Breast-feeding

[Ray Jones]

Also, if the child never get exposed to any virus or whatever, this will most probably cause a weak immune system. Those "sterile" grown babies are more likely to catch some illness or to be allergic to something etc, because their immune system is not trained well enough for proper function.

[El Sitherino]

You are making the assumption that my concern is for the baby and mother's safety, it's not.

[Tyrion]

You are making the assumption that my concern is for the baby and mother's safety, it's not.

 

So you're afraid that the milk is going to contaminate any object it spills onto?

 

I hope you've never seen a hick spit on the ground, then...

[El Sitherino]

So you're afraid that the milk is going to contaminate any object it spills onto?

No.

 

I'm afraid a disease-ridden mother/infant will expose me to whatever infectuous crap they may have. And where I am at, the chances of that are a little too high, especially for my concern. Therefore I distance myself from things like that when it comes to strangers.

I work at a Museum, lots of women come in there and breast feed publicly. Most of them I don't mind, but occasionally there comes a woman that simply is offputting (scars, {open}wounds, etc.) and her infant smells like death incarnate.

 

I'm simply cynical like that. And nothing I say is in relation to the milk itself, simply that many people aren't very concerned about sanitary needs.

 

Nowhere do I say outlaw it, simply that it can be unsanitary.

 

 

In the end, I really have no issue, as long as the risks are kept simply to the personal parties, the mother and infant. But when other people are put at risk, that's when I say give the baby a bottle and keep your shirt closed.

[Kurgan]

Do you avoid people who eat food in your presence as well? Because there's just as much disease riddenness going on there (people's mouths are filled with bacteria).

 

I mean, wouldn't it be hypocritical to make a big deal about it just because the baby is drinking breast milk, than a young child eating "solid food"?

 

Eating food may be disgusting and germ spreading, but we all do it and we all accept it as natural and permissable in public (unless there's some chance of the food getting on something and thereby damaging it, like in an art museum). But because in this case a female breast is involved, people freak out and think it's crazy.

 

Would people freak out as much if it were a woman wearing a bikini top eating a cheeseburger?

[El Sitherino]

Take a moment to re-read. Apparently you have absolutely no idea where my issue lies.

[Jae Onasi]

Well, let me give a little disease transmission guideline for you.

 

Just remember this: "If it's wet and sticky and doesn't belong to you, don't touch it."

 

Unless you're manhandling the breast-feeding woman with the nasty sores/wounds, you don't have anything to worry about. You'd probably get arrested for assault/battery long before you got hold of enough of her to get contaminated.

 

El Sithy, I've volunteered and worked in hospitals for 15 years, volunteer at first aid points for 20 years, and I currently work in people's faces all day long--been doing that for 12 years or so now. That's not all consecutive--there's overlap there. I can tell you I've probably seen and worked with some of the grossest things you can see, and I'm not going to elaborate on that here and gross people out in case they're eating or something. One of my dearest friends died of AIDS and I helped take care of him at times, hugged him, ate dinner with him, used the bathroom at his house, and so on, and didn't catch it, and he had lots of sores near the end of his life. I haven't caught anything, because I know how things spread and how to take appropriate precautions.

 

Your risk of catching something from the specific act of breastfeeding is ridiculously low. You'd have to get a bunch of open cuts and take a bath in breastmilk to get any kind of risk. Breastmilk does not pour out onto things, it's not going to get all over the exhibits, lunch tables, and so forth. If mom gets a drop of milk on her hands, even if she doesn't wash her hand, once it's dry, a virus like HIV dies/becomes inactive pretty quickly. Of all the wet and sticky things you shouldn't touch, breastmilk is probably the safest out of all of them. Otherwise, there's no other difference in risk between breast or bottle feeding of infants. If she has sores and has a disease, her ability to infect others is no different if she bottle or breast feeds.

 

People with open wounds/sores _who are infected_ are a risk if the wounds ooze, regardless of breastfeeding status. Blood is a much higher carrier of microbes than breastmilk is. Not everyone with a wound/sore has HIV or other disease, though if you don't know, it's always wise to take precautions. A lot of sores and such are caused by skin allergies, psoriasis, simple cuts, and so forth, not by some nasty infectious thing.

 

Most disease transmission is by direct contact or airborne droplets. You're much more at risk for catching something like a cold or flu, which is much easier to catch because it can be passed along by coughing, sneezing, touching a runny nose and then wiping your hand somewhere, than to catch it because mom or baby touched a drop of breastmilk or a breast and then touched something else.

 

The smelly baby--that baby may be taking soy or some othe specialty non-milk based formulas. Some babies on these formulas do develop an odd odor. They could also need a diaper change.

[El Sitherino]

The assumption keeps coming back to that of breastmilk. It's not.

 

It's the act of public breast feeding, exposing whatever ungodly death these impersonal beings carry. I could care less if some tittymilk gets on my hand. I'm worried about the puss and other crap they wipe and smear around.

I don't have all the time in the world to be able to make sure every area has been properly sterilized after an encounter with a person that no doubt has more disease in them than the African jungle, I also have crap I have to move around (and therefore am prone by various means).

 

It's not that hard to ask that these walking chem-bombs keep their breast in their shirt/blouse/ensemble until they get to a less public area, or at least some place with proper cleaning supplies.

 

It's not like any of this is unreasonable. Let's say you work at a theatre, and someone decides to "make out" there. That's fine, nothing illegal. But if they both have open wounds and disgusting signs of obvious disease, and you see them making out, getting crap all over the place. You'd be a little offset.

 

So, yeah, the main topic isn't the issue so much as what the main topic makes possible. Such as some diseased skank flopping out a breast and getting malaria juice all over my damn dinosaur exhibit crap.

[Ray Jones]

XD Hey, Sith-o-man, you're totally calming up on this one eh?

 

"A person that no doubt has more disease in them than the African jungle" is not what I see as the usual synonym for the 'mother who breastfeed her offspring'.

 

What you are addressing here deserves an own thread, as this is complete another issue and merely only tangent to the (where) to breastfeed or not to breastfeed question we try to discuss within this thread.

 

No?

 

 

It's the act of public breast feeding, exposing whatever ungodly death these impersonal beings carry. I could care less if some tittymilk gets on my hand.

I don't get it. If it's not the milk, are you touching breasts which are not yours?

 

 

I'm worried about the puss and other crap they wipe and smear around.

That, is as far as I know, not hardwired to breastfeeding. In that case, You (and me too) worry about little smeary children givin' you all ter juice they got.

 

 

It's not that hard to ask that these walking chem-bombs keep their breast in their shirt/blouse/ensemble until they get to a less public area, or at least some place with proper cleaning supplies.

So, are you saying that "hovering it out of the bra" contaminates the area within a radius of 5 miles?

[Kurgan]

Well, Sitherino, you could wear a surgical mask and rubber gloves when you go out in public...

 

*suddenly gets image in mind of Bill Murray in "What About Bob"*

 

 

As to the museum thing, you don't have a problem with bottle feeding, so the risk of getting the baby's meal on something doesn't seem to be the issue.

 

I'm saying a woman's nipples are no dirtier than other body parts being typically exposed (you make it sound like somebody is defecating on the floor). You're more likely to catch something nasty from the mouths of the folks around you. And besides, not everyone can be up to your standards of beauty to make rudely staring at them a pleasant past-time, right?

[Dagobahn Eagle]

So, yeah, the main topic isn't the issue so much as what the main topic makes possible. Such as some diseased skank flopping out a breast and getting malaria juice all over my damn dinosaur exhibit crap.

Am I immature if that cracked me up:p?

[Ray Jones]

I am, and it cracked me up, so chances are pretty *yes*

[edlib]

Maybe the place he works at is directly next door to a leper colony, and also frequently caters to prostitutes and hardcore porn stars who come there straight from work without bothering to wash up at all first.

 

I don't have any hard statistics at hand, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the most commonly exposed parts of the body (I.E: the hands and face...) are the filthiest, most germ-laden areas on the entire human body.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

I don't have any hard statistics at hand, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the most commonly exposed parts of the body (I.E: the hands and face...) are the filthiest, most germ-laden areas on the entire human body.

And that toilet-seats are way too dry for significant numbers of germs to live on them. Bathroom door handles, on the other hand...

[El Sitherino]

XD Hey, Sith-o-man, you're totally calming up on this one eh?

 

"A person that no doubt has more disease in them than the African jungle" is not what I see as the usual synonym for the 'mother who breastfeed her offspring'.

 

What you are addressing here deserves an own thread, as this is complete another issue and merely only tangent to the (where) to breastfeed or not to breastfeed question we try to discuss within this thread.

 

No?

I was merely expressing my reasons for why I stated what I did in my first post. Mostly because it seemed people were confused as to what my complaint was in relation to. Everyone seemed to think "Sith thinks breast milk is evil and dirty", which is completely opposite of everything I've said.

 

I don't get it. If it's not the milk, are you touching breasts which are not yours?

It's not that I'm touching anything, so much as it's that they're rubbing themselves on things, things that little kids touch, rub around on, etc.

Some of the things I've seen are quite disgusting, in context of taking place at a museum.

 

So, are you saying that "hovering it out of the bra" contaminates the area within a radius of 5 miles?

No.

 

Maybe the place he works at is directly next door to a prostitute colony.

Fixed for pretty much true.

 

 

I don't have any hard statistics at hand, but I seem to recall reading somewhere that the most commonly exposed parts of the body (I.E: the hands and face...) are the filthiest, most germ-laden areas on the entire human body.

True, however people take a little more care in their hands and face. And they're generally harmless as most junk that sticks around has already been introduced to the immune system and we therefore have an effective defense against. Besides, I'm not talking about normal, everyday breasts.

 

 

Whether anything I've talked about is common or not isn't the issue, it's that it happens, and those are the times I take issue with it. Which was, as I believe, the question and original discussion. I said I have no issue with it, just that I wish people wouldn't do it sometimes, as a matter of sanitation. And I explained it.

 

Whether you agree or approve of this is of no concern to me.

 

Besides, what the hell would be the point to this place without slightly differing opinion?

[Jae Onasi]

*Jae views the latest posts and the directions the thread has gone*

You all have no idea how badly I needed a good laugh today.

 

El Sithy, that had to be one of your most over-the-top posts that I've seen to date. "More disease than an African jungle", "tittymilk" and "walking chem-bombs" had me howling.

 

It's not that I'm touching anything, so much as it's that they're rubbing themselves on things, things that little kids touch, rub around on, etc.

Some of the things I've seen are quite disgusting, in context of taking place at a museum.

 

The thought of what you might be thinking we women do with lactating breasts is frightening and amusing all at the same time.

 

Now I will agree with you that I've seen some nasty stuff going on in public places. You don't want to know what people do while sitting in the waiting room in my office. Yukk. We keep Lysol and disinfectants around for a reason.

 

To be a little more serious, I understand what you're saying--and to be rather blunt, it looks to me like it's this: no skanky breasts should come in contact, either directly or indirectly, with your exhibits, and therefore, you, because you have no desire to catch diseases.

 

While I understand your concern about disease transmission, I think you may be worrying more about it than you need to. Hands and hair carry more germs than anything else. If the breasts are skanky, the hands are going to be even skankier, and breastfeeding's not going to make it any worse. There are no breast-specific germs that I know of that you have to worry about, _if_ that's one of your concerns. So you're not going to get exposed to something you haven't already been exposed to from their hands, even if the hands are washed.

 

A lot of skin sores are not caused by microbes or disease. A lot of them are the result of allergy, psoriasis, or some other non-contagious problem. Those skin sores that are the result of microbes are usually caused by staph aureus or staph epidermis, germs we all carry on our skin normally anyway. You would be exposed to these germs on a daily basis regardless of whether someone breastfed or not.

 

If it's wet and sticky and doesn't belong to you, don't touch it without gloves. However, if it's dry and not sticky, you don't have to sweat it unless it's something truly awful like Ebola. And if you've got Ebola in your museum, you have a heck of a lot more to worry about than a skanky breastfeeding woman.

[Emperor Devon]

I don't see the reasoning behind Sithy's concern over diseased women who breatfeed. I doubt they're doing things to your exhibits with their breasts. It sounds like your concern is about getting germs from exhibits they touched, in which it wouldn't matter if they're men or women, and is a completely different topic.

[The Source]

OMG! Some of this thread reads off like National Geographic gone mad.

 

I personally believe that if a women wants to nurse in public they should go right ahead. I learned to never cross a women on these types of issues. Us guys can take our top off in public, and I am all for... Ah?!? Um?!?! Yeah. Well, lets just say, I wouldn't want to take a way a women's right to take care of their young. Many of them cover up anyway, so I have no problem with the issue.