Here is a picture of what chicken "meat" looks like after it's been processed. They have to soak it in ammonia (to kill the bacteria), and add artificial flavor AND artificial color to make it look somewhat normal on your bun.

Were you really bottle-fed, Alexandria? I certainly was, but I'm pretty sure my mother was not.

I was vaccinated too, but the schedule given to me is only a fraction of what kids today are given.

I was probably a bit healthier as a kid than my average peer, but I think it mostly to do with not being in daycare.

The meat in that picture looks more like ice cream.  

Quote from: Matthew

Lack of vaccinations = children more sickly?  

That is the most ridiculous thing I've heard in a while. As if vaccinations contain some kind of vitamins or make you more healthy?

Alexandria, the ONLY way a non-vaccinated child would be more sickly, would be if the child ACTUALLY CONTRACTED one of the diseases they vaccinate against. And even then, unless the disease involved permanent damage to one's health (usually they do not), there would be no difference between the children you see and the vaccinated ones.

And how does health food make children more unhealthy? I don't get that one. Maybe it's debated what constitutes healthy food -- if they were feeding their children a vegetarian (or vegan) diet, that would certainly have an affect on their health. But that's not true health food! If they eat a variety of foods that God made, that's healthy.

Matthew

Matthew, read my post again.

I wrote:  

Quote

Whether this is because of the health food obsession that makes the rounds in trad chapels, the absence of vaccinations, or breastfeeding - maybe a combination of all three - but they do seem to be not as healthy.

All I know is this.  My generation was bottle-fed, raised on normal food, and vaccinated (and discipline too by the way).  We were not as sickly.  Whether that was because of one, two or all of the above, I know not.  I am merely stating facts.    

actually, your generations had healthier food often times, many were fed on farm produce...but that said, also, some studies have heard suggest you should be healthier actually, but not.....even in your early days, a lot of garbage already seeping into food, drink,etc....interesting, how myalgias, RA and dementia now affecting people younger and younger..

Quote from: Alexandria

Quote from: wallflower

Quote from: Alexandria

Quote from: wallflower

It has nothing to do with "this day and age". Humans have always been highly sɛҳuąƖ beings and breastfeeding and pregnancy have always highlighted the unique beauty of the woman. I have no doubt that men throughout the ages have found it to be a nearly irresistible mystery.  

That is true, but it is more, how shall I put this, predominant and uncontrolled these days.  People are doing things today that would have landed you in a psychiatric hospital in saner days.

Ok, so what about the "normal" men who are Catholic or who uphold a sense of morality, are very grounded in their Faith(s), happy in their marriages, concupiscence quelled (so to speak) who also state that breastfeeding and/or pregnancy can have a sensual effect on them, even if they don't will it? I'm sorry but this is not something that can be swept under the rug as a crazy person's syndrome. Being moved by a woman's exceptional glow and beauty while bf or pregnant is not by definition, a fetish. It could become one, but in and of itself, it is not.

You have the unique ability of putting words in someone's mouth.

I wasn't sweeping anything under the rug as a "crazy person's syndrome".  If you go back and read all of my posts on this subject, you would see that.

A man is a man.   Period.  Do you think being traditional removes the effects of original sin in a man?  Turns him into an angel?  St. Alphonsus de Liguori was beset with impure thoughts and temptations when he was in his eighties!  

Don't breastfeed except in private.  Plus, I have seen no evidence that it is healthier either.  The children in traditional chapels seem to be more sickly than "regular" children.  Whether this is because of the health food obsession that makes the rounds in trad chapels, the absence of vaccinations, or breastfeeding - maybe a combination of all three - but they do seem to be not as healthy.

I will now await the assaults.  Good thing I brought my buckler and shield with today.  :boxer:

Not sure why you are upset with me...You repeated everything I've said in my posts...I absolutely don't believe being traditional makes a man an angel, that was my whole point...my point towards you was that it isn't necessarily a matter of psychiatric issues giving men a hard time with finding nursing/pregnant women attractive. It's normal reaction for them, not something they should be berated for. You brought up psychiatric issues causing it and I defended that it isn't a psychiatric issue...was that not your meaning?

Too late to edit but wanted to add that I agreed with what pertains to bf in private, NOT the alleged unhealthiness of trad children. I've never seen a difference. Children are children are children and schools, all schools, trad or not, are the worst of virus stomping grounds. Plus, bf, non-vax and food re-education are present everywhere. It's hardly proper to trads.

Quote

Too late to edit but wanted to add that I agreed with what pertains to bf in private, NOT the alleged unhealthiness of trad children. I've never seen a difference. Children are children are children and schools, all schools, trad or not, are the worst of virus stomping grounds. Plus, bf, non-vax and food re-education are present everywhere. It's hardly proper to trads.

I didn't know you were older.  I thought you were only in your twenties or thirties.

How does age make a difference in my observation of trads vs non-trads? In THAT post you mentioned trad vs non-trad and I have an opinion on that. You observed old vs young in another post, about which I did not comment.

I could formulate an opinion on old vs young if you wish. I may not have been alive in the good ol days but I can compare yesteryear's formula and "normal food" ingredients, as well as the number and ingredients of vaccines, to today's formula, "normal food" and vaccines and see what we come up with. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts they aren't comparable and each generation gets a worse end of the stick. Not to mention what's found in mothers' breast milk these days, compared to less noxious times...yikes.

Thanks to these types of catastrophes that keep adding up on large and small scales...

http://www.kansascity.com/2010/10/07/2286392/hungary-toxic-red-sludge-has-reached.html

I am not interested in the studies and links, nor in you formulating any more opinions.

I will keep my opinion about all of this, and you will, no doubt, keep yours.

As for my remark about your age, you said "I've never seen a difference."  That meant to me that you were around at the time.  How could you have seen something if you weren't there to observe it?

Um....I believe I just clarified that. I've never seen a difference between trad children and non-trad children, not between young and old. You could just read my post, then you wouldn't have to repeat your question because you would see that it was answered the first time.

Ummmm, you and I are just talking past one another.  You think you clarified something.  You did not.

Yes she did:

How does age make a difference in my observation of trads vs non-trads? In THAT post you mentioned trad vs non-trad and I have an opinion on that. You observed old vs young in another post, about which I did not comment.