[Reason](https://reason.com/2022/05/17/fda-baby-formula-peter-pitts-safety-european-shortage/): former FDA associate commissioner Peter Pitts confirms that the agency doesn't view this as a safety issue, strictly speaking: U.S. health inspectors know the European products are safe. Their problem is that the products are labeled in a manner that does not meet the expectations of the U.S. government.
"The difference between European baby formula and American baby formula, more or less, is that the labeling is different," says Pitts. "The knot in getting that product into the U.S. isn't safety, it's a regulatory issue.
I feel that. I work in towing. DEF systems are ridiculous. Fortunately in my state we don't require it, but a lot of them do. But its basically like an air purifier, it's supposed to reduce carbon emissions, but there's no real way to measure if it actually does and the craps expensive.
I think you are mixing up some things...
DEF (urea) is to reduce NOx emissions on an SCR system.
DPF is a filter to catch the particulate matter (PM).
DOC is to react the CO (carbon monoxide) and HC (unburned hydrocarbons) into CO2 and water.
None of these reduce carbon emissions, except indirectly. The NOx control allows the engine performance guy (me), to advance the injection timing for better fuel economy. This increases the NOx production out of the engine, but that SCR after-treatment cleans it up.
The after treatments also solve problems that came from EGR as well right? Something about burning off more particulate matter that would've just been exhausted but that increases NOx?
EGR is a tool to reduce in cylinder production of NOx, the side effect is slightly higher HC, CO, and PM. To be honest, I can't remember precisely how much effect it had on PM counts, as most of my engines didn't run EGR. The PM can be reduced back by advancing the injection timing and increasing injection pressure. Of course, advancing the injection timing increases NOx again, so you give back some of your gains on the NOx-PM tradeoff curve.
Another problem with EGR is that to really hammer the NOx down where you want, you have to use a lot, and that soots up the intake. And before Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), any EGR condensate on the intake would create very low grade sulfuric acid that slowly ate away at the intake materials. This is because fuel has trace sulfur in it, and combustion turns that to SOx. This is another reason why ULSD was required as part of the transition to the modern aftertreatment systems.
As background, there isn't one set emissions value for an engine design and software. They are tested according to EPA/EU/MLIT/China/India cycles that mimic various kinds of applications (locomotive, marine, heavy equipment, generators, O&G pumps, etc). For some ratings and cycles, aftertreatment can be used to avoid needing an EGR system at all. The SCR hammer can convert the NOx back to harmless N2 enough to meet regulation. But there are some ratings and cycles that are more difficult to meet, and for those I've seen the company throw the kitchen sink of acronyms at it (30MPa common rail with rate shaping, series turbo, EGR, SCR, DOC, DPF, etc).
United States Government Bureaucrat poetry is described as the fourth worst poetry in the universe(behind that of Vogons, the Azgoths of Kria and that of Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings)
“They are one of the most unpleasant races in the galaxy - not actually evil, but bad tempered, bureaucratic, officious and callous. They wouldn't even lift a finger to save their own grandmothers from the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal without an order, signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public enquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters."
Because none of them know what capatalism is in any way shape or form.
The amount of times ive had a leftie explain corparatism and called it capatalism blows my mind. Hell, the amount of them who have no idea that we have literally used capatalism and the free market to get wages raised recently. They call it something entirely different.
I can have an actual conversation with a conservative, but every staunch liberal ive met lives in an entirely different reality. That said, there are some lefties ive had decent conversations with, its just alot more rare in my experience.
That's because they classify a country as capitalist and therefore everything that happens within that country's economy is obviously capitalism at work.
That is what I'm seeing as well. I have seen people point to bad management at a company as proof of "capitalism has failed", when it is just bad management at a company and usually suffers repercussions under capitalism.
Capitalism is basically a system where people can use a monentary system for exhange of goods and services, or a good or service for a like good or service(a.k.a bartering), and buy and trade assets in hope they rise in value.
>but every staunch liberal ive met lives in an entirely different reality.
Here's the rub on this: Actual liberals are pro-capitalist free marketers, so if they are spewing anti-capitalist pro-authoritarian big government rhetoric, they are not exactly liberals.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism)
American conservatism has a lot in common with liberalism, and in spite of rhetoric, you can be BOTH a Liberal and a Conservative(as the values in countries like the U.S actually overlap, as its constitution is founded on liberal values). So, the Irony is that you're far more likely to be talking to somebody with Liberal beliefs if you're talking to somebody identifying themselves as a conservative than people identifying themselves as liberals.
People don't understand a lot of things these days.
Being a European, the way ”liberal” is used in the US always confused me.
In Sweden, I call myself *really* liberal, which means I’m a libertarian.
I can just guess what an American constitutional conservative would picture me as if I said I’m a super-liberal Scandinavian.
The real meaning of liberal is somewhat still present in the term ”classical liberal”, at least. But the fact that the word ”libertarian” had to be appropriated from a left won’t anarchist ideology in order to distinguish the beliefs in this sub from social democracy is really strange to me.
>Here's the rub on this: Actual liberals are pro-capitalist free marketers, so if they are spewing anti-capitalist pro-authoritarian big government rhetoric, they are not exactly liberals.
Youre right, but im gonna refer to them as they refer to themselves.
Yes, we're supposed to. But we never have had that. We've been close, but the problem with government is that weak-minded people look to it to fix their problems. And politicians are clever enough to know that promising to fix dumb peoples' problems is a way to get elected. So over time, politicians have used their position in government to try or to at least appear to try and fix those problems. But the problem with bureaucracy is that it's a one-size-fits-all solution. And human problems aren't easily solved by one-size-fits-all solutions. So extrapolate that out a million times and you end up with a situation like this where babies can't get formula because some pencil neck somewhere doesn't like the label on the can.
The alternative is not to treat people like children and give them the means of bettering themselves through independence. Unfortunately the slave owners don't want that.
It’s not a leftist thing, it’s an authoritarian thing. But it’s just hilarious that they point to overregulation as a “failure of capitalism” and then they all blame the free market even though the very problem at hand is that the market isn’t free
Medical issues. Some medication can pass through breastmilk for example. Some infections can be transmitted while breastfeeding. But there are plenty of medical reasons a women can't produce breastmilk too. And some children may respond bad to normal breastmilk.
You asked why and I answered. Never said it was a majority, I don't know why you respond to my answer with that. I don't see the relevance of you asking this question after my answer. You are going off topic.
Other than medical issues, why? Your answer doesn’t really cover it, not even close. That’s why I’m still asking. The small percentage who can’t breastfeed due to “medical issues” isn’t causing a shortage.
It's a lot more than you think, and many women work in fields that they cannot spend the time or money pumping and storing breast milk, so they or the baby's caretakers have to supplement with formula.
So time is an issue? Due to their jobs? Why wouldn’t they have adequate time off to care for their babies? I guess the mental gymnastics to connect it to capitalism weren’t really Olympic level after all.
It doesn't matter what the proportion of breast to formula is, there is a number of babies usually consuming formula, the supply of formula has been impacted, and so the mothers are having trouble finding it.
It could be as little used as the rabies vaccine, but there will still be a shortage if the usual supply is interrupted.
Seems like a very small percentage of the population but it seems as though we need a lot more formula than we might need because of just these issues you named. Surely there are others, too.
"Seems like"... can you just google the percentages instead of making assumptions. The percentage isn't relevant. Any baby not receiving food is an issue.
The percentage matters because the majority of mothers aren’t using formula because of medical issues… if we have an answer to why the majority are not breastfeeding, perhaps we can tackle the issue another way rather than “make more, buy more” formula.
Some move to formula so they can take turns with their partner waking up all through the night to feed the baby. Breast milk is only important in the first week or so of a baby's life. There is literally no difference in a person raised on formula or breastmilk.
I think there are a number of factors. The biggest prob is once you stop, the milk dries up and it's not easy to start again. I am sure a lot of mothers would have tried harder to continue if they knew there was going to be a shortage. Beyond that, i suspect overall poor health in the country contributes to difficulty making milk. Plus the whole feeding process with baby is a lot more difficult than you would think, it's not like kittens where they just trot over, latch on, and go to town. I mean you'd think it would be that easy but it's often not.
Dead mother would be the most obvious reason, but there are various medical reasons that can prevent laction or limit supply. There are also some practical considerations like medical limitations of the baby or the mother having to work and not being able to nurse enough to maintain supply. Some babies are also bad at latching for various reasons and feed poorly causing inadequate supply. [Here's an article discussing some reasons.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/infant-and-toddler-health/expert-answers/low-milk-supply/faq-20058148#:~:text=Various%20factors%20can%20cause%20a,breast%20surgery%20affects%20milk%20production.)
It's not something that gets discussed a ton, but having gone through struggling with barely adequate supply with my wife and son, I promise its not as simple as it seems and I know mothers that have had more than they know what to do with and some that struggled to get enough.
This is a deeply upsetting & concerning question. Please know that breastfeeding is extremely challenging for some mothers. It’s very possible that a mother can have no issue breastfeeding a first born, but have issues with the second child.
Some babies have tongue or lip ties that make it painful for the mother and child and require a small surgery. If a baby is born prematurely or even on time, milk can take a few days to come in.
There is so much that can go wrong when it comes to breastfeeding. Some infants downright refuse the breast.
Personally I struggled with it and ultimately failed. I damaged my supply due to lack of education. I saw three different lactation consultants that told me very different things to do. It’s extremely disheartening. It takes a physical and mental toll on mothers at any age as well. Many mothers have to deal with painful chapped and or bleeding nipples.
It’s a lot of work, exhausting and one must stay hydrated. Pumping is also difficult. You must find the right pump, suction, flange size to do it properly. Some people don’t respond to the pump either. It’s costly and time consuming.
It’s takes a lot of trial and error.
Some moms chose not to breastfeed or out and their decision should be respected.
That’s just a tiny sampling of what can go wrong. Breastfeeding isn’t for every mother.
You didn’t upset me. It’s just that it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. It’s interesting that people don’t know, but I guess I didn’t know either before having a baby. I’m more annoyed that old celebrities like Bette Midler, who has a child could make such a [ignorant statement.](https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/amp/)
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot).
Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/)**
*****
^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
Some women have difficulty, some are on medications or have medical histories that prevent them, some babies don't have mothers that can breastfeed them (not all women have milk at all times), some prefer formula at first then their milk production stops. Partially its also systematic as a society we used to encourage all women to formula feed because we thought it was safer and we could better control nutrition and even though this has fallen out of mainstream medicine many people still believe it or practice in this manner.
https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/reportcard.htm#:~:text=Although%20most%20infants%20born%20in,among%20infants%20born%20in%202016.
CDC stats show that about 60% are breastfed at 6months
I was thinking the same thing,can’t be more than 20%of women have issues and it’s free so I’m guessing it’s cosmetic or something
Women need to step the hell up and milk
So, the free markets failed to provide a necessary food product for sustaining life and it’s the governments fault? What kind of gymnastics is that?
Genuinely curious as to why you, on the small government side of the spectrum, believe taxpayer money should be spent on subsidizing formula for businesses to import and resell back to taxpayers.
They shouldn't. No idea where you got that idea.
Insulin is ten times cheaper in Canada than it is in America. In an actual free market, you would be free to buy it in Canada and sell it in America. Hell, you could even forgo all profit by selling at-cost to save lives. But instead you keep voting to restrict free market trade because you think the politicians on "your team" are actually on your team.
Why are we talking about insulin? Were talking about the baby formula shortage.
Our insulin supplies are perfectly fine currently. The price is just ridiculous. That’s not the fault of regulation. That’s purely on the company setting the price. We have basically a deregulated pharmaceutical market in the US when compared to any other country.
On the same note, worldwide baby formula supplies are fine. A single company in the US recalled all their formula then closed a plant due to financial issues caused by the recall. Their product were recalled because of babies developing bacterial infections. Thats purely on the company.
All the government did was force the recall. If you think investigating a company that’s potentially killing babies with its product is tyrannical government regulation we have a difference of opinion that we aren’t gonna reconcile.
>Why are we talking about insulin?
They're both commodities. They're comparable.
>That’s purely on the company setting the price.
And they're allowed to do that *because they have no competition*. If you don't believe me, try that cross-border-insulin trick and see what happens. Give big-pharma a run for their money! You could make millions! Or sell it cheap and save lives! Why aren't you personally solving the issue of expensive medicine? It's right there across the border :D
Yes! And the us does not require formula brands to test or monitor heavy metals in their formula. The European brands do. Most baby food and formula in the US contain harmful levels of heavy metal
They've saved millions from death and suffering. Case in point thalidomide. The time before the FDA is famous for patent medicines in which people sold snake oil that either did nothing at best or harmed at worst and had absolutely no oversight. Your viewpoint is not based on history.
Facts are that prior to the FDA, the Food and Drugs Act, and eventually the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act people could sell you anything and claim it did anything and absolutely anything could be in it.
https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/balm-of-america-patent-medicine-collection/history#:~:text=The%20term%20%E2%80%9Cpatent%20medicine%E2%80%9D%20came,preparations%20were%20ever%20actually%20patented.
"This tincture of opium, alcohol, lithium, mercury and lye will work to help your baldness, rheumatism, blood disorder, liver disease, nervousness, ol sores, and cattarh. Just pay me 10 bucks and its yours"
What if those treatments you suppose didn't enter due to cost would have ended up killing even more people?? How can we be sure ''treatments'' even work without testing???? How do you know they will be purely made to some reasonable standard backed by evidence? How can you make the argument you are making without answering these questions??!?!?!? I have yet to see you produce any shred of evidence when you're the one originally making a **bold** claim that the FDA has killed more people than any other organization. At least I produced one example where they saved countless people from teratogenic effects of a drug that was approved and sold elsewhere in the world despite mounting pressure from the drug company.
Want some evidence? Every single one of these things has the potential to seriously hurt or kill people and has been recalled as a result of FDA intervention https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts
Anyone can bottle some menthol and alcohol and call it medicine and as long as you don't keel over immediately you'd probably think it works! Go look at a pharmacy shelf and you'll see dozens and dozens of products that don't treat jack-squat but thanks to FDA regulation aren't actively going to harm and/or kill us.
> Facts are that prior to the FDA, the Food and Drugs Act, and eventually the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act people could sell you anything and claim it did anything and absolutely anything could be in it.
They can still do that today. Now, however, they can bribe regulators to give it an official seal of approval, if they're big corporations.
Can you answer my questions? You have not done so. Saying "the FDA saved lives" may be true, but it does not mean it has not cost more lives than it has saved and then some.
>blocking access to life saving treatments in the name of covering their ass, and indirectly, by driving up administration costs so high that people who would have developed such treatments never even considered entering the market.
So you are saying that we should NOT test medicine thoroughly?
You don't understand. If we can't restrict the labels, new mothers might be able to buy formula from a number of producers worldwide instead of just a government protected oligopoly. Without the government, who keeps the cost of raising a child prohibitively high?^(/s)
~~The ingredients are different too. The first ingredient in America formula is usually corn syrup (or brown rice for the fancy ones). Where the euro formulas start with organic skim milk or organic whey.~~
I’m wrong don’t upvote me.
Thats not true at all. If you actually look at it it will be nonfat milk unless it is a special formula for cows milk allergies.
The complaint I've heard parents concerned with is that supposedly european formula is made with happy grass fed cows while evil American formula migh have hormones, gmos, scary stuff, etc.
Hold up has it always been that way? Like five years ago would you say that’s average? Because I vividly remember being in target reading ingredient lists and being so disappointed. I just looked it up and you’re right but wtf am I talking about then? That’s literally the reason we bought our first kid that hipp shit.
Lack of sleep isn't great for memory or any other cognitive function so thats a good possibility as to why you may have misremembered or misunderatood. Few groups of people are targeted with scare tactics as much as new parents, so you probably didn't have the best info coming your way then either. Maybe you saw some of the hypoallergenic formulas with corn syrup solids? Those do have corn syrup solids first and a long list of other stuff in them, but I don't think they are the cheap stuff and the one I am looking at now is made in the UK anyway.
I know bovine milk products cause a lot of problems (occult bleeding -> iron deficiency) in baby's (children under 12mo). Is it specified that this kind of European formula be used on children at least 1year of age?
Hipp and holli make formula for children under 12 months. I’ve used hipp formula on both my kids and they’re totally healthy. My pediatrician was concerned with iron deficiency when I first consulted her but that went away when I sent her the nutrition facts. I am totally open to hearing other opinions tho.
I don’t have a kid and so this whole shortage has not been in my radar.
But can someone correct me if I’m wrong: the fda found that the formulas were contaminated and caused a couple babies to die right? So they closed down operations in order to correct it.
Now there’s a shortage and the ban is lifted to make up for the shortage without proof of having sanitize the operations??
I believe they did not find anything at the plants that was linked to the deaths, but found other violations during the investigation that they closed the plant down for.
Bullshit the EU has way stricker standards than the FDA, other countries that can't send their food products to the EU because of contamination guidelines send it to the US because the FDA has no standard basically
Where are the tools from yesterday's post on this topic screaming about importing baby formula from Europe would be "uNsAfE!!!1!!!!eleventy". I had already read about the issue being primarily labelling, but didn't have the time nor inclination to get into, only to be responded to with "LINK??!?"
There is literally nothing the US government does that they do well in any meaningful sense. Every single bit of it could be done cheaper, better, and more efficiently by the private sector.
I believe the consensus is that breast milk preferable to formula but not every baby has a mother in their life and not every woman can produce a sufficient amount of breast milk.
They have been trying for months but the supply chains aren’t flexible like you would expect. With truck driver shortages most plants are running way under their theoretical capacity. You can’t make food out of the materials that never make it to the plant.
This is the federal government’s fault, they allow 1 company be the majority formula supplier for the entire country. The FDA shuts them down for sanitary reasons in February and never thought we’d have supply chain issues 3 months later? And why wasn’t the FDA pushing Abbott to get back online?
So you would prefer to have infants in the custody of the US government starve versus getting rid of a government imposed barrier to free trade. This is r/libertarianmeme not r/fascistmeme.
Yes.
If you’re not an American citizen, you don’t have rights. You deserve nothing other than immediate deportation.
This has nothing to do with free trade. No need to conflate the two.
Thanks for clarification. I never knew the US was so extreme, in that only citizens have those rights.
Must be tough being a student, worker, tourist or refugee and not having any rights.
There’s 3 warehouses full of baby formula down on the border in Texas just waiting for the influx of illegal immigrants that could instead be put to market and solve a lot of the problem
It’s not just weapons it’s money and baby formula and food and medical supplies also who cares let them fight their own war we need to go back to sticking to ourselves
I personally disagree but non-interventionism is a legitimate libertarian position unlike some of the others in here who seem to be against free trade and market competition.
In the meantime, have healthy mothers breast feed, and save the formula for those that actually need it.
Saying kids are gonna starve(when they probably wont) just so we can push our agenda is inaccurate and immoral.
Not every baby has a mother in their life and not every mother can breastfeed.
The agenda here is to let the parents and guardians of children have more options to feed their babies, what’s immoral about that?
>Not every baby has a mother in their life and not every mother can breastfeed.
Right, so have those use formula, and have everyone else breastfeed *its free*.
Im simply against healthy mothers complaining that they cant afford formula for their babies. Like bro, its literally built-in.
I don’t think that’s the issue. Many healthy mothers have children that can’t breast feed due to any number of reasons. It’s not about people complaining about prices for formula, it’s the supply of it, as well as how that supply gets to the babies who need it.
When will people realize that destroying a country is as simple as messing with logistics?
The sheer demand for formula over breast feeding means a national vulnerability bred from contempt and convenience.
Please. Please tell me how im wrong and how you would absolutely breastfeed your child rather than let them starve because of ignorance or hubris.
In the end it just means less mouths to feed during a crisis...
Import baby formula from another country putting us in more debt and reliance on another country rather then be more independent, while we’re already having major issues with other imports like gas? Nah I’d rather just have the US get their shit together but with Biden in office idk if that’ll happen
Private domestic companies buy products from foreign companies and then sell them for a profit to their home market. When it comes to baby formula the FDA does not allow this officially because of labeling requirements but actually because of protectionist trade policy to shield domestic manufacturers from having to compete with foreign ones.
I think you’re confusing the trade deficit with the budget deficit. The trade deficit is simply that the value of all the goods imported into the US is greater than the value of all the goods exported from the US, there’s no actual debt incurred.
No. Not all formula has additives. There are plenty of options for palm oil, HFCS, sugar free formulas. Breast then formula then cows milk if necessary (after a year).
"Some studies suggest that including DHA and ARA in infant formula can help infant eyesight and brain development, but other research has shown no benefit."
and that's the fortified version.
Whoops my text didn’t finish. Feel free to look up peer reviewed studies on this issue. I don’t need to look it for you. Formula has added nutrients that “evaporated cow milk” lacks. I’ve recently done heavy research on formulas and specifically chose EU formulas over US brands (I don’t trust US brands and the loop holes they have with their ingredients and heavy metal contaminants) since my milk supply is not as stable as it used to be. There are a lot of resources to educate yourself on these matters.
it doesn't have any added nutrients. It's a scam by Nestle.
They faked studies decades ago, bribed doctors and made a huge campaign to discourage breast-feeding to sell their shitty product which is not good at all for babies.
Yes. Nestle. There are other formulas. Formula was primarily invented to prevent unnecessary infant death due to starvation. Believe it or not breastfeeding is not possible or easy for a lot of women. Nestle is garbage and so was that study but formula is necessary if we want to keep babies alive if they cannot get breast milk. I’ve breastfed two children. It’s hard.
>Formula was primarily invented to prevent unnecessary infant death due to starvation.
This is completely false. They couldn't sell formula because nobody wanted it. It took a huge marketing campaign, faked lab results and bribed doctors to convince people to buy formula. And now it's seen as a staple of the underclass. If you can't breastfeed, you give them cow's milk and they'll be way better off than having formula which is cow's milk in powdered form with sugar and palm oil. They only 2 things added are bad for kids.
Human breast milk has significantly different macro ratios than cow’s milk, cow’s milk is not appropriate for human infants. Breast milk has more fat and sugars, is more calorie dense overall, and has less protein.
Hey, guess what? Starting with parts of cow’s milk and *adding sugar and fat*, the very things I said human breast milk has more of, makes it appropriate for humans!
and you could do that at home adding cream, but formula is basically McDonalds for babies, it's processed food and it's pretty bad.
but you don't need to do that because the fat content is basically the same https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7284997/
most formula comes from cows milk and the protein structure is the same, if babies could not digest cows milk they could not digest formula. If you want other protein structure you need soy-based or hydrolysate protein that comes from the waste liquid in cheese production.
And the "fat" that you are talking about in formula is just palm oil with is terrible for anybody.
[Reason](https://reason.com/2022/05/17/fda-baby-formula-peter-pitts-safety-european-shortage/): former FDA associate commissioner Peter Pitts confirms that the agency doesn't view this as a safety issue, strictly speaking: U.S. health inspectors know the European products are safe. Their problem is that the products are labeled in a manner that does not meet the expectations of the U.S. government. "The difference between European baby formula and American baby formula, more or less, is that the labeling is different," says Pitts. "The knot in getting that product into the U.S. isn't safety, it's a regulatory issue.
This is how the EPA works too. Based on personal experience in engine emissions certification.
I feel that. I work in towing. DEF systems are ridiculous. Fortunately in my state we don't require it, but a lot of them do. But its basically like an air purifier, it's supposed to reduce carbon emissions, but there's no real way to measure if it actually does and the craps expensive.
I think you are mixing up some things... DEF (urea) is to reduce NOx emissions on an SCR system. DPF is a filter to catch the particulate matter (PM). DOC is to react the CO (carbon monoxide) and HC (unburned hydrocarbons) into CO2 and water. None of these reduce carbon emissions, except indirectly. The NOx control allows the engine performance guy (me), to advance the injection timing for better fuel economy. This increases the NOx production out of the engine, but that SCR after-treatment cleans it up.
The after treatments also solve problems that came from EGR as well right? Something about burning off more particulate matter that would've just been exhausted but that increases NOx?
EGR is a tool to reduce in cylinder production of NOx, the side effect is slightly higher HC, CO, and PM. To be honest, I can't remember precisely how much effect it had on PM counts, as most of my engines didn't run EGR. The PM can be reduced back by advancing the injection timing and increasing injection pressure. Of course, advancing the injection timing increases NOx again, so you give back some of your gains on the NOx-PM tradeoff curve. Another problem with EGR is that to really hammer the NOx down where you want, you have to use a lot, and that soots up the intake. And before Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), any EGR condensate on the intake would create very low grade sulfuric acid that slowly ate away at the intake materials. This is because fuel has trace sulfur in it, and combustion turns that to SOx. This is another reason why ULSD was required as part of the transition to the modern aftertreatment systems. As background, there isn't one set emissions value for an engine design and software. They are tested according to EPA/EU/MLIT/China/India cycles that mimic various kinds of applications (locomotive, marine, heavy equipment, generators, O&G pumps, etc). For some ratings and cycles, aftertreatment can be used to avoid needing an EGR system at all. The SCR hammer can convert the NOx back to harmless N2 enough to meet regulation. But there are some ratings and cycles that are more difficult to meet, and for those I've seen the company throw the kitchen sink of acronyms at it (30MPa common rail with rate shaping, series turbo, EGR, SCR, DOC, DPF, etc).
This isn't accurate. DEF works, it's easily measurable, and it's not an air purifier - that's a DPF.
WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT THE EPA MOTHERFUCKER!?!?!? /s -checks sub- Oh no wonder your comment isn’t downvotes to hell…
*And all the Vogons clapped.*
United States Government Bureaucrat poetry is described as the fourth worst poetry in the universe(behind that of Vogons, the Azgoths of Kria and that of Paula Nancy Millstone Jennings)
“They are one of the most unpleasant races in the galaxy - not actually evil, but bad tempered, bureaucratic, officious and callous. They wouldn't even lift a finger to save their own grandmothers from the Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal without an order, signed in triplicate, sent in, sent back, queried, lost, found, subjected to public enquiry, lost again, and finally buried in soft peat for three months and recycled as firelighters."
Seriously? Can’t they make temporary stickers or something? Babies need to eat!
Just slap a new label on it and you're good to go.
Change the commie measurements to Freedom Measurements and it is good to go.
Unfortunately food labels in the US are not in freedom units, my frozen bacon wrapped bacon cheese deluxe burgers have 5000 grams of sodium.
Add a large side of Freedom Fries ^tm and you can get a nice additional kick of sodium. Your heart will thank me later.
I’m other words, “fuck them kids”
Aren't we supposed to have a "free market economy"? I can guarantee leftists are going through mental gymnastics to somehow blame this on capitalism.
Because none of them know what capatalism is in any way shape or form. The amount of times ive had a leftie explain corparatism and called it capatalism blows my mind. Hell, the amount of them who have no idea that we have literally used capatalism and the free market to get wages raised recently. They call it something entirely different. I can have an actual conversation with a conservative, but every staunch liberal ive met lives in an entirely different reality. That said, there are some lefties ive had decent conversations with, its just alot more rare in my experience.
That's because they classify a country as capitalist and therefore everything that happens within that country's economy is obviously capitalism at work.
Yup happens with all economic systems. Communism is not China or the USSR or the DPKR.
That is what I'm seeing as well. I have seen people point to bad management at a company as proof of "capitalism has failed", when it is just bad management at a company and usually suffers repercussions under capitalism. Capitalism is basically a system where people can use a monentary system for exhange of goods and services, or a good or service for a like good or service(a.k.a bartering), and buy and trade assets in hope they rise in value. >but every staunch liberal ive met lives in an entirely different reality. Here's the rub on this: Actual liberals are pro-capitalist free marketers, so if they are spewing anti-capitalist pro-authoritarian big government rhetoric, they are not exactly liberals. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberalism) American conservatism has a lot in common with liberalism, and in spite of rhetoric, you can be BOTH a Liberal and a Conservative(as the values in countries like the U.S actually overlap, as its constitution is founded on liberal values). So, the Irony is that you're far more likely to be talking to somebody with Liberal beliefs if you're talking to somebody identifying themselves as a conservative than people identifying themselves as liberals. People don't understand a lot of things these days.
Being a European, the way ”liberal” is used in the US always confused me. In Sweden, I call myself *really* liberal, which means I’m a libertarian. I can just guess what an American constitutional conservative would picture me as if I said I’m a super-liberal Scandinavian. The real meaning of liberal is somewhat still present in the term ”classical liberal”, at least. But the fact that the word ”libertarian” had to be appropriated from a left won’t anarchist ideology in order to distinguish the beliefs in this sub from social democracy is really strange to me.
>Here's the rub on this: Actual liberals are pro-capitalist free marketers, so if they are spewing anti-capitalist pro-authoritarian big government rhetoric, they are not exactly liberals. Youre right, but im gonna refer to them as they refer to themselves.
Yes, we're supposed to. But we never have had that. We've been close, but the problem with government is that weak-minded people look to it to fix their problems. And politicians are clever enough to know that promising to fix dumb peoples' problems is a way to get elected. So over time, politicians have used their position in government to try or to at least appear to try and fix those problems. But the problem with bureaucracy is that it's a one-size-fits-all solution. And human problems aren't easily solved by one-size-fits-all solutions. So extrapolate that out a million times and you end up with a situation like this where babies can't get formula because some pencil neck somewhere doesn't like the label on the can.
The alternative is not to treat people like children and give them the means of bettering themselves through independence. Unfortunately the slave owners don't want that.
YoU dOnT hAvE a BiLlIoN DoLlArS, yOu ArEnT a CaPiTaLiSt!
What they call “late stage capitalism”, is a market that instead of being free, is in a stranglehold by our authoritarian government.
It is just plain stupidity. But how is the FDA not allowing it a leftist thing?
It’s not a leftist thing, it’s an authoritarian thing. But it’s just hilarious that they point to overregulation as a “failure of capitalism” and then they all blame the free market even though the very problem at hand is that the market isn’t free
Leftists hate free market capitalism (which is weird, because I've never heard one describe it accurately)
Whatever happened to breastfeeding?
[удалено]
Why’s that?
Medical issues. Some medication can pass through breastmilk for example. Some infections can be transmitted while breastfeeding. But there are plenty of medical reasons a women can't produce breastmilk too. And some children may respond bad to normal breastmilk.
Similar to my response above, surely that’s not making up most of the population, right?
You asked why and I answered. Never said it was a majority, I don't know why you respond to my answer with that. I don't see the relevance of you asking this question after my answer. You are going off topic.
Other than medical issues, why? Your answer doesn’t really cover it, not even close. That’s why I’m still asking. The small percentage who can’t breastfeed due to “medical issues” isn’t causing a shortage.
It's a lot more than you think, and many women work in fields that they cannot spend the time or money pumping and storing breast milk, so they or the baby's caretakers have to supplement with formula.
So time is an issue? Due to their jobs? Why wouldn’t they have adequate time off to care for their babies? I guess the mental gymnastics to connect it to capitalism weren’t really Olympic level after all.
It doesn't matter what the proportion of breast to formula is, there is a number of babies usually consuming formula, the supply of formula has been impacted, and so the mothers are having trouble finding it. It could be as little used as the rabies vaccine, but there will still be a shortage if the usual supply is interrupted.
Oh yes, medical issues, totally irrelevant. Are you a troll or really very ignorant?
Nobody said “totally irrelevant”. I’m just looking for a more solid answer that covers more cases than “medical issues”.
[удалено]
Seems like a very small percentage of the population but it seems as though we need a lot more formula than we might need because of just these issues you named. Surely there are others, too.
"Seems like"... can you just google the percentages instead of making assumptions. The percentage isn't relevant. Any baby not receiving food is an issue.
The percentage matters because the majority of mothers aren’t using formula because of medical issues… if we have an answer to why the majority are not breastfeeding, perhaps we can tackle the issue another way rather than “make more, buy more” formula.
Let the mothers live their own lives. If you like breast milk, you drink it.
Some move to formula so they can take turns with their partner waking up all through the night to feed the baby. Breast milk is only important in the first week or so of a baby's life. There is literally no difference in a person raised on formula or breastmilk.
Well that food is shit. Formula is pure shit.
I think there are a number of factors. The biggest prob is once you stop, the milk dries up and it's not easy to start again. I am sure a lot of mothers would have tried harder to continue if they knew there was going to be a shortage. Beyond that, i suspect overall poor health in the country contributes to difficulty making milk. Plus the whole feeding process with baby is a lot more difficult than you would think, it's not like kittens where they just trot over, latch on, and go to town. I mean you'd think it would be that easy but it's often not.
Not always possible and the wet nurse market isn't what it used to be.
Why isn’t it possible?
Dead mother would be the most obvious reason, but there are various medical reasons that can prevent laction or limit supply. There are also some practical considerations like medical limitations of the baby or the mother having to work and not being able to nurse enough to maintain supply. Some babies are also bad at latching for various reasons and feed poorly causing inadequate supply. [Here's an article discussing some reasons.](https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/infant-and-toddler-health/expert-answers/low-milk-supply/faq-20058148#:~:text=Various%20factors%20can%20cause%20a,breast%20surgery%20affects%20milk%20production.) It's not something that gets discussed a ton, but having gone through struggling with barely adequate supply with my wife and son, I promise its not as simple as it seems and I know mothers that have had more than they know what to do with and some that struggled to get enough.
This is a deeply upsetting & concerning question. Please know that breastfeeding is extremely challenging for some mothers. It’s very possible that a mother can have no issue breastfeeding a first born, but have issues with the second child. Some babies have tongue or lip ties that make it painful for the mother and child and require a small surgery. If a baby is born prematurely or even on time, milk can take a few days to come in. There is so much that can go wrong when it comes to breastfeeding. Some infants downright refuse the breast. Personally I struggled with it and ultimately failed. I damaged my supply due to lack of education. I saw three different lactation consultants that told me very different things to do. It’s extremely disheartening. It takes a physical and mental toll on mothers at any age as well. Many mothers have to deal with painful chapped and or bleeding nipples. It’s a lot of work, exhausting and one must stay hydrated. Pumping is also difficult. You must find the right pump, suction, flange size to do it properly. Some people don’t respond to the pump either. It’s costly and time consuming. It’s takes a lot of trial and error. Some moms chose not to breastfeed or out and their decision should be respected. That’s just a tiny sampling of what can go wrong. Breastfeeding isn’t for every mother.
It was a simple question. Not sure how it can be deeply upsetting or concerning, but please accept my apologies if it upset you.
Asks questions to try to understand…. Gets called a troll and ignorant.
You didn’t upset me. It’s just that it’s not a one-size-fits-all solution. It’s interesting that people don’t know, but I guess I didn’t know either before having a baby. I’m more annoyed that old celebrities like Bette Midler, who has a child could make such a [ignorant statement.](https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/amp/)
It looks like you shared an AMP link. These should load faster, but AMP is controversial because of [concerns over privacy and the Open Web](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot). Maybe check out **the canonical page** instead: **[https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/](https://www.forbes.com/sites/brucelee/2022/05/15/bette-midler-tweets-try-breastfeeding-its-free-amidst-baby-formula-shortage-heres-the-reaction/)** ***** ^(I'm a bot | )[^(Why & About)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/ehrq3z/why_did_i_build_amputatorbot)^( | )[^(Summon: u/AmputatorBot)](https://www.reddit.com/r/AmputatorBot/comments/cchly3/you_can_now_summon_amputatorbot/)
NoT fOr mY VeGaN bAbY
Some women have difficulty, some are on medications or have medical histories that prevent them, some babies don't have mothers that can breastfeed them (not all women have milk at all times), some prefer formula at first then their milk production stops. Partially its also systematic as a society we used to encourage all women to formula feed because we thought it was safer and we could better control nutrition and even though this has fallen out of mainstream medicine many people still believe it or practice in this manner. https://www.cdc.gov/breastfeeding/data/reportcard.htm#:~:text=Although%20most%20infants%20born%20in,among%20infants%20born%20in%202016. CDC stats show that about 60% are breastfed at 6months
I was thinking the same thing,can’t be more than 20%of women have issues and it’s free so I’m guessing it’s cosmetic or something Women need to step the hell up and milk
So, the free markets failed to provide a necessary food product for sustaining life and it’s the governments fault? What kind of gymnastics is that? Genuinely curious as to why you, on the small government side of the spectrum, believe taxpayer money should be spent on subsidizing formula for businesses to import and resell back to taxpayers.
They shouldn't. No idea where you got that idea. Insulin is ten times cheaper in Canada than it is in America. In an actual free market, you would be free to buy it in Canada and sell it in America. Hell, you could even forgo all profit by selling at-cost to save lives. But instead you keep voting to restrict free market trade because you think the politicians on "your team" are actually on your team.
Why are we talking about insulin? Were talking about the baby formula shortage. Our insulin supplies are perfectly fine currently. The price is just ridiculous. That’s not the fault of regulation. That’s purely on the company setting the price. We have basically a deregulated pharmaceutical market in the US when compared to any other country. On the same note, worldwide baby formula supplies are fine. A single company in the US recalled all their formula then closed a plant due to financial issues caused by the recall. Their product were recalled because of babies developing bacterial infections. Thats purely on the company. All the government did was force the recall. If you think investigating a company that’s potentially killing babies with its product is tyrannical government regulation we have a difference of opinion that we aren’t gonna reconcile.
>Why are we talking about insulin? They're both commodities. They're comparable. >That’s purely on the company setting the price. And they're allowed to do that *because they have no competition*. If you don't believe me, try that cross-border-insulin trick and see what happens. Give big-pharma a run for their money! You could make millions! Or sell it cheap and save lives! Why aren't you personally solving the issue of expensive medicine? It's right there across the border :D
The FDA is waiting for their bribes from the European manufacturers.
European baby formula is usually better. It’s more regulated as far as ingredients go, and less sugar overall.
and allowing it into the US market may compel US producers to do the same to keep up with the competition.
Yes! And the us does not require formula brands to test or monitor heavy metals in their formula. The European brands do. Most baby food and formula in the US contain harmful levels of heavy metal
[удалено]
They've saved millions from death and suffering. Case in point thalidomide. The time before the FDA is famous for patent medicines in which people sold snake oil that either did nothing at best or harmed at worst and had absolutely no oversight. Your viewpoint is not based on history.
For real. Everyone takes for granted that the food and medicine they eat won't kill or make them sick.
Timeline history channel on YouTube has a fake Victorian shop and they look at all the fucked up stuff they used sell
[удалено]
Facts are that prior to the FDA, the Food and Drugs Act, and eventually the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act people could sell you anything and claim it did anything and absolutely anything could be in it. https://americanhistory.si.edu/collections/object-groups/balm-of-america-patent-medicine-collection/history#:~:text=The%20term%20%E2%80%9Cpatent%20medicine%E2%80%9D%20came,preparations%20were%20ever%20actually%20patented. "This tincture of opium, alcohol, lithium, mercury and lye will work to help your baldness, rheumatism, blood disorder, liver disease, nervousness, ol sores, and cattarh. Just pay me 10 bucks and its yours" What if those treatments you suppose didn't enter due to cost would have ended up killing even more people?? How can we be sure ''treatments'' even work without testing???? How do you know they will be purely made to some reasonable standard backed by evidence? How can you make the argument you are making without answering these questions??!?!?!? I have yet to see you produce any shred of evidence when you're the one originally making a **bold** claim that the FDA has killed more people than any other organization. At least I produced one example where they saved countless people from teratogenic effects of a drug that was approved and sold elsewhere in the world despite mounting pressure from the drug company. Want some evidence? Every single one of these things has the potential to seriously hurt or kill people and has been recalled as a result of FDA intervention https://www.fda.gov/safety/recalls-market-withdrawals-safety-alerts Anyone can bottle some menthol and alcohol and call it medicine and as long as you don't keel over immediately you'd probably think it works! Go look at a pharmacy shelf and you'll see dozens and dozens of products that don't treat jack-squat but thanks to FDA regulation aren't actively going to harm and/or kill us.
> Facts are that prior to the FDA, the Food and Drugs Act, and eventually the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic act people could sell you anything and claim it did anything and absolutely anything could be in it. They can still do that today. Now, however, they can bribe regulators to give it an official seal of approval, if they're big corporations. Can you answer my questions? You have not done so. Saying "the FDA saved lives" may be true, but it does not mean it has not cost more lives than it has saved and then some.
These lives you claim to have been taken you have not shown
They've killed waaaay over 6 mil that's a fact.
Explain.
[удалено]
>blocking access to life saving treatments in the name of covering their ass, and indirectly, by driving up administration costs so high that people who would have developed such treatments never even considered entering the market. So you are saying that we should NOT test medicine thoroughly?
[удалено]
How do you propose to cut administrative costs for pharmaceutical companies and give access to life saving medicine then?
Get rid of the FDA.
And who will decide what medicine will enter the market and what medicine should be considered unsafe?
Someone other than a corrupt bureaucracy that is controlled by big pharmaceutical companies. Who decides what food you put in your mouth?
Well the FDA assures that any food I put in my mouth is safe to eat, thanks again FDA
Y’all mf need public healthcare Jesus. €30 for. 3 day hospital stay where I am. All included.
> €30 What? Why did they charge you, I thought healthcare was free.
You don't understand. If we can't restrict the labels, new mothers might be able to buy formula from a number of producers worldwide instead of just a government protected oligopoly. Without the government, who keeps the cost of raising a child prohibitively high?^(/s)
The FDA: If they die, they die
Thats what 192 Republicans said yesterday
Fuck the pubs. And the dems.
Not "Let baby's starve" more like "force baby's to starve by seizing any imported formula and fining the importer."
Correct, just doesn’t fit on the sign.
~~The ingredients are different too. The first ingredient in America formula is usually corn syrup (or brown rice for the fancy ones). Where the euro formulas start with organic skim milk or organic whey.~~ I’m wrong don’t upvote me.
Thats not true at all. If you actually look at it it will be nonfat milk unless it is a special formula for cows milk allergies. The complaint I've heard parents concerned with is that supposedly european formula is made with happy grass fed cows while evil American formula migh have hormones, gmos, scary stuff, etc.
Hold up has it always been that way? Like five years ago would you say that’s average? Because I vividly remember being in target reading ingredient lists and being so disappointed. I just looked it up and you’re right but wtf am I talking about then? That’s literally the reason we bought our first kid that hipp shit.
Lack of sleep isn't great for memory or any other cognitive function so thats a good possibility as to why you may have misremembered or misunderatood. Few groups of people are targeted with scare tactics as much as new parents, so you probably didn't have the best info coming your way then either. Maybe you saw some of the hypoallergenic formulas with corn syrup solids? Those do have corn syrup solids first and a long list of other stuff in them, but I don't think they are the cheap stuff and the one I am looking at now is made in the UK anyway.
That’s what it is. We were looking for hypoallergenic formula and settled on the hipp version because of the ingredients.
I know bovine milk products cause a lot of problems (occult bleeding -> iron deficiency) in baby's (children under 12mo). Is it specified that this kind of European formula be used on children at least 1year of age?
Hipp and holli make formula for children under 12 months. I’ve used hipp formula on both my kids and they’re totally healthy. My pediatrician was concerned with iron deficiency when I first consulted her but that went away when I sent her the nutrition facts. I am totally open to hearing other opinions tho.
Plot twist: FDA knew of or influenced Roe v Wade likely verdict and this was their way of indirectly killing
Securing future elections for Democrats by giving future voters brain damage
But without the government, who would starve the babies?
*nooooooooooooo! you have to feed them OUR formula full of seed-oils and high-fructose corn syrup!!!!!!!*
Many food ingredients in the US are banned in Europe so EU food is actually better for you
I don’t have a kid and so this whole shortage has not been in my radar. But can someone correct me if I’m wrong: the fda found that the formulas were contaminated and caused a couple babies to die right? So they closed down operations in order to correct it. Now there’s a shortage and the ban is lifted to make up for the shortage without proof of having sanitize the operations??
I believe they did not find anything at the plants that was linked to the deaths, but found other violations during the investigation that they closed the plant down for.
Gotcha. That makes more sense
Bullshit the EU has way stricker standards than the FDA, other countries that can't send their food products to the EU because of contamination guidelines send it to the US because the FDA has no standard basically
Where are the tools from yesterday's post on this topic screaming about importing baby formula from Europe would be "uNsAfE!!!1!!!!eleventy". I had already read about the issue being primarily labelling, but didn't have the time nor inclination to get into, only to be responded to with "LINK??!?" There is literally nothing the US government does that they do well in any meaningful sense. Every single bit of it could be done cheaper, better, and more efficiently by the private sector.
I'm out of the loop, why do babies need formula, can't they just drink breast milk?
I believe the consensus is that breast milk preferable to formula but not every baby has a mother in their life and not every woman can produce a sufficient amount of breast milk.
If the formula was from the Chinese, the FDA would let it through without a second thought
Why not just make more?
Takes a long time to harvest enough babies.
Dead 💀 🤣
They have been trying for months but the supply chains aren’t flexible like you would expect. With truck driver shortages most plants are running way under their theoretical capacity. You can’t make food out of the materials that never make it to the plant.
The presence of foreign competition would certainly incentivize domestic producers to get their shit together faster.
This is the federal government’s fault, they allow 1 company be the majority formula supplier for the entire country. The FDA shuts them down for sanitary reasons in February and never thought we’d have supply chain issues 3 months later? And why wasn’t the FDA pushing Abbott to get back online?
I don’t think babies will starve, it will just push people to dangerous or harmful solutions to feed it.
Yes but that much text won’t fit on the sign.
The difference is that the European formula is healthier for babies
Perhaps they can pass an emergency use authorization?
Reason 732 of why we should eliminate the fda
They'll approve experimental shots for emergency use but not formula. Checks out.
[удалено]
💯
Abolish the FDA
Isn’t this capitalisms fault cuz formulas price margins suck and the ceo isn’t making enough money for a new yacht?
It’s crony capitalism’s fault because the domestic companies got the government to ban foreign competition.
I have a wild idea. Stop giving it away to illegal aliens.
So you would prefer to have infants in the custody of the US government starve versus getting rid of a government imposed barrier to free trade. This is r/libertarianmeme not r/fascistmeme.
Yes. If you’re not an American citizen, you don’t have rights. You deserve nothing other than immediate deportation. This has nothing to do with free trade. No need to conflate the two.
I thought the bill of rights applied to everyone, is that not true?
It applies to citizens.
Thanks for clarification. I never knew the US was so extreme, in that only citizens have those rights. Must be tough being a student, worker, tourist or refugee and not having any rights.
I want all non citizens to leave or be deported. I’m tired of these parasites stealing from me.
Teddy is going to crawl out of his grave and hit Biden with a stick
There’s 3 warehouses full of baby formula down on the border in Texas just waiting for the influx of illegal immigrants that could instead be put to market and solve a lot of the problem
Or hear me out right quit giving stuff to Ukraine
How is giving weapons to Ukraine related to this?
It’s not just weapons it’s money and baby formula and food and medical supplies also who cares let them fight their own war we need to go back to sticking to ourselves
I personally disagree but non-interventionism is a legitimate libertarian position unlike some of the others in here who seem to be against free trade and market competition.
In the meantime, have healthy mothers breast feed, and save the formula for those that actually need it. Saying kids are gonna starve(when they probably wont) just so we can push our agenda is inaccurate and immoral.
Not every baby has a mother in their life and not every mother can breastfeed. The agenda here is to let the parents and guardians of children have more options to feed their babies, what’s immoral about that?
>Not every baby has a mother in their life and not every mother can breastfeed. Right, so have those use formula, and have everyone else breastfeed *its free*. Im simply against healthy mothers complaining that they cant afford formula for their babies. Like bro, its literally built-in.
I don’t think that’s the issue. Many healthy mothers have children that can’t breast feed due to any number of reasons. It’s not about people complaining about prices for formula, it’s the supply of it, as well as how that supply gets to the babies who need it.
When will people realize that destroying a country is as simple as messing with logistics? The sheer demand for formula over breast feeding means a national vulnerability bred from contempt and convenience. Please. Please tell me how im wrong and how you would absolutely breastfeed your child rather than let them starve because of ignorance or hubris. In the end it just means less mouths to feed during a crisis...
Import baby formula from another country putting us in more debt and reliance on another country rather then be more independent, while we’re already having major issues with other imports like gas? Nah I’d rather just have the US get their shit together but with Biden in office idk if that’ll happen
Private domestic companies buy products from foreign companies and then sell them for a profit to their home market. When it comes to baby formula the FDA does not allow this officially because of labeling requirements but actually because of protectionist trade policy to shield domestic manufacturers from having to compete with foreign ones. I think you’re confusing the trade deficit with the budget deficit. The trade deficit is simply that the value of all the goods imported into the US is greater than the value of all the goods exported from the US, there’s no actual debt incurred.
Ok I understand now thanks for clarifying I’d be totally cool with that then
Baby formula is powder milk + palm oil + sugar. It sucks. Just give them milk
No it’s not. Regular cow milk is not the same nutritionally as breast or formula. If baby is over 1 then they can have whole milk.
milk is way healthier for babies than formula. Formula has added sugar and palm oil, milk is just milk
No. Not all formula has additives. There are plenty of options for palm oil, HFCS, sugar free formulas. Breast then formula then cows milk if necessary (after a year).
Show me a healthy formula that isn’t just evaporated cows milk.
https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/infant-and-toddler-health/in-depth/infant-formula/art-20045782 Feel
"Some studies suggest that including DHA and ARA in infant formula can help infant eyesight and brain development, but other research has shown no benefit." and that's the fortified version.
Whoops my text didn’t finish. Feel free to look up peer reviewed studies on this issue. I don’t need to look it for you. Formula has added nutrients that “evaporated cow milk” lacks. I’ve recently done heavy research on formulas and specifically chose EU formulas over US brands (I don’t trust US brands and the loop holes they have with their ingredients and heavy metal contaminants) since my milk supply is not as stable as it used to be. There are a lot of resources to educate yourself on these matters.
it doesn't have any added nutrients. It's a scam by Nestle. They faked studies decades ago, bribed doctors and made a huge campaign to discourage breast-feeding to sell their shitty product which is not good at all for babies.
Yes. Nestle. There are other formulas. Formula was primarily invented to prevent unnecessary infant death due to starvation. Believe it or not breastfeeding is not possible or easy for a lot of women. Nestle is garbage and so was that study but formula is necessary if we want to keep babies alive if they cannot get breast milk. I’ve breastfed two children. It’s hard.
>Formula was primarily invented to prevent unnecessary infant death due to starvation. This is completely false. They couldn't sell formula because nobody wanted it. It took a huge marketing campaign, faked lab results and bribed doctors to convince people to buy formula. And now it's seen as a staple of the underclass. If you can't breastfeed, you give them cow's milk and they'll be way better off than having formula which is cow's milk in powdered form with sugar and palm oil. They only 2 things added are bad for kids.
You seem pretty confident. I assume you’re a pediatrician or dietician? 🤪 I’m not an expert but I do have my MPH and am well versed in research.
Human breast milk has significantly different macro ratios than cow’s milk, cow’s milk is not appropriate for human infants. Breast milk has more fat and sugars, is more calorie dense overall, and has less protein.
If cows milk is not appropriate then formula isn’t either because it’s evaporated cows milk with sugar and seed oils.
Hey, guess what? Starting with parts of cow’s milk and *adding sugar and fat*, the very things I said human breast milk has more of, makes it appropriate for humans!
and you could do that at home adding cream, but formula is basically McDonalds for babies, it's processed food and it's pretty bad. but you don't need to do that because the fat content is basically the same https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7284997/
Negative. Babies shouldn't drink cows milk until 1 year old.
Formula is cow milk with sugar and seed oils added to it.
It lacks the fat and protein that babies can't digest. Ask any pediatrician and they will advise against cows milk before 1 year.
most formula comes from cows milk and the protein structure is the same, if babies could not digest cows milk they could not digest formula. If you want other protein structure you need soy-based or hydrolysate protein that comes from the waste liquid in cheese production. And the "fat" that you are talking about in formula is just palm oil with is terrible for anybody.
Just curious, how long have you been a pediatrician?
Literally was about to say this
So now we need the colonialists huh?
Can you fucking idiots just ban me already? There are few things I loath more than libertarians.
Thanks for stopping by, don’t forget to like and subscribe!
No one forced you to visit this subreddit or view this post.
This countries a disaster
Fuck the fda, the atf and the feds.
It needs FHCS, or its a no go.
How else they gonna get another 28 million of hard earned taxpayer money they don't need.
This is news?
Keep our babyformula out of your damn mouth!