lemonkettaz said:anyone regarding the baby and the mother sexually explicit.... must be sick in the head for starters.
just a bunch of tree huggers complaining again
wehey i second that vote
lemonkettaz said:anyone regarding the baby and the mother sexually explicit.... must be sick in the head for starters.
just a bunch of tree huggers complaining again
From this weeks New ScientistSquark said:Sensible question:-
What is the recommended period of time that a baby should be breast-fed for?
My emphasisBreast is best, but watch out for the allergies
MOTHER'S milk is undeniably the most nutritious food for babies, but can they have too much of a good thing? While exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months of a child's life is thought to help prevent allergies, it is not clear whether further breastfeeding is beneficial in this way.
Twenty years ago researchers at the Helsinki Skin and Allergy Hospital in Finland asked 200 mothers of newborns to maintain exclusive breastfeeding for as long as possible. The children were assessed for allergies at ages 5, 11 and 20.
Exclusive breastfeeding for nine months or more actually appeared to increase the chances of a baby developing allergic conditions such as eczema and food hypersensitivity. At age 5, 56 per cent of children with a family history of allergy who had been breastfed for nine months or more had allergic symptoms, compared with 20 per cent of those who had been breastfed for between two and six months.
The researchers noticed that children who developed allergies after prolonged exclusive breastfeeding were most likely to do so during the first years of life, suggesting that environmental factors such as pollen exposure, diet and disease are the more important factors in the onset of allergies in later childhood and early adulthood.
"A beautiful hypothesis is that there is a time window when the immune system needs to be exposed to external antigens for it to develop properly," says team member Maria Pesonen, although more research is needed to be sure.
geeza said:dont women get turned on a kid sucking on their nipples?
So? They offend people then there the same in that sense right?
alexthecheese said:EDIT: Geeza, where the hell did you get that from?
yermum said:Is the US so much more religious that they are outraged by these type of pictures?
.
PhantomKarl said:breastfeeding is a good thing + it keeps womens breasts bigger i think?![]()
Ahaha. I'm reminded of the milky explosion scene in Akira - you know, with the giant teddies and stuff.Visage said:And risk some kind of milky explosion? No Way....
geeza said:if its not the actual nipple area then if I tried to be breast fed by a bunch of MILFS do you then they would get turned on? (as much as me!)
Le_Petit_Lapin said:What?![]()
I think you'd get a slap. You sound like a dirty pervert.
Le_Petit_Lapin said:What?![]()
I think you'd get a slap. You sound like a dirty pervert.
geeza said:ha ha. what i was trying to say was, someone pointed out that when babies breast feed its not the same sucking action as sexual so if someone (not a baby) could do the same action, would it turn the woman on?
Or is it just the fact its their kid?
again, noOakesy2001uk said:again... would you get turned on if a little kid started sucking you?
geeza said:again, no
have you heard of gloryhole?![]()
Le_Petit_Lapin said:Ah, you are a dirty pervert.
geeza said:ok, so youve never heard of glory hole then?