domestica says...
health

Ruffling Feathers

This would be one of those “what on earth were they thinking?!?!” moments:

How soon is too soon?

Not soon enough. Laboratory tests over the last few years have proven that babies who start drinking soda during that early formative period have a much higher chance of gaining acceptance and “fitting in” during those awkward pre-teen and teen years.

So, do yourself a favor. Do your child a favor. Start them on a strict regimen of sodas and other sugary carbonated beverages right now, for a lifetime of guaranteed happiness.

The Soda Pop Board of America
1515 W. Hart Ave – Chicago, IL

– Promotes Active Lifestyle!
– Boosts Personality!
– Gives body essential sugars!

You read that now and you think it’s the most absurd thing you’ve ever heard!  Geesh, we can’t even give our kids watered down apple juice before bed without feeling like they need to go brush their teeth asap!  But back in the 50’s, soda was under the health radar and very few people saw sugar as all that bad for you.  It wasn’t permeating every shelf of our grocery stores back then.

It begs the question, if the Soda Pop Board of America was seen as well-intended when suggesting that we give sugar-laden cola to our infants back in the 50’s, what do you think the other well-intended food/pharma groups are trying to convince us of today that will make us look back in horror?

In fifty years from now, what advertisements will our children look at with disgust and disdain?  Wondering to themselves, “what on earth were they thinking?!?!”…

Genetically modified crops being the science victory of our times? Even though farmers are being strong-armed into buying a monopolized seed that seems to get more and more expensive as they grow more and more dependent on it?

I think the first part of safety is ensuring my produce doesn't have crazy foreign genes causing allergies, toxin overload and God knows what else while you sue every farmer that's not in line!

Parents being forced to vaccinate their 9-year-old girls against a venereal disease, despite the reported side effects and the fact that it’s one of the least threatening cancers in the world (only 1.5% of cancer cases in the US)?

At a revenue of $360 per child, I have a hard time believing that Merk really cares about the future of your daughter….or her dreams.

Mike Adams, the hot-topic guru dubbed as “The Health Ranger”, says it best:

“If U.S. corporations could have their way, babies would be born with a cigarette in their mouth, a vaccine needle in their arm, Nike shoes on their feet, an iPod in their hands and a bag of Doritos tucked under one arm. Welcome to the world of unbridled advertising and consumerism, little guy!”

Discussion

7 thoughts on “Ruffling Feathers

  1. That soda ad is so strange because it looks like something we ‘d today to mock pop – but it was real. Craziness. Jamie Oliver’s Food Revolution show starts tonight (at least in the US & Canada I know) and I can’t wait. More info here: http://www.jamieoliver.com/news/watch-jamie-oliver-s-food-revolution-on.

    Posted by Vanessa | March 25, 2010, 9:54 pm
  2. Oops – i meant to say that the show starts tomorrow night, not tonight.

    Posted by Vanessa | March 25, 2010, 10:04 pm
  3. I hope you don’t mind me posting this. Feel free to delete it.

    Full Disclosure: My wife works for a pharmaceutical company.

    I know about the personal liberty issues and controversies surrounding vaccines, but I was one of the lucky few, less than 1% of the population, who got a brain tumor and subsequently, permanently “only” lost my right side hearing.

    If there was a vaccine that I could have taken when I was young to prevent this, shouldn’t I have taken it even if it “only” affects 1% of the population.

    Percentages and statistics quickly become irrelevant when you or a loved one were the ones affected.

    Posted by Paul Pereira | March 26, 2010, 3:53 pm
    • Thanks for the comment Paul — and I have no problem with your opinions being published! It’s simply that – your opinion!

      I agree totally that 1% is still 100% when it’s your own family member (or yourself) but my problem is that this vaccine is recommended for women up to the age of 27…so why are we pushing it on 9-year-old girls? Because the pharma knows that when you mandate something by law, you guarantee a higher yield than when it’s optional.

      Women who are sexually active should have every right to take this vaccine and protect themselves from such a serious STD…but that is a woman’s choice, not a government’s.

      Posted by Natasha | March 26, 2010, 7:52 pm
  4. Vaccinations linked to Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS)

    “Vaccines are known to cause fevers in babies (CDC 2001). These fevers can increase generation of the gases, exposing babies to higher concentrations. In addition, vaccines can lead to the depletion of vitamin C in a baby’s body (Hattersley 1993 and Pauling 1981), and damage the developing nervous and immune systems. Vaccines have also been shown to cause stressed breathing (Scheibner 1993), weakened immunity, and neurological damage (Neustaedter 1996), which can lower the baby’s ability to tolerate a given concentration of toxic gases.”
    But what about when vaccinations cause harm?
    I agree with you Natasha, GM crops, drug companies and blatant advertising are things I have no patience for.
    I’m sorry for Paul, but when you’re in need you seek out help, it doesn’t have to be on TV, in magazines, telling people perhaps they have a sickness and pills fix it. We shouldn’t “shop” for drugs.

    Posted by Michaela | March 26, 2010, 5:20 pm
  5. My feathers aren’t ruffled AT ALL…I completely agree with you on everything.

    Have you and Tim watched Food Inc yet? ugh…I’m so messed up about what I should/shouldn’t eat.

    I’m baby-stepping to a better diet though. . . I have to for the midget’s sake.

    Posted by Shannon | March 26, 2010, 8:53 pm
  6. I don’t think the HPV vaccine should be mandated, but I do think people should be informed and make their own choice.

    Wikipedia: Worldwide, HPV is the most common sexually transmitted infection in adults. For example, more than 80% of American women will have contracted at least one strain of HPV by age fifty.

    The pain and cost of treating HPV is substantial and if there is an option that could prevent it or prevent cancer, people should be made aware of it.
    While it’s true drug companies make money selling drugs/vaccines, I much rather see them prevent or cure disease rather then just treat symtoms.

    My original point was that it’s easy to dismiss small percentages, if we haven’t been personally affected by it.

    I guess the logic in targeting young women is to reach them before sexual activity.

    Posted by Paul Pereira | March 26, 2010, 10:03 pm