Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

Now we see the standard reaction. Applauses (sarcasm for those unable to spot it).

I said ''Amy Weimar doesn't agree with you''. Then a flurry of opposition to that. Amy Weimar is a doctor and researcher.

It doesn't take a rigorous testing regime to compare one food stuff with another when they are essentially similar. A laboratory test of the milk from the breast of a trans woman is found to be the same as the milk from a cis woman. If it is the same, then it is no more or no less harmful.

A rigorous testing is certainly needed before introducing a new drug; that much is obvious, but breast milk is not a new drug. If the composition of breast milk from a trans woman is the same as from a cis woman, then the risks are the same. That is the science.

On the other hand, there are higher risks to children from being breastfed by women who either wittingly or unwittingly risk their babies health by way of what they ingest. There's much less fuss being made about the latter.

The thing that I am noticing and drawing attention to, is this leaping to false conclusions, fake analogies, and misdirection; and the subsequent claim that this is following the science.

In New York there was an outcry because a trans woman was feeding a baby. There is no evidence of harm caused, and some evidence that this was safe.

In the UK Mika Minio-Paluello breastfed her baby. This has resulted in a huge pile-on from alarmists with the now standard approach of death threats against her. The NHS and a number of politicians have supported her. The alarmists tried reporting her to the NSPCC, who have rebutted the claim of abuse.

I suspect the real problem here is that some people find this distasteful.

 

[Ian H]

You'd better keep them wrapped up now in an underground bunker to reduce all risks to zero. Oh and be sure to keep them away from those religious cultists too. Best yet, keep them away from bigots - very damaging to a young mind.

Too late, I fear.

 

[monkers]

This says it all. This experiment was in no way beneficial to the baby, only for the transwoman. The baby didn't need to be "co-breastfed" at all, and the "study" does not mention whether the breast milk produced was analysed for hormones. The study is also locked so people can't read it without paying.

It wasn't an experiment.

 

[icowden]

I said ''Amy Weimar doesn't agree with you''. Then a flurry of opposition to that. Amy Weimar is a doctor and researcher.

Amy Weimar is an American doctor and researcher who works primarily with transgender people. Given that US doctors are funded by Pharmaceutical companies, it isn't clear whether there are any conflicts of interest given that she appears to be the only researcher advancing this view.

It doesn't take a rigorous testing regime to compare one food stuff with another when they are essentially similar. A laboratory test of the milk from the breast of a trans woman is found to be the same as the milk from a cis woman. If it is the same, then it is no more or no less harmful.

Breast milk isn't one thing. It's incredibly complex. It constantly changes composition depending on the babies needs. Medications such as hormone treatments pass into breast milk. You can do tests that demonstrate the nutritional content but they won't look at the hormonal content.

A rigorous testing is certainly needed before introducing a new drug; that much is obvious, but breast milk is not a new drug. If the composition of breast milk from a trans woman is the same as from a cis woman, then the risks are the same. That is the science.

That's not scientific at all. Firstly you have to establish the scientific composition of breast milk. We can't do that. That's why formula milk is not recommended for new-borns. It just isn't good enough. We can't make anything anywhere *near* as good as breast milk.

On the other hand, there are higher risks to children from being breastfed by women who either wittingly or unwittingly risk their babies health by way of what they ingest. There's much less fuss being made about the latter.

Most women don't want to harm their babies. There is tonnes of advice about what not to eat when breastfeeding.

The thing that I am noticing and drawing attention to, is this leaping to false conclusions, fake analogies, and misdirection; and the subsequent claim that this is following the science.

I agree.

In New York there was an outcry because a trans woman was feeding a baby. There is no evidence of harm caused, and some evidence that this was safe.

But no evidence that this was something that is either sane or sensible, any more than removing body parts and making new bits out of them.

In the UK Mika Minio-Paluello breastfed her baby. This has resulted in a huge pile-on from alarmists with the now standard approach of death threats against her.

Yes, because many people take against someone using a baby as a social media prop for their issues with gender identity. She did not solely breastfeed her baby - she wouldn't have been able to. The biological mother of the baby is the best person to do that for the health of the baby. Many people see the baby's health as being more important than the parents vanity and gender issues.

 

[monkers]

Amy Weimar is an American doctor and researcher who works primarily with transgender people. Given that US doctors are funded by Pharmaceutical companies, it isn't clear whether there are any conflicts of interest given that she appears to be the only researcher advancing this view.


Breast milk isn't one thing. It's incredibly complex. It constantly changes composition depending on the babies needs. Medications such as hormone treatments pass into breast milk. You can do tests that demonstrate the nutritional content but they won't look at the hormonal content.



That's not scientific at all. Firstly you have to establish the scientific composition of breast milk. We can't do that. That's why formula milk is not recommended for new-borns. It just isn't good enough. We can't make anything anywhere *near* as good as breast milk.


Most women don't want to harm their babies. There is tonnes of advice about what not to eat when breastfeeding.


I agree.


But no evidence that this was something that is either sane or sensible, any more than removing body parts and making new bits out of them.


Yes, because many people take against someone using a baby as a social media prop for their issues with gender identity. She did not solely breastfeed her baby - she wouldn't have been able to. The biological mother of the baby is the best person to do that for the health of the baby. Many people see the baby's health as being more important than the parents vanity and gender issues.

Thanks

Hormone level testing is so easily achieved either for an individual or for large number for a screen test.

Part of the outrage relates to domperidone being used to promote lactation. This isn't a new process. Domperidone is routinely used to help women to breastfeed having previously recovered from breast cancer. I'm not seeing similar outrage over this.

In the UK domperidone can be prescribed as a medicine to babies in certain cases. Again no outrage.

The suggestion that everything should be risk-free is a nonsense. Most activities are risk assessed with the aim of minimising risk, never with the presumption that all risk is always removed. If everything that was without risk was banned, not only would there be no women's sport, but no sport.

In the case of medications it is always the case that they are approved on the basis of an assessment of benefit to risk, and benefit to cost.

 

[monkers]

The biological mother of the baby is the best person to do that for the health of the baby. Many people see the baby's health as being more important than the parents vanity and gender issues.

I don't agree with this. Nothing to do with the gender identity discussion; it just isn't true. Not all mothers produce sufficient milk. Some mothers are just not comfortable with breast feeding, cracked / sore nipples are a common complaint.

It may be less common now, but I remember certain things as a child, such a woman feeding another woman's child, not only for health reasons, but simply because the mother was busy. There is an argument that a baby's immune system is better developed if passed around this way.

In some cultures in previous times when infant mortality rates were high, passing babies around was thought to increase a child's chances of survival.

 

[monkers]

But no evidence that this was something that is either sane or sensible, any more than removing body parts and making new bits out of them.

Crass.

Surgeons do this all the time to save or improve lives.

 

[Deleted member 159]

The evidence was clear to see- a man pressing a child to his chest

 

[Deleted member 159]

Crass.

Surgeons do this all the time to save or improve lives.

The rest is for vanity or personal gratification, trans fall into the latter

 

[classic33]

The NHS don't support their use based on one study though, unlike they are here.

There's one study, a couple of other mentions ...none of which are good science.

I'm not seeing any long term follow up studies so how can we know? Apart from which, we don't normally do unnecessary stuff to babies on the basis of it probably won't be harmful.(1)

They're women so unless they are on testosterone why would there be?

Some points about the Weimer study here:

View: https://twitter.com/FondOfBeetles/status/1760391430369947675


Doesn't look like the single participant was even required to be observed producing milk. They just brought in a sample. Could easily have been from the mother of the baby. It's poorly evidenced and the NHS are acting as trans activists in promoting male lactation on the back of such sloppy research.

Also worth noting that the male participant was on 20mg of domperidine 3 times a day ... and this was a reduction of the initial dose... which has to be taken all the time. The maximum dose for breastfeeding mothers seems to be 10mg 3 times a day until milk kicks in.(2)

(1) Suggest you read the piece linked to earlier, about Epilim and the effects on the children that never actually took it.
(2) NHS guidelines states seven days usage maximum. And that's for it's licensed usage
It's used to increase the milk yield, Not "until milk kicks in"

 

[monkers]

The rest is for vanity or personal gratification, trans fall into the latter

Simon Weston is just vain is he?

 

[monkers]

Most women don't want to harm their babies.

True. Not just most but very nearly all I will hope.

There is tonnes of advice about what not to eat when breastfeeding.

Also true. However you should note that domperidone (also a travel sickness drug) is not on the list of medications that pregnant or breastfeeding women should avoid.

https://www.nhs.uk/medicines/domper...eding-and-fertility-while-taking-domperidone/

Domperidone and pregnancy​

Domperidone can be taken in pregnancy if other anti-sickness medicines have not worked.

Domperidone and breastfeeding​

If your doctor or health visitor says your baby is healthy, you can take domperidone while breastfeeding but it's best to only take it for a short time.

There is not much information about how much domperidone passes into breast milk, but it's only a tiny amount. It's been used during breastfeeding for many years without babies having side effects.

Domperidone can also be used to help increase your breast milk supply. Although it's not made for this purpose, a specialist may offer this to you, if other things have not worked.

If you notice your baby has diarrhoea, or you have any other concerns about your baby, talk to a midwife, health visitor, pharmacist or doctor as soon as possible.


It is one thing to say there hasn't been much research, it's another to claim that therefore there is no body of knowledge.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Simon Weston is just vain is he?

He was a war injured serviceman. It was absolutely necessary or he could have died from his injuries.

Trans won't die if they don't get surgery or life altering medication

 

[monkers]

He was a war injured serviceman. It was absolutely necessary or he could have died from his injuries.

Indeed, now reread your crass statement about vanity.

Trans won't die if they don't get surgery or life altering medication

Some do.

 

[Deleted member 159]

Indeed, now reread your crass statement about vanity.


Some do.

Since the recent halt in many European countries of trans operations and drugs there hasn't been a marked increase in trans deaths

So those wanting medical procedures are doing it for vanity/personal gratification