2
100

[–] SyriansAreTerrorists 2 points 100 points (+102|-2) ago 

*Paid for by Similac and Enfamil.

*Both products contain soy and soy products.

*Both companies are owned by the jews.

0
36

[–] knightwarrior41 0 points 36 points (+36|-0) ago 

Paid for by Similac and Enfamil.

*Both products contain soy and soy products.

*Both companies are owned by the jews.

producing the soyboys and betas of tomorrow one milk at the time

0
2

[–] prairie 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago  (edited ago)

producing the soyboys and betas of tomorrow one suckle at the time

Or maybe cuckle.

0
10

[–] GassyMcGasface 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Someone should, idk, ... the jews?

0
3

[–] HST 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Nice username

4
6

[–] NoRagrets 4 points 6 points (+10|-4) ago 

Actual quote from the publication;

FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE:
The authors have indicated they have no financial relationships relevant to this article to disclose.

FUNDING:
No external funding.

POTENTIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST:
The authors have indicated they have no potential conflicts of interest to disclose.

Where did you get your information?

0
22

[–] HST 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

Calling breastfeeding unnatural really makes me skeptical of any disclosure like that. There's no way to possibly come to that conclusion.

Dangerous for some, sure. But it's completely natural.

0
7

[–] wolfsktaag 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

The authors have indicated

well, glad they cleared that up for us

0
1

[–] truthwoke33 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

I noticed that you are down voted by 3 accounts despite directly quoting the original publication. The title is out right fake news click bait. Someone is trying push an agenda and to shove garbage down our throats.

0
0

[–] gentronseven 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Lol, of course they're not going to write that they are shills in their own paper. Funding will come to it through back channels like straight donations to the university.

1
2

[–] RecluS 1 points 2 points (+3|-1) ago 

It's rare you see a 57+/-0 post on voat. It's because your 100% right and everyone knows it.

1
46

[–] Aprioned 1 points 46 points (+47|-1) ago 

Buy our formula so we can fuck up your children goyim! I swear, fucking kikes will stop at nothing.

0
19

[–] Rellik88 0 points 19 points (+19|-0) ago 

Full of natural Soy!

1
12

[–] KosherHiveKicker 1 points 12 points (+13|-1) ago  (edited ago)

...specifically Phytoestrogens (plant based estrogens) which mimic the female hormone once inside the human body.

Effects on humans

In human beings, phytoestrogens are readily absorbed, circulate in plasma and are excreted in the urine. Metabolic influence is different from that of grazing animals due to the differences between ruminant versus monogastric digestive systems.[20]

A wide range of beneficial effects of phytoestrogens on the cardiovascular, metabolic, central nervous systems as well as reduction of risk of cancer and post menopausal symptoms have been claimed. However, there is also concern that phytoestrogens may act as endocrine disruptors that adversely affect health. Based on currently available evidence, it is not clear whether the potential health benefits of phytoestrogens outweigh their risks.[29]

Males It is unclear if phytoestrogens have any effect on male sexuality, with conflicting results about the potential effects of isoflavones originating from soy. A 2010 meta-analysis of fifteen placebo-controlled studies said that "neither soy foods nor isoflavone supplements alter measures of bioavailable testosterone concentrations in men."[30] Some studies showed that isoflavone supplementation had no effect on sperm concentration, count, or motility, and had no effects on testicular or ejaculate volume.[31][32] Sperm count decline and increasing rate of testicular cancers in the West may be linked to a higher presence of isoflavone phytoestrogens in the diet, but such a link has not been definitively proven.[33] Furthermore, there is some evidence that phytoestrogens may affect male fertility, but "further investigation is needed before a firm conclusion can be drawn".[34]

Females It is unclear if phytoestrogens have any effect on the cause or prevention of cancer in females.[35] Some epidemiological studies have suggested a protective effect against breast cancer.[35][36] Other epidemiological studies found that consumption of soy estrogens is safe for patients with breast cancer, and that it may decrease mortality and recurrence rates.[37][38] It remains unclear if phytoestrogens can minimize some of the deleterious effects of low estrogen levels (hypoestrogenism) resulting from oophorectomy, menopause, or other causes.[35] A Cochrane Review of the use of phytoestrogens to relieve the vasomotor symptoms of menopause (hot flashes) stated that there was no conclusive evidence to suggest any benefit to their use, although genistein effects should be further investigated.[39]

Infant formula Some studies have found that some concentrations of isoflavones may have effects on intestinal cells. At low doses, genistein acted as a weak estrogen and stimulated cell growth; at high doses, it inhibited proliferation and altered cell cycle dynamics. This biphasic response correlates with how genistein is thought to exert its effects.[40] Some reviews express the opinion that more research is needed to answer the question of what effect phytoestrogens may have on infants,[41][42] but their authors did not find any adverse effects. Studies conclude there are no adverse effects in human growth, development, or reproduction as a result of the consumption of soy-based infant formula compared to conventional cow-milk formula.[43][44][45] The American Academy of Pediatrics states: "although isolated soy protein-based formulas may be used to provide nutrition for normal growth and development, there are few indications for their use in place of cow milk-based formula. These indications include (a) for infants with galactosemia and hereditary lactase deficiency (rare) and (b) in situations in which a vegetarian diet is preferred."[46]

0
25

[–] selpai 0 points 25 points (+25|-0) ago 

“Promoting breastfeeding as ‘natural’ may be ethically problematic and, even more troublingly, it may bolster this belief that ‘natural’ approaches are presumptively healthier. This may ultimately challenge public health’s aims in other contexts, particularly childhood vaccination.”

Wow...

0
22

[–] Fambida 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

problematic

Found the SJW (not you, the author). I swear that fucking word is one of the biggest giveaways that the person speaking is an utter twat.

0
3

[–] HST 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

This is what people say when there is no problem, in my experience.

0
16

[–] gazillions 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago 

My God they're disgusting pigs. They really do think the dollar is the value of life and goyem are cattle to be farmed and manipulated for dollars then killed off when they've picked them dry.

1
13

[–] Humphreyboggart21 1 points 13 points (+14|-1) ago 

So you can start feeding that garbage called baby formula at birth? Start em sickly to always line your pockets.

0
10

[–] Rellik88 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

Sooo glad my wife breast feeds! Why pay $30 a can of soy formula. Which welfare will pay for. Or free milk from momma? Did you know infants can only see the distance from breasts to moms face?

0
7

[–] ArsCortica 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

This entire "natural" vs "unnatural" thing is not wholly beyond a point - having a parasite lay eggs under your skin technically is perfectly "natural", but hardly beneficial, while having surgery after you broke your leg is entirely "unnatural" but very much beneficial.

As a matter of fact, the entire field of medicine outside of very, very basic stuff is "unnatural". As is selective breeding for animals, constructing buildings, and various other stuff civilization has come up with.

This all being said, I strongly advocate breastfeeding - both from a medical standpoint (unless the mother is a complete crackwhore or something) and from a psychological point, given its significant effect on the mother-child bond.

0
3

[–] Fambida 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

In the case of breastfeeding, natural means evolved to be a near perfect nutritional substance for babby. Is it possible to improve on nature? Absolutely! However, any milk from a human mother has hundreds of millions of years of successful breeding/evolution behind it. We've evolved to drink it, and we've evolved to produce it, meaning it's pretty damned good at what it does.

And for anyone who takes the evolution doesn't exist route, well, god made the titty to be what babies suck from. You can't top god's work.

0
2

[–] Humansized 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Yeah, it is beyond a point. You could argue potentionally dangerous, like you said drugs or whatever else that may be in the mothers system but saying unnatural is just absurd.

3
-2

[–] Conspirologist [S] 3 points -2 points (+1|-3) ago 

You are confused. Natural means that an action is meant by nature. Human brain is meant by nature to come up with solutions that benefit health and improve by building each own natural habitat, like many other species. Unnatural means doing something that was not meant by nature and is illogical or harmful, or else also negative.

0
3

[–] ArsCortica 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

meant by nature

Since when is nature a sentient being that wants you to do things in one way or another? There only is adaption and natural selection. And humanity has not become the dominant species on the planet by doing "natural" things, not to speak of how vague that term is in the first pace.

It's the same kind of bullshit with people insisting to buy "naturally grown crops", which actually means that said crops aren't GNOs, but said crops only are natural if you count several centuries of selective breeding as "natural" - their original forms no longer existing and presumably having been inedible to humans as well.

1
-1

[–] PAT-riot 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XY_gonadal_dysgenesis

Your XY kid is born naturally without testicles, dick, or ability to even make testosterone. I'd bet my house that you'd give your kid steroids.

0
3

[–] knightwarrior41 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

true story,my sister didnt want to breastfeed her sons because of "reasons" and some years later they all sickly all the time

load more comments ▼ (28 remaining)