Tassimo for formula!!!!!!!!!!

[aragornlover8]

"section, tummy tuck and massage brigade." Not to say it might not also appeal to those people too. But people who formula feed aren't doing it for convenience's sake a majority of the time, which is what a lot of the contention on this thread seems to be about.

The what brigade?!

i was quoting someone else

Yes, sorry I realised that after my post. I had a proper what the moment.

Haha. No worries at all

 

[nov_mum]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

 

[aliss]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

As my OH always says, money can't buy class

 

[aragornlover8]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

Off topic I know but... could that thing about the flat heads be true? It seems pretty silly to me.

Edit (for elaboration): However, I see the point of the article and I don't necessarily think she was saying breastfeeding is ONLY for amphetamine users and poor people. I think she was illustrating that strict guidelines are necessary in developing countries and among groups of people who are less likely to do research for themselves. It is more necessary to say "In order to have a healthy baby, you should do A,B,C..." because they are less likely to know how to use formula correctly, to know how to wrap a baby specifically so it doesn't fall on its face when it's sleeping on its side, etc. The grayer areas of alternative parenting styles are a luxury for those who can afford to do the research. That's not to say that those are the ONLY reasons to breastfeed, however. And I realize that WHO guidelines aren't necessarily looking at it from that perspective. They have plenty of hard data and evidence that definitively proves breast is best, to be sure.

I think that a lot of the formula feeding v. breastfeeding debate hinges on those grayer areas. A lot of formula feeders like myself believe that, while breast is best, formula works for us and it's far from poison. We know how to safely use it, and we give our LOs all of the care in the world when feeding them. We can do these things because we know the right ratio of water to formula, how to make sure the bottles are clean, and how to read our babies' cues. We have the time (albeit less and less of it with growing babies ) and resources to find these answers.

Sorry to kind of go off on a bit of a tangent. As for the gadget, I think it's nifty but I would likely break it.

 

[KittyVentura]

I've not read anything page the first post so apologies if what I say is already said or contradicted etc.

Firstly I think it seems like a good idea fo those that have already made up their mind to FF.
Secondly, I think that for some people that really like gadgets and buying cool things it could however be a thing they are tempted to get when pregnant that just adds to the temptation to move to FF in those early hard days.
Thirdly, while I FF Fin after failing at BF. I do not think things should be invented that make FF glamourous or cool. I think in a way it is "promoting" FF... the only way or not having it promote FF from birth-6 months when FF promotions are banned is to have it only available with formula pods from 6 months + milk.
Fourthly, calling it vile and disgusting makes it seem you are insulting the act of FF... may not be what was meant but it is how it comes across.

Which leads me onto point 5... which I do not make to be rude. IT's just a flash observation and as such, please throw the comment away if you feel it is invalid as I do not know the OP.

Your avatar says you're training to be a MW - Congrats. An admirable and worthy career choice and I wish you the best of luck in it. Your status thing saying lactivist and infantist, added to the tone of the first post and words used can't help but make me feel you would absolutely intimidate me as my MW... and a MW should be someone you feel you can confide in. I dunno if those views come across IRL or if you would carry them into your career with you but I'd suggest softening it up a touch if you do. Like I said... I don;t know you so please don;t be offended. Was just an instant picture build from what I saw on here and thought you might find it useful to hear. xxx

 

[bky]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

I kind of hope/feel that the article is a bit of satire emphasizing how one size doesn't really fit all when it comes to parenting guidelines, but she puts it across in such a poor way that I wonder/fear that it isn't. I mean it seems the way she writes that she's doing things just to be contrary.

I think people want to believe (because it's sensational and shocking) that there's this mass 'posh' brigade of people out there that have c-sections for convenience, don't BF as they can't be bothered, hire nannies to raise their offspring and so on. While I know that these people are real (I'm related to at least one of them who did all three things listed above and has a very alien outlook IMO) to varying degrees they just make everyone else who ends up needing those options look and feel bad.

 

[nov_mum]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

I kind of hope/feel that the article is a bit of satire emphasizing how one size doesn't really fit all when it comes to parenting guidelines, but she puts it across in such a poor way that I wonder/fear that it isn't. I mean it seems the way she writes that she's doing things just to be contrary.

I think people want to believe (because it's sensational and shocking) that there's this mass 'posh' brigade of people out there that have c-sections for convenience, don't BF as they can't be bothered, hire nannies to raise their offspring and so on. While I know that these people are real (I'm related to at least one of them who did all three things listed above and has a very alien outlook IMO) to varying degrees they just make everyone else who ends up needing those options look and feel bad.

I don't think there is a mass brigade, I think there is a very small section in the population that see a baby as a commodity. I think 95% of people that have children do so with the best intentions. No one is perfect and we all learn as we go but there are the other 5% who are driven by cash incentives, lack of education or a status symbol. There are a section of society that see babies as an inconvenience and will always place their own needs above those of their child. Some are poor, some are rich.

Unfortunately this lady in the article is for real. She does a huge disservice to those who choose to FF. I have exclusively BF with one child and also mixed fed with another. So it's not like I haven't seen the other side of the fence.

Back to the machine - like someone said above, having gadgets etc seems to glorify it and make it more attractive. Cigarettes would never have taken off if it were not for advertising, media making it seem classy and cool/sophisticated etc and without all the smoking paraphenalia, it would never have reached the popularity it did.

I am not trying to say that smoking is like cigarettes, but what I am saying is that if something deadly like cigarettes can be
marketed and become so popular, it shows that society is very sensitive to advertising and trends. BFing used to be stock standard way of feeding for a long time. There was a huge movement (mostly backed by formula producers) to move away from it. Formula was marketed as 'better' than BM in that it was full of nutrients that mum couldn't provide. The myths of weak BM, low supplies etc helped women lose confidence in their bodies. There was two generations where FF became the norm and it has done a huge disservice to women and babies in regards to health stats, breast cancer, diabetes etc 40 odd years down the track or more. I am thankful formula is around, like I said I used it myself, but machines and advertising products to promote it seems like we are heading back i nteh same direction as our mothers/grandmothers

 

[nov_mum]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

Off topic I know but... could that thing about the flat heads be true? It seems pretty silly to me.

Edit (for elaboration): However, I see the point of the article and I don't necessarily think she was saying breastfeeding is ONLY for amphetamine users and poor people. I think she was illustrating that strict guidelines are necessary in developing countries and among groups of people who are less likely to do research for themselves. It is more necessary to say "In order to have a healthy baby, you should do A,B,C..." because they are less likely to know how to use formula correctly, to know how to wrap a baby specifically so it doesn't fall on its face when it's sleeping on its side, etc. The grayer areas of alternative parenting styles are a luxury for those who can afford to do the research. That's not to say that those are the ONLY reasons to breastfeed, however. And I realize that WHO guidelines aren't necessarily looking at it from that perspective. They have plenty of hard data and evidence that definitively proves breast is best, to be sure.

I think that a lot of the formula feeding v. breastfeeding debate hinges on those grayer areas. A lot of formula feeders like myself believe that, while breast is best, formula works for us and it's far from poison. We know how to safely use it, and we give our LOs all of the care in the world when feeding them. We can do these things because we know the right ratio of water to formula, how to make sure the bottles are clean, and how to read our babies' cues. We have the time (albeit less and less of it with growing babies ) and resources to find these answers.

Sorry to kind of go off on a bit of a tangent. As for the gadget, I think it's nifty but I would likely break it.

While I think you are being very open minded in regards to the article, I don't think money makes people immune from breast cancer, SUDI, diabetes and asthma.

 

[aragornlover8]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

Off topic I know but... could that thing about the flat heads be true? It seems pretty silly to me.

Edit (for elaboration): However, I see the point of the article and I don't necessarily think she was saying breastfeeding is ONLY for amphetamine users and poor people. I think she was illustrating that strict guidelines are necessary in developing countries and among groups of people who are less likely to do research for themselves. It is more necessary to say "In order to have a healthy baby, you should do A,B,C..." because they are less likely to know how to use formula correctly, to know how to wrap a baby specifically so it doesn't fall on its face when it's sleeping on its side, etc. The grayer areas of alternative parenting styles are a luxury for those who can afford to do the research. That's not to say that those are the ONLY reasons to breastfeed, however. And I realize that WHO guidelines aren't necessarily looking at it from that perspective. They have plenty of hard data and evidence that definitively proves breast is best, to be sure.

I think that a lot of the formula feeding v. breastfeeding debate hinges on those grayer areas. A lot of formula feeders like myself believe that, while breast is best, formula works for us and it's far from poison. We know how to safely use it, and we give our LOs all of the care in the world when feeding them. We can do these things because we know the right ratio of water to formula, how to make sure the bottles are clean, and how to read our babies' cues. We have the time (albeit less and less of it with growing babies ) and resources to find these answers.

Sorry to kind of go off on a bit of a tangent. As for the gadget, I think it's nifty but I would likely break it.

While I think you are being very open minded in regards to the article, I don't think money makes people immune from breast cancer, SUDI, diabetes and asthma.

And not breastfeeding doesn't make those conditions inevitable either.

 

[bky]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

I kind of hope/feel that the article is a bit of satire emphasizing how one size doesn't really fit all when it comes to parenting guidelines, but she puts it across in such a poor way that I wonder/fear that it isn't. I mean it seems the way she writes that she's doing things just to be contrary.

I think people want to believe (because it's sensational and shocking) that there's this mass 'posh' brigade of people out there that have c-sections for convenience, don't BF as they can't be bothered, hire nannies to raise their offspring and so on. While I know that these people are real (I'm related to at least one of them who did all three things listed above and has a very alien outlook IMO) to varying degrees they just make everyone else who ends up needing those options look and feel bad.

I don't think there is a mass brigade, I think there is a very small section in the population that see a baby as a commodity. I think 95% of people that have children do so with the best intentions. No one is perfect and we all learn as we go but there are the other 5% who are driven by cash incentives, lack of education or a status symbol. There are a section of society that see babies as an inconvenience and will always place their own needs above those of their child. Some are poor, some are rich.

I think my point is, every time there is a c-section/BF vs formula/ etc debate that small group of people is trotted out with an eye to 'look what they did omg!', when in reality the people who think like that are pretty freakish and rare. Really we, as normal people who make decisions balancing what is best for our families, selves and children need to stop worrying what they think because we don't even live on the same planet.
I do think you're right in that it's trending toward glamourizing FF, which will in turn influence people. As ridiculous as I find it, what if Paris Hilton (who seems like as good a candidate as any) bought one and publicized it, then that would have influence (even though I can't fathom why people would want to emulate her, I know it would). The machine itself, not so much. While people may end up buying it, I think it's destined to be one of those things that people buy, don't use, and ends up in a clear-out sale.

 

[AriannasMama]

I don't get whats so vile about it? Its not like they are adding a shot of vodka to the baby's bottle or anything....

 

[moomoo]

I don't get whats so vile about it? Its not like they are adding a shot of vodka to the baby's bottle or anything....

Now there's an idea!!

 

[Parkep]

I don't get whats so vile about it? Its not like they are adding a shot of vodka to the baby's bottle or anything....

Now there's an idea!!

They would sleep better

 

[Laura2919]

I don't get whats so vile about it? Its not like they are adding a shot of vodka to the baby's bottle or anything....

Now there's an idea!!

They would sleep better

Or be swinging from the lightshade!

 

[tallybee]

It just seems a complete ostentatious extravagance to me. WTF is the point of it? I've hardly any experience of making bottles the normal way but it ain't difficult, millions manage it perfectly well. Stupid marketing bullshit

 

[Laura2919]

It just seems a complete ostentatious extravagance to me. WTF is the point of it? I've hardly any experience of making bottles the normal way but it ain't difficult, millions manage it perfectly well. Stupid marketing bullshit

I suppose its just moving with the times.. The gadgets we have these days..

 

[Aidan's Mummy]

I don't get whats so vile about it? Its not like they are adding a shot of vodka to the baby's bottle or anything....

Now that's an idea. It would defiantly get them to sleep x

 

[nov_mum]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

I kind of hope/feel that the article is a bit of satire emphasizing how one size doesn't really fit all when it comes to parenting guidelines, but she puts it across in such a poor way that I wonder/fear that it isn't. I mean it seems the way she writes that she's doing things just to be contrary.

I think people want to believe (because it's sensational and shocking) that there's this mass 'posh' brigade of people out there that have c-sections for convenience, don't BF as they can't be bothered, hire nannies to raise their offspring and so on. While I know that these people are real (I'm related to at least one of them who did all three things listed above and has a very alien outlook IMO) to varying degrees they just make everyone else who ends up needing those options look and feel bad.

I don't think there is a mass brigade, I think there is a very small section in the population that see a baby as a commodity. I think 95% of people that have children do so with the best intentions. No one is perfect and we all learn as we go but there are the other 5% who are driven by cash incentives, lack of education or a status symbol. There are a section of society that see babies as an inconvenience and will always place their own needs above those of their child. Some are poor, some are rich.

I think my point is, every time there is a c-section/BF vs formula/ etc debate that small group of people is trotted out with an eye to 'look what they did omg!', when in reality the people who think like that are pretty freakish and rare. Really we, as normal people who make decisions balancing what is best for our families, selves and children need to stop worrying what they think because we don't even live on the same planet.
I do think you're right in that it's trending toward glamourizing FF, which will in turn influence people. As ridiculous as I find it, what if Paris Hilton (who seems like as good a candidate as any) bought one and publicized it, then that would have influence (even though I can't fathom why people would want to emulate her, I know it would). The machine itself, not so much. While people may end up buying it, I think it's destined to be one of those things that people buy, don't use, and ends up in a clear-out sale.

It is scary that people would buy something because of a Paris Hilton endorsement isn't it?? I find the Kardashian endorsements just as baffling hehehe.

 

[LeeBee]

This one is not from New York, but it gives you a flavour of the brigade perhaps

https://www.nzherald.co.nz/shelley-bridgeman/news/article.cfm?a_id=724&objectid=10720331

She basically states that breast feeding si for amphetamine users and poor people (who probably can't afford a tassimo)

I kind of hope/feel that the article is a bit of satire emphasizing how one size doesn't really fit all when it comes to parenting guidelines, but she puts it across in such a poor way that I wonder/fear that it isn't. I mean it seems the way she writes that she's doing things just to be contrary.

I think people want to believe (because it's sensational and shocking) that there's this mass 'posh' brigade of people out there that have c-sections for convenience, don't BF as they can't be bothered, hire nannies to raise their offspring and so on. While I know that these people are real (I'm related to at least one of them who did all three things listed above and has a very alien outlook IMO) to varying degrees they just make everyone else who ends up needing those options look and feel bad.

I don't think there is a mass brigade, I think there is a very small section in the population that see a baby as a commodity. I think 95% of people that have children do so with the best intentions. No one is perfect and we all learn as we go but there are the other 5% who are driven by cash incentives, lack of education or a status symbol. There are a section of society that see babies as an inconvenience and will always place their own needs above those of their child. Some are poor, some are rich.

I think my point is, every time there is a c-section/BF vs formula/ etc debate that small group of people is trotted out with an eye to 'look what they did omg!', when in reality the people who think like that are pretty freakish and rare. Really we, as normal people who make decisions balancing what is best for our families, selves and children need to stop worrying what they think because we don't even live on the same planet.
I do think you're right in that it's trending toward glamourizing FF, which will in turn influence people. As ridiculous as I find it, what if Paris Hilton (who seems like as good a candidate as any) bought one and publicized it, then that would have influence (even though I can't fathom why people would want to emulate her, I know it would). The machine itself, not so much. While people may end up buying it, I think it's destined to be one of those things that people buy, don't use, and ends up in a clear-out sale.

This I do agree with.

 

[aragornlover8]

One day there will probably be an iPhone app for bottle making. People will likely be too busy playing Angry Birds to mess with it, though.