Are chest-feeders pro-life?
- Thread starter squeak
- Start date
I read the headlines but didn’t bother reading the articles, which appeared silly. Does this involve a harness with bottles, or is it a baby sucking on dry “man-nips”?
Here we are again, Democrats supporting, promoting and idolizing mental illness.
Are you looking in the mirror when you type that?
Pointing out dumbfvckery is not “getting worked up”. Nor is it “triggeration”. Are you now perhaps starting to see why everyone except other dumbfvcks considers you a dumbfvck?
Yeah, saying men can breastfeed and CDC has guidance that they sent out. Is insane to even have this communication. I thought Libs were about the science.
Its actually an interesting article. For all the effort that the CDC goes through to be pro-LBGTQ and support chest-feeding, they failed the first medical principle of 'do no harm'. It is possible, via drugs and surgery, for biological men to lactate. And the CDC guidelines address that. However, the CDC completely ignores the question about whether such drug-induced lactation is actually safe for the children. The drugs used to force lactation are known to cause heart arrythmia and is passed to the child via the chest-milk. (If its called chest-feeding, I assume its also called chest-milk?) To omit such a significant fact regarding the safety of chest-feeding, just to appease the political winds, demonstrates how politics influences these major health organizations and tarnishes their credibility. We saw it with the WHO and Covid, and now you see it with the CDC and the trans-community. Politics over purpose.
So what’s next? Centskatine gonna pop a baby out of their fauxgina?
Doctors consider uterine transplants for male pregnancy
Transgender individuals are pushing for more experimentation
wng.org
He could always seek one of these.
Doctors consider uterine transplants for male pregnancy
Transgender individuals are pushing for more experimentationwng.org
He could always seek one of these.
For profit medicine and ‘do no harm’ are fundamentally conflicting concepts, and every day something new arises to prove it.
I have to disagree here. Without profit, you wouldn't have the advancements that we've had for the past 100+ years.
For-profit entities are at best amoral and are driven to do things they think they can sell, not what is right or best for patients.
The ends do not justify the means.
Who gets to determine what's right or best for the patients? If you believe that's the purview of the patient, then for-profit medicine gets it right. The practitioners are simply performing at the behest of the customer who is willing to pay for it. It only becomes an issue when the liberals start expecting these surgeries to be paid for and now my tax dollars (or insurance dollars) go to funding BS operations like the one above.
I disagree.
As long as new self-destructive procedures are invented, there will be a vocal lobby pressing to make those procedures part of insurance coverage, which increases costs for everyone. And that’s just the beginning, as you implied at the end of your post.
The day humans stop coming up with stupid shit is the day we become extinct. Laughing at you and yore manufactured outrage. Get a hobby or something.
His rectal tubal ligation failed. He's happy though as he was having second thoughts.
Things lefties say when they don't like their dumbassery talked about. 🤣
So we are in agreement. The issue here isn't for-profit medicine. Its the application of socialistic payment programs to fund that profit.
Sleepy's (dimms) promotion. Docs are gittin paid for their perversion. In the name of science? 🤣
We are in partial agreement.
For-profit medicine says ‘**** that’ when it comes to ‘do no harm’ because that’s not a good way to increase shareholder value. Making money and increasing value will always be more important.
‘Do no harm’ should not be a goal of medicine, it should be the edict to which all other principles and goals are subordinate.
You can point out advancements if you wish, and my response is simply ‘at what cost?’ Some will say the cost was worth it and some will not.
Are there greedy AHoles in medicine who don't give a damn about the impact of their work? Absolutely. But I see capitalism like I see gun rights. You don't get rid of it, just because a small portion of the population abuses it.
Thirty replies and not a single one of you understands the significance - the *scientific* significance - of what humans are embarking on. We are at the beginning of humanity’s intentional meddling with the evolutionary process as we alter our sexual essence as human beings. Give the development another thousand years or so and we will have learned how to alter our genetic makeup so that we will all be hermaphrodites who can impregnate ourselves. There can be no woke agenda with more importance than that!
Centskatine’s (if it should ever manage to get laid) descendants could literally go fvck themselves. 😂😂😂
Last edited:
I don’t have a problem with capitalism. I have a problem with capitalism when it comes to health care. The motivations involved combined with human nature creates a recipe for all kinds of trouble.
To be clear, I am not in any way advocating for state run health care. That may be the worst option. My preference is for non-profit health care. But I realize I’m in a tiny minority and there’s virtually no chance that happens.
We've been going down this road ever since we discovered what chromosomes were in the 19th century. We've already seen cloning. We've mapped the genome. We've proven the ability to manipulate RNA and DNA and create catalog babies . And we can do medical transplants of just about any organ in the body now except maybe the brain, so why does a uterus transplant strike you as particularly significant?
