "they think they know better than we do!" is something you likely hear often and is nestled in the point I am making. This is the audiences Trump is targeting and The New York Times is ignoring that entirely. Instead they are creating the Strawman of "Trump hates breastfeeding!" and doing everything they can to brutally attack that. THIS is something that the middle absolutely hates, it is a lie and inaccurate journalism. If you disagree with Trump and want to say "people need 'US' to inform or tell them things" that is fine, it has merit to it and is worthwhile to discuss. But instead, the two sides aren't even talking about the same thing. -Trumpers see it is as a government overreach. -Other side see it as a woman's right or whatever else. This brings us to the middle where a lot of us absolutely despise that tactic. It is basically virtue signaling in an attempt to guide the conversation in a different direction. That tactic is being shunned more and more, that is the huge backlash against Leftists and SJW types who do it a lot. This example is a pretty weak one, it is low hanging fruit and anyone in politics will line up to just say "they don't care, women should have choice ...etc etc etc" But it is also a perfectly lined up argument for the anti-SJW types who see it as another New York Times lie, bending the truth of what is actually going on. Hope that makes sense. But it seems like NYT and it's supporters are basically stating that there are people who want babies to be unhealthy or something, that is a PERFECT example of Virtue Signaling and is just flat out stupid.
I do not disagree, back in the 70's the choice was sugar or fat and the government choose fat as the enemy, so yes it can have bad consequences but arguing that breast milk is not the better option is silly, arguing that they should just present the facts and leave it to us to decide I can agree with
But that's exactly my point, if you actually read what him and his administrators are saying, it is not that they think breast milk is not a better option. They are saying they are worried that a large government body will get in the way of making it less readily available, which will harm those who for one reason or another rely on synthetic. It is pretty much right there to read. So if you think Trump and his administration is lying, ok fair enough that could be true. But for a news agency to write a piece completely based upon "he is lying" and not state the other side, is completely fallacious. That is why I hate and refuse to watch, listen to or read any modern media anymore and a huge population is doing the same. Unless these agencies stop doing this, they will continue to decline and at this rate will likely die off in the next decade. Now that will REALLY hurt the Left, which is why I recommend no longer doing it and just debating both sides actual argument, instead of the strawman built on the idea that you believe he is lying.
\ This article was designed to outrage the easily outraged. Do you believe that women should be forced to breastfeed by denying them formula?
Some women do both, my wife did. Breast feeding was always first, but sometimes she couldn’t keep up with production and had to supplement.
Exactly, and I think it is very fair to be worried that a government organization may get involved and ... like usual .... screw things up. If we all the sudden don't have baby formula because it is labled "evil" by the WHO, will there be women out there that canont get it? I would rather people be in charge of their own decisions, MAYBE the WHO thing wouldn't do this, but if that is the case then why make the statement at all? Is it an actual problem? Could educations do it instead of a big program? But yeah, either way, the New York Times is just showing another completely ridiculous and biased article and makes it so we cannot have an actual conversation about the topic. ARE there people who are dying from over use of baby formula? We will never know because people are turning into a political argument first
https://www.counterpunch.org/2018/0...ly-blackmail-threaten-thirrd-world-countries/ More corporate welfare that could lead to millions dying if he animals in the Trump administration get their way. " The 1974 article titled The Baby Killer blew the lid off the Nestle bottle formula scandal. (1) Companies like Nestle used women in nurses uniforms to sell their baby formula. They provided free samples to mothers who would use the formula. These women would then find their breasts had stopped giving milk after a month of using the infant formula. Now they were hooked and needed to pay for the formula yet the family income in many cases was only $7 a week. What unfolded was a tragedy: from mixing the baby water with unsafe water sources to not being able to afford the expensive baby formula and diluting it to make it last longer. The result was deaths of babies in the millions, malnourished babies with stunted growth condemned to a lifetime of physical and mental disability. A stunning example of free-market murder feeding the worlds children to a $11.5 billion industry. A million infant deaths a year are blamed on a reliance of infant formula rather than breastfeeding. (2) The recent attempt by the United States to overturn 40 years of World Health Organisation consensus that breast feeding is universally better for babies is a prime example of the desperation of United States capital and how entwined corporate interest has become within the government. American officials first sought to water down the resolution by removing language that called on governments to “protect, promote and support breast-feeding”. When that failed they resorted to threats of trade measures and withdrawing military aid to help assisting in the drug wars. (3) The press has blown up because under an internal code of the World Health Organisation baby formula companies are banned from explicitly targeting mothers and their health careers. Advertising is also controlled. This is what 3rd world nations were trying to achieve. “We were shocked because we didn’t understand how such a small matter like breast-feeding could provoke such a dramatic response,” said the Ecuadorean official, who asked not to be identified because she was afraid of losing her job.(3) South American countries should be least shocked of all on the ideology of the United States. Profit over everything. Even other the corpses of a million babies a year to keep the $11.5 billion Infant Formula industry going. This new era of a naked and brazenly corrupt capitalism from the United States is prime evidence of a desperate and shamelessly awful system struggling to make profit in a time of Great Power rivalries. Because in an era of great power rivalry, making some profit is not enough. Making super profits is what is required."
Wow does trump know his base. There was nothing in there about not allowing formula. If you don’t like the New York Times try defying Trump and educate yourself. There are about 50 sites. I guess even FOXNews doesn’t want to report something that is so blatantly bullying...and ridiculous and again more divisive. I do have to laugh that the New York Times with all of the Pulitzer Prize is fake news. This is exactly what fascists do it this is exactly what Hitler did making the media “the enemy of the people” no wonder Trump loves his base. The New York Times happens to be probably the most respected newspaper all over the world but to people like you you probably read Breitbart or other trash https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/08/health/world-health-breastfeeding-ecuador-trump.html
lol personal attacks, shocker. But yes, "allowing" was the wrong word. But the idea behind it is to have the government organization step in far more than what a lot of us want to be. And yes, the New York Times has been proven time and time again to be LOADED with fake news, you really deny that? Come on man, that one isn't even in question. This article is a perfect example, you are just parroting that "Trump hates breast feeding" when he and the administration have clearly been stated "too much government". You really think, whether you agree with Trump or not, that this is GOOD for the paper? lawl, look at their readership, it is stuff like that which has NYT in the tank. And no, I don't read any of that crap because it is all lies, there are far better direct ways of getting news now days. Instead of being a shill that bounces around and only wants to personally attack people, I try to actually have conversations. I know it's tough when your actual paid job is to do this kinda stuff, I am thankful that the modern media has made itself look worse and worse and worse. I wonder what kids like you will do when there is not a quoted script to call from. ----EDIT---- "The final resolution largely reflected the original wording. But the U.S. insisted on removing language calling on the World Health Organization to offer technical support to officials trying to stop “inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children,” according to the Times." This is exactly what I am talking about, from what I have read, they simply did not want some International government body involved. Yet you are parroting it like a shill, why? Why make such fallacious statements on a public forum? You just look foolish and it makes more and more people see how horrible modern media outlets are.
No wonder trump loves those who don’t educate themselves. What choices do they want to take away? Let me guess, you’re a guy who is ignorant about breastfeeding vs artificial milk....nothing to do with taking away choices from women. This is about corporations https://www.ohchr.org/EN/NewsEvents/Pages/DisplayNews.aspx?NewsID=20904&LangID=E
There’s that trumpism again...Being manipulated by fear and ignorance Tell us what was wrong with article? We don’t have fake news...we have a fake president who appeals to those who can’t think for themselves
