Dear all:
I was intrigued by the conversations about the so-called "alternative" healer who is now coming up with a formula for babies that will be "healthy". The problem I see is that we strive to put people in little boxes whereby we classify the "other" as "not as good" or even sometimes "evil".
I find the labels of "traditional" confusing. Sometimes this is used on Lactnet to describe the "medical establishment" whatever that means as well. I tend to think of "traditional" as "historical", but even that may not be appropriate. And what really is "alternative" anyway? Breastfeeding for up to four years was called "alternative" by a New York Sunday Times piece many years ago. But really breastfeeding really "traditional"? And if we call it "modern" medicine then is it really "traditional" medicine, while "holistic" or "naturopathic" methods are "alternatives"? Actually so-called modern medicine was, at one time, the new "alternative".
In any case, I think the labels can be completely misleading. I, for one, am dubious about the so-called nutritional centers where you can find a lot of processed protein powders and concentrated "natural" vitamins and mineral supplements in that these have become a huge big business that is largely unregulated. This is a far cry from the local healers in developing areas of the world who had an in depth knowledge of the local plants and preparations. If you follow the money, I don't really see much difference between some of these large corporations and the pharmaceutical industry in that both are trying to make a profit by selling their products to a population using lots of health claims that may or may not be true. One of the so-called gurus of one of the so-called natural food centers thinks that people who are sick deserve it and happened to donate a bunch of processed protein powder for my son's school auction. Just because someone falls under a particular label doesn't mean that they are any more or less prone to bias, coercion, or corruption than any other label.
I also have always had difficulty with the term "organic". Organic in chemistry merely means that you are dealing with a chemical compound with carbon rings. I know that there are now standards for "certified organic" products. I would rather, however, know more specific information about what this really means -- for instance "pesticide free", "antibiotic free", or "free range". The fact that the formula industry can claim that a formula is "organic" is about the most ludicrous use of the term I have ever heard. This would be like claiming a cookie is organic because the flour was grown without pesticides, but then including preservatives and eggs laced from chickens with antibiotics in that same cookie.
And I also have difficulty with the fuzziness of the term "natural". Nature can kill. I think of the green Mamba snake that entered my house when I was living in what was then known as Zaire, the moldy bread that caused whole towns in Europe to hallucinate, and earthquakes (since I grew up in California).
I think the use of these terms can polarize conversations and be used to stop the critical thinking process dead in its tracks if one "believes" that those labels imply that one is "good" and the other is "bad". The same critical thinking should be applied to everything we do, despite the label that is slapped on a particular intervention as being "traditional", "alternative" or any other label . Similarly, any individual or group of individuals can be be subject to bias, coercion, and or corruption.
Best,
Susan Burger, MHS, PhD, IBCLC
***********************************************
Archives: http://community.lsoft.com/archives/LACTNET.html
To reach list owners: [log in to unmask]
Mail all list management commands to: [log in to unmask]
COMMANDS:
1. To temporarily stop your subscription write in the body of an email: set lactnet nomail
2. To start it again: set lactnet mail
3. To unsubscribe: unsubscribe lactnet
4. To get a comprehensive list of rules and directions: get lactnet welcome
|
