Trans women feeding chemical ridden milk to babies - approved by NHS

[Heylo]

Are people aware of this?
This has gone too far. Throwing women and children under a bus is one thing. Now babies.
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-13095965/Row-hospitals-say-hormone-filled-milk-trans-women-born-male-just-good-baby-real-thing.html?ito=native_share_article-top

They're not measuring it because they know the results will be bad and will make responsible doctors sit up and say 'hell, no' to exposing infants to it.

The only way they can push this is if people don't know the answers that they should be asking.

It's the same thing as the long term impacts of puberty blockers - not doing the studies because they KNOW the results will stop their plans.

In no other field of medicine is this complete abandonment of normal principles allowed. Normally, you do research to answer reasonable questions about safety and risk. If you don't know the risk, you don't do the potentially risky thing = precautionary principle.

No child needs male breast excretions. There's formula with safety data spanning decades and there's female breast milk with safety data spanning hundreds of years.

Ye gods, even women who are taking medications known and proven to be safe in breastfeeding are rejected as milk donors because they are so precautionary about the milk given to sick newborns.

How can we live in a world where that is the case but also male fetishes are enabled to the detriment of babies in this way? The NHS spokesman putting out that statement without the evidence to back it up should quite frankly just be fired.

We already KNOW that hormone exposure can increase the risk of cancer. It's absolute lies / misinformation to say what they have if you don't have the data on hormone levels.

Also, for all those who earnestly believed that a male exclusively fed for six weeks and that a doctor then declared the infant to be perfectly healthy. I have now read two medically trained people reviewing those studies, that in two studies it has been shown that the quantity produced is drastically inadequate.

So, I really cannot see how that study that went for six weeks was even ethical! Fuck! this is mind blowing if true. That a research team never felt the need to check and validate the quantity? It could have been expressed, checked before feeding it to an infant. What the actual fuck! I know I was outraged the first few times I posted that particular study, but seeing that a second study also showed just how little was produced, I am floored that this has been allowed to get to this point.

There is no need for these studies, there is absolutely no need for this to be considered. What are they going to do? Just find another drug to administer to increase dosage ? Meanwhile, there are women being shamed for taking the medication they need while doing what their bodies have been designed to do in feeding their infants. This is truly getting more and more fucked up.

For me this conversation should start and finish with ‘why’? Why would a man want take on all those drugs and risk unknown harms to an infant in order to ‘breast’ feed. And why is there so many cheerleaders on the sidelines justifying it?

Nope, we all know that’s this is not right and the motivations behind it are deeply suspicious.

They're not measuring it because they know the results will be bad and will make responsible doctors sit up and say 'hell, no' to exposing infants to it.

Exactly.

They must think people are stupid. It's the work of a moment. Test for these five things.

Plus, as other people have said, where is the questioning of why.

Because if they are going to try and fill a man with medication so he can enjoy the experience of trying to feed babies, they are going to have to explain how they know these men aren't lactation fetishists.

Sadly the evidence is stacking up that people are this stupid. The medical director and board at that Trust. So many medics claiming TWAW etc.

Of course, ordinary people commenting under articles in the Times, Telegraph, Mail are universally repelled, recognising it for the abuse that it is. Yet someone posted upthread that "letter" supporting the man boasting of doing the same to his poor baby. And we've had the grim sight on this thread of a transactivist trying to tell us that breastfeeding our babies is a common sexual fetish amongst women.

That's how far from safeguarding and ethics this ideology is leading society.

“A leaked letter from the medical ­director of University Hospitals Sussex NHS Foundation Trust defends the practice of using drugs to induce lac­tation and enable trans women to feed babies”.

Brighton I presume.

The article did not mention the element of fetish in some cases too.

I want to see the leaked letter. Is it available anywhere?

Of course, ordinary people commenting under articles in the Times, Telegraph, Mail are universally repelled, recognising it for the abuse that it is.

That's what I'm relying on.

You obviously do to get people who have never come across the concept of a lactation fetish. But as soon as you see the lengths some of these men are going to, and the non-existent arguments for doing it, it very quickly slots into place.

Not least, their complete failure to be able to discuss it without their excitement creeping in.

Unsurprisingly. I should imagine it's almost impossible to describe deliberately breastfeeding a baby, when there is no benefit to that baby, without sounding like a creepy, narcissistic cock.

This needs stopping in its tracks.

I really see it as the first step. This will continue to be pushed. People who don't look further will only see the headlines that it is all the same and 'nothing to see here'. No toxic compounds, no fetish.

I see that this will continue to build over time until people who wish to think themselves as being 'fair' and 'liberal' will have no barriers and will shame those who point out the issues. We have seen it on these threads constantly.

People who don't know any about it, yet come and chide others for rejecting it and then rather than going and reading the links and finding more to read, or demanding that 'this isn't happening, this is just fear mongering!' Unless it is nipped in the bud, this will rumble along for years. That is the end goal. It is not an immediate action. This is normalising this action.

Normalising yet another paraphilia. By utilising people's own need to be seen as kind and tolerant.

What Helle said.

Milli Hill on the BBC's reporting of this

https://millihill.substack.com/p/dear-bbc-youve-got-your-facts-wrong

Reading milli hill's account it looks to me as if the BBC and other media did fuck all investigation into the story.

What is happening? Are they so desperate to fill 24 hour news programing that they let anything on, or have the an agenda to launder TRA misinformation?

Massive currents to the number of journalistic staff they have.

It means BBC capacity for investigative journalism and basic fact checking is massively reduced.

The role of the media should be to hold power to account, but without enough manpower to do this, the best you get is reguratated stories from other outlets or unchecked press release rewrites.

None of the reporting comments that it's only one trust saying this obvious bullshit, the rest of them aren't.

The onus is on them to prove no risk and to prove it's not paedophilia BEFORE they allow men to do this.

And they've done neither. It should be a sackable lack of professional standards.

Brilliant article by Milli Hill.

Mic drop right here;
"It’s taken me, one person, one day of reading and research to get to the bottom of it - whilst the BBC with teams of trained journalists didn’t bother. Either they were too blown away by the Stroop effect, or too captured by the idea that male people’s needs must be unquestioningly affirmed and centred in absolutely every situation, even when a newborn baby is potentially being put at risk.

Either way, it’s an absolute disgrace."

And I refer to my comment on the GB news thread that the BBC is no friend to women or children, no friend at all. It's institutional and it's why Savile was enabled, it hasn't got any better. My advice is, if you care about women's and children's rights don't pay your tv license.

That is a great article. And there's a link to the actual letter that a pp hs been so desperate to insist may not exist. One less reason to derail this important thread.

@AdamRyan

Here you go

https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Policy-Exchange-Biology-Matters-COTS-Letter.pdf

Isn’t there also someone in the BBC who has a job which effectively affords them the power to censor anything trans related they feel may come across as negative?

I think there was a thread about him a year or so ago.

Sorry I meant trans related criticism.

Here's a thread from Cath Leng looking at the history of appointments at the BBC and how there's a perfect storm that includes the journalists existing bias and the BBC rules on impartiality. This results in everyone who understands facts about sex / gender being considered to be one one side of this debate that's not a debate (ie it's pitting facts against fantasy). She also comments how, despite a veritable tsunami of court cases and incidents the LGBTetc / identity staff completely ignore them :

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1730874970216059320.html

Thank you.

So this is proof that this trust has reviewed a case study of ONE male and made their reckless recommendation.

I doubt they would ever admit that there is a massive group of male people with lactation fetishes. That letter is one that is dismissive in every way. And yes, by reducing it to "Human milk' it does completely neutralise the 'male hormone induced' aspect of it.

This is yet another aspect of the harms of using preferred pronouns and 'gender neutral' language.

Despite the constant iteration that the 'trust has children's safeguarding at heart', I don't believe it because this shows some loose language where it can be interpreted, correctly I feel, that this trust will assist in the lactation of male people and will leave it to the parents to decide.

The Trust policy on the induction of lactation advises a referral to and careful discussion with a neonatologist, who has a particular interest in medication used in pregnancy and during infant feeding, and an infant feeding midwife when induced lactation is being considered. This would involve a review of the literature available at the time and a careful discussion with the parent of the risks and benefits. The discussion would include consideration of what doses of medication are planned and at what point during gestation, as the effects of medication can vary significantly during fetal development as gestation progresses.

Just like this 'we have listened ... but we will do what our inclusion team have told us, which will be pretty much Stonewall's law' is how I read this. Or 'we know that some of you will want single sex, but well.... we are not going to guarantee it and you know.... gender reassignment... yeah?

The Trust treats all patients equally and on the basis of their health needs and acknowledges that patients for a wide variety of reasons may have a preference for being cared for by a male or female nurse or in a single sex ward and staff will always be sensitive to and mindful of the preference of patients. However, the limitations of the hospital environment and the clinical and non-clinical staffing profiles on wards and in outpatient clinics means that this is not always possible. Although, as I am sure you are also aware, gender reassignment is also a protected characteristic under the Equality Act 2010.

Platitudes.

Another article

https://www.spiked-online.com/2024/02/19/why-is-the-nhs-indulging-breastfeeding-men/

Has anyone here sent the Unherd article to the BBC?

Good idea - although I'm weary oif complaining and getting the same old dismissive lies and obfuscations back as they continue their trans / drag /MRA /anti child safeguarding obsessed narrative. 😡