I'm from the south. I eat grits. I can cook some of the best greens you ever had. I can make cornbread like it's going out of style. My husband is from the north. He is rather infatuated with my ability to cook, because it's no secret, food is better in the south. It really is.
Now, The Food Network got ahold of this well known fact, and decided to capitalize on it. Business is business, after all, and food is a rather lucrative business to be in. Enter at stage right, Paula Deen, with her way exaggerated Savannah accent (Trust me, I lived in that part of GA for five years. NOBODY talks like that.) and her disgusting food that contains so much fat and sugar that she gave herself Type 2 diabetes through a lifetime of eating the crap she cooks.
Paula Deen is a walking stereotype. She's the embodiment of every crappy misconception that northerners hold of us, trotted out on national TV, for all to behold. Thank you, food network, for making every misinformed individual I encounter, automatically assume that since I hail from below the Mason Dixon (WAY below it) that I fry all my foods, have never met a vegetable, and put butter in everything. Thank you, Paula Deen for selling out, and basically becoming a caricature, in the name of earning a few bucks.
I do not like her cookware. I do not like her restaurant. (Seriously, go there. Better yet, don't. The food is awful. If you think that's southern cooking, you obviously have no idea what it's supposed to taste like. Plus, a friend of mine who knows one of the cooks there told me most of the food served there is canned.) I definitely do not like her TV show. I do not like her fake accent, or the way she speaks in cliches. Frankly, she reminds me of the fake women in the beauty salon who are so nice while you're there, but say the most awful things about you the minute you walk out. I love being from the south, but Paula Deen is the living, breathing (although not sugar metabolizing), embodiment of all the worst parts of being southern.
OK, so I'll admit something. This is for my in-laws. I also apologize to Thak's aunt, whom I totally chewed out over this. I get it. You people live up north. You really do think southern people are like Paula Deen. We're not, though, well, most of us anyway. I'm not like the stereotypes you have seen. I do cook with butter, but that's because it's better for you than margarine. I use olive oil far more. I take care to feed my kids organic and GMO-free foods. I won't touch mayonnaise with a 10 foot pole. I also would not eat most of the stuff Paula Deen cooks, for the precise reason she shouldn't. It's extremely unhealthy, and also, because most of it tastes awful, and is a complete bastardization of southern food.
Real southern foods can be found in small restaurants which are owned by chefs whose names you probably don't know, who are part of the "farm-to-table" movement that's growing throughout the south in an effort to reclaim our cuisine, as it is meant to be. In South Carolina, it's particularly popular. You may find purple hull peas over tidal rice, seasoned with bacon from a pastured hog raised just up the road. You may eat fried green heirloom tomatoes, alongside roasted free-range chicken. Maybe you will have my personal favorite, collard greens, boiled with smoked pork knuckles, and drizzled with a bit of habanero vinegar, and served alongside a delicious buttermilk cornbread, and pork chops. (Ask Thak about this meal. It's one of his favorites.) It's nothing like what Paula Deen is putting out there. It's a million times better.
Tell you what. When we get back to Georgia, why not come see for yourself? I'm tired of being pigeon holed because I'm southern. You can try Paula Deen's food, and then you can try mine. I think mine is better. At least it won't give you diabetes, even if you did eat it every day. Ask Thak how much his health has improved since he's been married to me. And you know what else? My food is every bit as southern as Paula Deen's is.
I guess I'm just sick of the Paula Deen comparisons because she's not representative of anything that I'm proud of about the south. It would be like me comparing life up north to the movie Fargo. I know how much that annoys people from up that way. This is like that. The guys in Fargo were a total caricature of people from that part of the country. That's what Paula Deen is like to us. Most people I know think she's completely ridiculous. The only thing I have in common with her is a gender and a state, and that's just how I like it.
Tuesday, January 31, 2012
Sunday, January 29, 2012
Goodbye, El Paso.
I don't know why I always do this, but having spent basically my entire adult life bouncing back and forth between GA and TX, with a little bit of FL and MO thrown in, I've noticed that when I'm about to leave a place, I always take lots of pictures of the things that really represent that place. I'll share a few of them as I take them this time. This is how I view El Paso. First, a couple of my favorite views.
This is northeast El Paso at night, as seen from the first picnic area on Transmountain Road. If you've been to El Paso, it's the one that overlooks Cohen Stadium. I particularly like this view because, even though it is a different part of the city than what we first saw, because we were coming from the opposite direction, it looks exactly like what we saw when we first arrived here three years ago. We'd been on the road for five days, moving from GA, and it was late at night. We were tired, hungry, and ready for our trip to be over. Then we rounded a corner, and saw El Paso, all lit up like this.
This one, I took last night from the little stopping area, right by the police academy on Scenic Drive. I was facing south, and if you look, you can see the tall buildings of the financial district, and behind them, the slums of Juarez, Mexico. This is one of the most interesting juxtapositions I have ever seen in my life, and if you can live here, and not see the significance of it, I just don't know what to tell you.
More later.
This is northeast El Paso at night, as seen from the first picnic area on Transmountain Road. If you've been to El Paso, it's the one that overlooks Cohen Stadium. I particularly like this view because, even though it is a different part of the city than what we first saw, because we were coming from the opposite direction, it looks exactly like what we saw when we first arrived here three years ago. We'd been on the road for five days, moving from GA, and it was late at night. We were tired, hungry, and ready for our trip to be over. Then we rounded a corner, and saw El Paso, all lit up like this.
This one, I took last night from the little stopping area, right by the police academy on Scenic Drive. I was facing south, and if you look, you can see the tall buildings of the financial district, and behind them, the slums of Juarez, Mexico. This is one of the most interesting juxtapositions I have ever seen in my life, and if you can live here, and not see the significance of it, I just don't know what to tell you.
More later.
Monday, January 23, 2012
Assignment, but not really.
There is no assignment. What they had today was a list of definite openings to choose from, and we might have actual assignments by the end of the week. We submit our official final choices from the options that were given today, by tomorrow, and then they do what they will with it.
The options we have chosen are, in this order:
Ft. Stewart
Someplace in Maryland (we're not sure if it's National Guard or Marine Corps, but it's in Maryland)
Tooele Army Depot, Tooele, Utah
Let me explain. Ft. Stewart is obvious. We want to go back. Obviously, that's job 1. Maryland is a nice location that has a lot, so we chose that one second because it's nice there. It would also be easy for Thak to transfer to a job in corporate HQ in a few years if we're already in MD. That's just a nice added benefit to that location. We chose Tooele Army Depot because it is a non-deploying position where we could stay for a few years until all these deployments stop, and then transfer somewhere else. I wanted to put that one second. Thak wanted to put it third because he doesn't like Utah all that much. I told him to trust his gut on it and do what's best for us, and that's what he did by putting Maryland ahead of Utah.
Now, here's the curve ball. You know there always is one. Well, they need two people to go to Ft. Drum, in upstate New York. It's remote, and cold, and shitty. Nobody likes that place. They HAVE TO have two people to go there, though. There are eight people in the class. Three volunteered to deploy right out of training, leaving five to assign stateside. Two have to go to Drum. If two don't volunteer, they're just going to pick two. That's 40% odds that we're going to Ft. Drum. We just have to hope that our ties to Ft. Stewart are enough to pull us there.
Now, here's the thing about Ft. Stewart. I give it about 50/50 odds right now that we can get it. The reason it's only 50/50 is because there's this other guy who is trying to get it, and he claims he has a house in Savannah (most of us think that's BS, but that's what he's telling corporate). This guy is NOT a fit for the Ft. Stewart team at all, personality-wise, and they have talked with Thak about this in the past as well. He's told them that he doesn't think this guy is a fit for the team, and exactly why so they know it's not because he's trying to get that assignment for himself. They already know that Thak is a fit for the Stewart team, because some of his references when he got hired for this job, are part of that team. They have also talked with the team there, and they have said they want Thak to come work with them. They are doing what they can. If it's enough to boost us into that assignment over this other guy, that remains to be seen. I do think our odds are good, but I'm not going to say we've got it yet.
So basically, we don't know much of anything yet, but we do have it down to four possibilities, two of them strong possibilities. Stewart and Drum are the strong possibilities. Maryland and Utah are the lesser possibilities. We may find out later this week.
The options we have chosen are, in this order:
Ft. Stewart
Someplace in Maryland (we're not sure if it's National Guard or Marine Corps, but it's in Maryland)
Tooele Army Depot, Tooele, Utah
Let me explain. Ft. Stewart is obvious. We want to go back. Obviously, that's job 1. Maryland is a nice location that has a lot, so we chose that one second because it's nice there. It would also be easy for Thak to transfer to a job in corporate HQ in a few years if we're already in MD. That's just a nice added benefit to that location. We chose Tooele Army Depot because it is a non-deploying position where we could stay for a few years until all these deployments stop, and then transfer somewhere else. I wanted to put that one second. Thak wanted to put it third because he doesn't like Utah all that much. I told him to trust his gut on it and do what's best for us, and that's what he did by putting Maryland ahead of Utah.
Now, here's the curve ball. You know there always is one. Well, they need two people to go to Ft. Drum, in upstate New York. It's remote, and cold, and shitty. Nobody likes that place. They HAVE TO have two people to go there, though. There are eight people in the class. Three volunteered to deploy right out of training, leaving five to assign stateside. Two have to go to Drum. If two don't volunteer, they're just going to pick two. That's 40% odds that we're going to Ft. Drum. We just have to hope that our ties to Ft. Stewart are enough to pull us there.
Now, here's the thing about Ft. Stewart. I give it about 50/50 odds right now that we can get it. The reason it's only 50/50 is because there's this other guy who is trying to get it, and he claims he has a house in Savannah (most of us think that's BS, but that's what he's telling corporate). This guy is NOT a fit for the Ft. Stewart team at all, personality-wise, and they have talked with Thak about this in the past as well. He's told them that he doesn't think this guy is a fit for the team, and exactly why so they know it's not because he's trying to get that assignment for himself. They already know that Thak is a fit for the Stewart team, because some of his references when he got hired for this job, are part of that team. They have also talked with the team there, and they have said they want Thak to come work with them. They are doing what they can. If it's enough to boost us into that assignment over this other guy, that remains to be seen. I do think our odds are good, but I'm not going to say we've got it yet.
So basically, we don't know much of anything yet, but we do have it down to four possibilities, two of them strong possibilities. Stewart and Drum are the strong possibilities. Maryland and Utah are the lesser possibilities. We may find out later this week.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Bebe Chai does FaceTime
Seriously, everybody who's going to be apart from their family ever, needs an iPhone. I don't know what we did before FaceTime. Oh yeah... webcam, except that Thak was never anywhere that had internet strong enough to support them, we did email... anyhow, that's not important. We have iPhones now, and OMG!!
Bebe Chai is usually in bed when we get daddy on FaceTime for Erin and Orren, and to read bedtime stories (and by read, I mean recite from memory), but yesterday, daddy was on a plane from Utah to Maryland for most of the day, so we didn't get to talk to him much since it was a direct flight with no layovers. When he got settled in Maryland and called us, Chai was still awake, so we went ahead and let Bebe Chai have his first FaceTime experience.
He loved it. Just one question. Daddy, how you got in the phone??
Bebe Chai is usually in bed when we get daddy on FaceTime for Erin and Orren, and to read bedtime stories (and by read, I mean recite from memory), but yesterday, daddy was on a plane from Utah to Maryland for most of the day, so we didn't get to talk to him much since it was a direct flight with no layovers. When he got settled in Maryland and called us, Chai was still awake, so we went ahead and let Bebe Chai have his first FaceTime experience.
He loved it. Just one question. Daddy, how you got in the phone??
Saturday, January 21, 2012
As a sidenote about food...
A friend of mine, whose son is Orren's best friend, just texted me about something that happened at the grocery store that sells all the good organic foods. They were in the checkout, and her son, Orren's friend, was having a lovely conversation with an older couple, who definitely really liked him (If you knew him, you'd understand. The kid is adorable. He's just like Orren, but blonde.) They ended up buying him some cookies to share with his brother. (His brother wasn't there, but he told them that he has a brother.)
See, stuff like that always happens at that store. It's like, every single time I go there, we see cool people, and they're always super nice. I've never gone to that store without getting complimented by at least one person (just random people, not employees) on how nice Erin and Orren are, or how cute Chai is, and people always come up to talk to them. That NEVER happens anywhere else here. Everywhere else, people really don't even look at you, and if you dare to venture into the depths known as Transmountain Walmart, at least one person will either run into you with their cart, or say something rude at some point.
Why are the people at Sprouts (formerly called Sun Harvest) so much nicer than the people everywhere else? Could it be that eating well has a positive effect on the mind?
See, stuff like that always happens at that store. It's like, every single time I go there, we see cool people, and they're always super nice. I've never gone to that store without getting complimented by at least one person (just random people, not employees) on how nice Erin and Orren are, or how cute Chai is, and people always come up to talk to them. That NEVER happens anywhere else here. Everywhere else, people really don't even look at you, and if you dare to venture into the depths known as Transmountain Walmart, at least one person will either run into you with their cart, or say something rude at some point.
Why are the people at Sprouts (formerly called Sun Harvest) so much nicer than the people everywhere else? Could it be that eating well has a positive effect on the mind?
Let's talk about food.
I've always known, theoretically, that better food made for better health. I had read all the articles about how our food supply in this country is questionable at best, and the various concerns about it. I also know how bad factory farming is, and completely disagree with these practices.
Because of all this stuff, I tried to get organic produce when possible, usually ate free-range or grass-fed meats, and tried to avoid GMO's by using GMO-free sunflower oil, organic flour, and avoiding soy. Then Thak got out of the Army, and we became poor. We could no longer afford even the gas to drive across town to the good grocery store that carries all the organic foods and free-range meats that we had become accustomed to. Even if we could have afforded the gas, we couldn't have afforded the food there. Our only sources of food, for several months, were our gardens, and what we could get from WIC (which is quite a bit when you're breastfeeding a baby, and have a toddler as well). Occasionally, I would manage to get to a farmers' market an hour away in New Mexico when Thak had drill at a nearby Reserve center (he was going anyway, so me and the kids would just ride along). At the farmers' market, I could get cheap organic produce, and that was great. Mostly, though, we had to eat factory farmed crap, because it was cheap, and it was eat that, or starve, so we ate it. This went on for several months.
A few things surprised me about this, but most of all, I was surprised by how much we got sick. Orren got many colds and viruses. His immune system obviously suffered. For a while, I was feeding him breastmilk just to try to boost his immune system any possible way I could. Erin was sick sometimes, too. I got sick several times, and that's very unusual for me. Thak even missed a couple days of work due to sickness. Even Chai got a cold once, and that's pretty rare for a breastfed baby. I know it was the food. The food we bought was dead and empty. It was just something to chew up and digest so we weren't as hungry. The only things that were anywhere near good were the things we were able to grow, and the things we got from the farmers' market. This stuff didn't feel dead, and even the squashes that grew too big and were tough in consistency, were a pleasure to eat compared to the stuff that came from the store. Don't even get me going on the meats. On the rare occasion we could afford meat, we had to buy cheaply, so it was factory-farmed. As if knowingly supporting the worst agricultural practices in history wasn't enough, the stuff doesn't taste all that good compared to the better kinds, and it's hard to eat when you know it's full of synthetic hormones and antibiotics.
I cannot tell you how hard it is to continuously eat that type of food, day in and day out, knowing that it is making you unhealthy, but also that you have no choice, because that is all you can afford.
When Thak started working for the firm he works for now, one of the first things I did was buy good foods for me and the kids. Since I cook everything from scratch, with even $100, I can feed us for a long time on organic, GMO-free foods, and even get a little bit of meat (the good kind!) If you're not picky about what kind of produce you get, you can usually find some of it on sale for really cheap. I got organic apples for $1 a pound a couple weeks ago, for example. Last week, I got organic pears for $1.25 a pound. The non-organic variety goes for more than that at Walmart, so that's quite the deal. You can find deals like that if you look for them. Anyway, between doing that, and cooking from scratch, I was able to get me and the kids back on a diet of good foods before long. Our health has improved drastically, just as one would expect. Erin did get sick earlier this week, but she fought it off in record time, and so far, nobody else has gotten what she had (knock on wood).
The other thing that really gets me is how different the foods are, just in general. Take sweet potatoes, for example. We go through sweet potatoes like crazy because all three kids just love them. The non-organic sweet potatoes that we were buying from Walmart, were more of a mushy consistency when baked than the organic sweet potatoes we get from Sprouts or from our CSA. The organic ones have more texture, and take a little longer to bake. They don't have as long a shelf life either (which is a good thing in my opinion. Produce that lasts indefinitely on the shelf creeps me out.) Since 72% of our nation's food supply is GMO, I can only assume the non-organic sweet potatoes we were getting, were GMO. Broccoli is another one. We go through tons of broccoli, because it's currently Chai's favorite food in the entire world. The conventional broccoli has so much less texture than the organic broccoli, and once again, is a little *too* shelf-stable.
Now, my main thing is, you can't change form without changing function. Everyone with any background at all in engineering knows that. So basically, these foods that are mass marketed to people, and that most people eat (many times, because that is what they can afford) have been modified to make them shelf stable forever. What is that doing to their nutritional value? There could well be some adverse side effects to eating them. They are not plants we have evolved to be able to eat, like the non-GMO varieties are. What are these things doing to our systems? After eating conventional foods for a few months, my entire family's immune systems were shot. That SHOULD NOT be the case. Why is it that only those who are either fairly well off, or fairly resourceful, can afford to be healthy? That's crap. I honestly believe the conventional agriculture industry is killing the average American citizen, slowly but surely.
What I want to know is how most of Europe can have way higher food standards, and still manage to make it, but here in the US, we have such low food standards. Why is that? Why can't we demand that this GMO stuff be put to a halt, that organic produce be available everywhere, that synthetic hormones see their way out of farming? That's not asking much, and it would make a huge difference.
Because of all this stuff, I tried to get organic produce when possible, usually ate free-range or grass-fed meats, and tried to avoid GMO's by using GMO-free sunflower oil, organic flour, and avoiding soy. Then Thak got out of the Army, and we became poor. We could no longer afford even the gas to drive across town to the good grocery store that carries all the organic foods and free-range meats that we had become accustomed to. Even if we could have afforded the gas, we couldn't have afforded the food there. Our only sources of food, for several months, were our gardens, and what we could get from WIC (which is quite a bit when you're breastfeeding a baby, and have a toddler as well). Occasionally, I would manage to get to a farmers' market an hour away in New Mexico when Thak had drill at a nearby Reserve center (he was going anyway, so me and the kids would just ride along). At the farmers' market, I could get cheap organic produce, and that was great. Mostly, though, we had to eat factory farmed crap, because it was cheap, and it was eat that, or starve, so we ate it. This went on for several months.
A few things surprised me about this, but most of all, I was surprised by how much we got sick. Orren got many colds and viruses. His immune system obviously suffered. For a while, I was feeding him breastmilk just to try to boost his immune system any possible way I could. Erin was sick sometimes, too. I got sick several times, and that's very unusual for me. Thak even missed a couple days of work due to sickness. Even Chai got a cold once, and that's pretty rare for a breastfed baby. I know it was the food. The food we bought was dead and empty. It was just something to chew up and digest so we weren't as hungry. The only things that were anywhere near good were the things we were able to grow, and the things we got from the farmers' market. This stuff didn't feel dead, and even the squashes that grew too big and were tough in consistency, were a pleasure to eat compared to the stuff that came from the store. Don't even get me going on the meats. On the rare occasion we could afford meat, we had to buy cheaply, so it was factory-farmed. As if knowingly supporting the worst agricultural practices in history wasn't enough, the stuff doesn't taste all that good compared to the better kinds, and it's hard to eat when you know it's full of synthetic hormones and antibiotics.
I cannot tell you how hard it is to continuously eat that type of food, day in and day out, knowing that it is making you unhealthy, but also that you have no choice, because that is all you can afford.
When Thak started working for the firm he works for now, one of the first things I did was buy good foods for me and the kids. Since I cook everything from scratch, with even $100, I can feed us for a long time on organic, GMO-free foods, and even get a little bit of meat (the good kind!) If you're not picky about what kind of produce you get, you can usually find some of it on sale for really cheap. I got organic apples for $1 a pound a couple weeks ago, for example. Last week, I got organic pears for $1.25 a pound. The non-organic variety goes for more than that at Walmart, so that's quite the deal. You can find deals like that if you look for them. Anyway, between doing that, and cooking from scratch, I was able to get me and the kids back on a diet of good foods before long. Our health has improved drastically, just as one would expect. Erin did get sick earlier this week, but she fought it off in record time, and so far, nobody else has gotten what she had (knock on wood).
The other thing that really gets me is how different the foods are, just in general. Take sweet potatoes, for example. We go through sweet potatoes like crazy because all three kids just love them. The non-organic sweet potatoes that we were buying from Walmart, were more of a mushy consistency when baked than the organic sweet potatoes we get from Sprouts or from our CSA. The organic ones have more texture, and take a little longer to bake. They don't have as long a shelf life either (which is a good thing in my opinion. Produce that lasts indefinitely on the shelf creeps me out.) Since 72% of our nation's food supply is GMO, I can only assume the non-organic sweet potatoes we were getting, were GMO. Broccoli is another one. We go through tons of broccoli, because it's currently Chai's favorite food in the entire world. The conventional broccoli has so much less texture than the organic broccoli, and once again, is a little *too* shelf-stable.
Now, my main thing is, you can't change form without changing function. Everyone with any background at all in engineering knows that. So basically, these foods that are mass marketed to people, and that most people eat (many times, because that is what they can afford) have been modified to make them shelf stable forever. What is that doing to their nutritional value? There could well be some adverse side effects to eating them. They are not plants we have evolved to be able to eat, like the non-GMO varieties are. What are these things doing to our systems? After eating conventional foods for a few months, my entire family's immune systems were shot. That SHOULD NOT be the case. Why is it that only those who are either fairly well off, or fairly resourceful, can afford to be healthy? That's crap. I honestly believe the conventional agriculture industry is killing the average American citizen, slowly but surely.
What I want to know is how most of Europe can have way higher food standards, and still manage to make it, but here in the US, we have such low food standards. Why is that? Why can't we demand that this GMO stuff be put to a halt, that organic produce be available everywhere, that synthetic hormones see their way out of farming? That's not asking much, and it would make a huge difference.
Wednesday, January 18, 2012
Just do me a favor.
If you're going to cut your baby, despite having the knowledge that it's unnecessary, that there is no way to properly anesthetize a baby, that they feel extreme pain, that it alters their brain wave patterns, that it carries risks including death... DON'T TELL ME ABOUT IT!! If you know all that stuff (and if you know me, you know that stuff) and you still decide to cosmetically alter your perfect little baby to suit your own preferences, then at least have the courtesy to let those of us who know better, live in blissful ignorance.
I try to save them all, but like anyone else, I do not succeed in that. Another little baby I could not save will be strapped into a circumstraint tomorrow morning, and mutilated. I literally feel sick every time I think of this thing happening in our society, in this very country... right down the road from me. It is just so cruel and barbaric. I walk among people who do this to babies. It just blows my mind. How can they think it's ok? How can they honestly believe it's their choice to make? The only ones I can even remotely begin to understand are the ones who do it for religious reasons. I still don't condone the practice, but I can understand their reasoning for doing it. The vast majority are not doing this for religious reasons, though.
I've known it was wrong ever since I started researching it when I was pregnant with Erin, but until I had a couple of sons, it was just a theoretical thing. There's a vast ocean of difference between the abstract, "Would you cut a baby?" and the very concrete, "Would you cut Orren and Chaiyo?" It was never so much as a consideration to cut our boys. It literally never crossed our minds. When Orren was born, and we refused the Vitamin K injection, our midwife asked us if we were planning to have him circumcised. I was surprised by how visceral my reaction was. I held Orren a little tighter, and said, "Absolutely NOT!" She laughed, and commended us on our wonderful choice to keep our son whole and perfect. I laughed at my reaction, but in truth, you just don't know how much this whole circumcision thing flies in the face of every parental instinct out there, until you hold your son for the first time, and see how amazing and beautiful he is, and then have someone ask you if you want to cut a piece off him. My heart literally skipped a beat just to think of the idea.
It's that moment that comes back to me every time someone talks about getting their son circumcised. The thing that kills me the most is that most of them talk about it in such a cavalier way, like in the same tone that they would use if they were telling me they were going to hit Albertson's on the way home for a gallon of milk. Again, while I still don't condone the practice at all, I have a lot more respect for parents who at least take it seriously. While I have no desire to hear about the plans for a bris, I would rather hear about that than this other crap, because at least some thought goes into it, and it's not just one more box to check before going home. The tone of these people's comments about getting it done just show that they haven't thought it through.
In light of this, here are some facts about routine infant circumcision that every parent should know:
FACT: More neonates (babies 4 weeks or younger) die of complications from circumcision every year than SIDS and car accidents combined. 117 babies died of circumcision related complications in the US last year.
FACT: The US Navy released a study in 2011 showing no difference in disease transmission rates based on circumcision status.
FACT: During circumcision, 20,000 nerve endings are severed, and the amount of skin removed would be equivalent to the size of a postcard if removed from an adult and laid out flat.
FACT: Plastibel is not cut-free or painless. The foreskin is fused to the glans until the age of roughly 10 years old, so it must be ripped away (think of ripping a fingernail from the nail bed. It's the same idea.), then crushed, and tied with a string until it falls off. Does that sound painless to you?
FACT: The EMLA cream that doctors often tell parents is used to numb the baby for the procedure, carries a label specifically saying that it is NOT for use during circumcision, and that it is not an adequate anesthetic for such things. If your doctor told you that your baby would be anesthetized with that stuff, he is lying.
FACT: After he's done cutting it off, the doctor will then sell your son's foreskin to a cosmetic company. Do you want your son to suffer so that Oprah can have her $500 an ounce face cream? (Yes, Oprah uses face cream that contains cells from human baby foreskins. The company substantiates this claim.)
FACT: It is more work to take care of a circumcised baby than an intact one. For an intact boy, you just wipe like a finger. Only clean what's seen. Forcible retraction is harmful, studies show, so don't do it. When you circumcise, you have to keep an open wound clean, while it resides in a diaper 24 hours a day.
FACT: Intactivists are obsessed with one thing only, HUMAN RIGHTS. It doesn't matter what part of the body it was customary to cut off without the consent of the person whose body it is. If it were earlobe removal that we were talking about here, we'd be just as against it.
Don't cut babies. It's a really shitty thing to do.
At very least, if you take all this information, read all the studies that are out there, and still decide, for whatever unfathomable reason, to do this, I do not want to know about it. It just makes me feel awful, and I will never look at you the same way again. Maybe this will change when my boys are older, and our decision on this isn't so fresh, but right now, as I have these two little boys, who are so perfect, it's just offensive that there are so many people who would have cut them to shreds just for being born male. My mind simply cannot comprehend how someone can reconcile that decision in absence of religious reasons.
I try to save them all, but like anyone else, I do not succeed in that. Another little baby I could not save will be strapped into a circumstraint tomorrow morning, and mutilated. I literally feel sick every time I think of this thing happening in our society, in this very country... right down the road from me. It is just so cruel and barbaric. I walk among people who do this to babies. It just blows my mind. How can they think it's ok? How can they honestly believe it's their choice to make? The only ones I can even remotely begin to understand are the ones who do it for religious reasons. I still don't condone the practice, but I can understand their reasoning for doing it. The vast majority are not doing this for religious reasons, though.
I've known it was wrong ever since I started researching it when I was pregnant with Erin, but until I had a couple of sons, it was just a theoretical thing. There's a vast ocean of difference between the abstract, "Would you cut a baby?" and the very concrete, "Would you cut Orren and Chaiyo?" It was never so much as a consideration to cut our boys. It literally never crossed our minds. When Orren was born, and we refused the Vitamin K injection, our midwife asked us if we were planning to have him circumcised. I was surprised by how visceral my reaction was. I held Orren a little tighter, and said, "Absolutely NOT!" She laughed, and commended us on our wonderful choice to keep our son whole and perfect. I laughed at my reaction, but in truth, you just don't know how much this whole circumcision thing flies in the face of every parental instinct out there, until you hold your son for the first time, and see how amazing and beautiful he is, and then have someone ask you if you want to cut a piece off him. My heart literally skipped a beat just to think of the idea.
It's that moment that comes back to me every time someone talks about getting their son circumcised. The thing that kills me the most is that most of them talk about it in such a cavalier way, like in the same tone that they would use if they were telling me they were going to hit Albertson's on the way home for a gallon of milk. Again, while I still don't condone the practice at all, I have a lot more respect for parents who at least take it seriously. While I have no desire to hear about the plans for a bris, I would rather hear about that than this other crap, because at least some thought goes into it, and it's not just one more box to check before going home. The tone of these people's comments about getting it done just show that they haven't thought it through.
In light of this, here are some facts about routine infant circumcision that every parent should know:
FACT: More neonates (babies 4 weeks or younger) die of complications from circumcision every year than SIDS and car accidents combined. 117 babies died of circumcision related complications in the US last year.
FACT: The US Navy released a study in 2011 showing no difference in disease transmission rates based on circumcision status.
FACT: During circumcision, 20,000 nerve endings are severed, and the amount of skin removed would be equivalent to the size of a postcard if removed from an adult and laid out flat.
FACT: Plastibel is not cut-free or painless. The foreskin is fused to the glans until the age of roughly 10 years old, so it must be ripped away (think of ripping a fingernail from the nail bed. It's the same idea.), then crushed, and tied with a string until it falls off. Does that sound painless to you?
FACT: The EMLA cream that doctors often tell parents is used to numb the baby for the procedure, carries a label specifically saying that it is NOT for use during circumcision, and that it is not an adequate anesthetic for such things. If your doctor told you that your baby would be anesthetized with that stuff, he is lying.
FACT: After he's done cutting it off, the doctor will then sell your son's foreskin to a cosmetic company. Do you want your son to suffer so that Oprah can have her $500 an ounce face cream? (Yes, Oprah uses face cream that contains cells from human baby foreskins. The company substantiates this claim.)
FACT: It is more work to take care of a circumcised baby than an intact one. For an intact boy, you just wipe like a finger. Only clean what's seen. Forcible retraction is harmful, studies show, so don't do it. When you circumcise, you have to keep an open wound clean, while it resides in a diaper 24 hours a day.
FACT: Intactivists are obsessed with one thing only, HUMAN RIGHTS. It doesn't matter what part of the body it was customary to cut off without the consent of the person whose body it is. If it were earlobe removal that we were talking about here, we'd be just as against it.
Don't cut babies. It's a really shitty thing to do.
At very least, if you take all this information, read all the studies that are out there, and still decide, for whatever unfathomable reason, to do this, I do not want to know about it. It just makes me feel awful, and I will never look at you the same way again. Maybe this will change when my boys are older, and our decision on this isn't so fresh, but right now, as I have these two little boys, who are so perfect, it's just offensive that there are so many people who would have cut them to shreds just for being born male. My mind simply cannot comprehend how someone can reconcile that decision in absence of religious reasons.
Monday, January 16, 2012
Hey white girl! Yeah, you with the Asian husband! Listen up!
I've been here in White Girl With Asian Husband Land for close to 8 years now, and spent about half of that helping to run the world's most successful website for our kind, which had, before its demise, over 20,000 members. (Yeah... didn't know that about me, did you? It's true. That's not what I'm here to discuss, though.) Anyhow, over the course of all that time and experience, I've made a few observations, as one may imagine. Today, I'm just going to talk about one of them, but it's a really freakin important one, so listen up, ESPECIALLY if you haven't reproduced yet.
I've just got to say it. WHAT THE FCUK is up with the names?!! I'm not talking about ethnic names (obviously, considering I'm Chaiyo's mom), or old school uncommon names (again, obviously, since I'm also Orren's mom), or even stupid names straight off the Top 20 Most Popular names list. No, I don't have a problem with any of that. What I have noticed that is disturbing, though, is that at least half the white girls I know who have babies by an Asian man, whether he's their husband, their boyfriend, or some random guy they met in a bar 9 months ago, name their kids the worst things. I'm talking straight-up dog names.
Is this some kind of backlash against the pushing that so many Asian parents are notorious for doing so that their kids succeed at all costs? Admittedly, the Asian guys who end up with white wives are usually the rebellious sort. Those who aren't, in overwhelming numbers, end up with someone of their own ethnicity, many times hand picked by family (Don't believe me? I'll show you Thak's buddy's wedding pictures from a few months ago. That was special.) Let's also not forget that a significant number of white girls do experience some backlash from their families, and maybe even friends, when they date or marry outside their race, so having an Asian husband does require some degree of rebellion in some cases (not mine, but others). Anyhow, maybe this trend toward these horrible names, is just another way for these already somewhat rebellious people to be even more rebellious. Maybe naming your kid something like Blaze, or Maverick, or Stryker is just the piece de resistance in their gigantic "up yours!" to their traditional families.
Maybe, in some cases, there's not rebellion in it after all. Another thing I've noticed about the Asian guy white girl crowd is that a great many of them see themselves as very progressive. Maybe they think that regular human names are just so last generation, and went out of style with miscegenation laws and segregated high schools. Apparently, many celebrities have gotten on this crazy name bandwagon, too... Maybe these people think they're just doing like their favorite celebrities by naming their kids crazy things.
I just wonder what they expect to accomplish by this. I can tell you why my kids have the names they have. Both of my boys have an English name and a Thai name. Orren's English name is Orren, and his Thai name is Kiet. Chaiyo's Thai name is Chaiyo, and his English name is David. It was important to Thak that his kids have Thai names, and I think that's understandable, and makes sense, because their names represent their heritage. (Although I'm really glad we don't plan on more kids, because while we have an awesome girl name picked out, Thai boys' names are very difficult, and the next son would definitely end up Thaksin Jr, for lack of other half decent options. In general, though, I am very supportive of ethnic naming. I like it. I think it's a way to sort of think outside the box, while still giving the kid a respectable name.
This other crap, though, I just want to ask these parents what they were thinking. Put your child's name behind the title "Senator", and see if it makes a damned bit of sense. Orren and Chaiyo are as convincing in the Senate chambers as they are on the playground. Is Blaze?
Think before you name. I have no idea why this is so common in Asian Guy White Girl Land, but it is. I will just say, there is a definitive line that stands between creative and idiotic. It is best to make sure you are standing on the side you think you are.
I've just got to say it. WHAT THE FCUK is up with the names?!! I'm not talking about ethnic names (obviously, considering I'm Chaiyo's mom), or old school uncommon names (again, obviously, since I'm also Orren's mom), or even stupid names straight off the Top 20 Most Popular names list. No, I don't have a problem with any of that. What I have noticed that is disturbing, though, is that at least half the white girls I know who have babies by an Asian man, whether he's their husband, their boyfriend, or some random guy they met in a bar 9 months ago, name their kids the worst things. I'm talking straight-up dog names.
Is this some kind of backlash against the pushing that so many Asian parents are notorious for doing so that their kids succeed at all costs? Admittedly, the Asian guys who end up with white wives are usually the rebellious sort. Those who aren't, in overwhelming numbers, end up with someone of their own ethnicity, many times hand picked by family (Don't believe me? I'll show you Thak's buddy's wedding pictures from a few months ago. That was special.) Let's also not forget that a significant number of white girls do experience some backlash from their families, and maybe even friends, when they date or marry outside their race, so having an Asian husband does require some degree of rebellion in some cases (not mine, but others). Anyhow, maybe this trend toward these horrible names, is just another way for these already somewhat rebellious people to be even more rebellious. Maybe naming your kid something like Blaze, or Maverick, or Stryker is just the piece de resistance in their gigantic "up yours!" to their traditional families.
Maybe, in some cases, there's not rebellion in it after all. Another thing I've noticed about the Asian guy white girl crowd is that a great many of them see themselves as very progressive. Maybe they think that regular human names are just so last generation, and went out of style with miscegenation laws and segregated high schools. Apparently, many celebrities have gotten on this crazy name bandwagon, too... Maybe these people think they're just doing like their favorite celebrities by naming their kids crazy things.
I just wonder what they expect to accomplish by this. I can tell you why my kids have the names they have. Both of my boys have an English name and a Thai name. Orren's English name is Orren, and his Thai name is Kiet. Chaiyo's Thai name is Chaiyo, and his English name is David. It was important to Thak that his kids have Thai names, and I think that's understandable, and makes sense, because their names represent their heritage. (Although I'm really glad we don't plan on more kids, because while we have an awesome girl name picked out, Thai boys' names are very difficult, and the next son would definitely end up Thaksin Jr, for lack of other half decent options. In general, though, I am very supportive of ethnic naming. I like it. I think it's a way to sort of think outside the box, while still giving the kid a respectable name.
This other crap, though, I just want to ask these parents what they were thinking. Put your child's name behind the title "Senator", and see if it makes a damned bit of sense. Orren and Chaiyo are as convincing in the Senate chambers as they are on the playground. Is Blaze?
Think before you name. I have no idea why this is so common in Asian Guy White Girl Land, but it is. I will just say, there is a definitive line that stands between creative and idiotic. It is best to make sure you are standing on the side you think you are.
Friday, January 13, 2012
Let's talk about vaccines.
Please read this short, yet very telling, article. Click here.
I got this from my friend, who also happens to be my La Leche League leader (not that that has anything to do with vaccinations), this morning. I found it so interesting that I ran it up my virtual flag pole, just to see who would salute. I also came out publicly with the fact that Chai 100% vaccine-free. I found the comments I got very interesting.
Most of all, I was very pleased that nobody told me I was endangering Chai by not vaccinating him yet. As you can see in the article, even this very pro-vaccine immunologist states that babies can't even produce the antibodies that vaccines are meant to stimulate production of, when they're under a year old, so vaccinating prior to a year is really pointless. Seeing that I got absolutely no "You suck at life and you're crazy!" comments (of which I usually get at least a few on my more controversial posts), shows that everyone at least read the article, and that was my point in posting it anyway.
What I did get were a lot of questions about whether I would vaccinate Chai after he was a year old. These, I answered very frankly, that I am working on choosing a vaccination schedule I can feel confident in, and am currently considering using the Finnish vaccination schedule, but that my understanding of this issue is a work in progress.
Vaccines are sort of my Achilles heel as a parent. I have a very solid understanding of a lot of topics, but the vaccine issue troubles me, and always has. Even when Erin was a baby, before I knew it was my right to refuse vaccines, or to make my own schedule for them, I didn't feel right about the whole thing. I felt like there had to be a better way. Even then, my gut feeling was telling me that it wasn't right to give all these vaccines to tiny little babies. When Erin was 1, I started to refuse some of the vaccinations, most notably, the chicken pox vaccine. I thought to myself, "Why would anyone bother to vaccinate for chicken pox? That's not even that bad an illness."
That brings me to my next point. Some of the comments I got were from people telling me that they knew someone who had Measles, Mumps, Hepatitis A, or Tuberculosis, so they were vaccinating on that basis. Fair enough, but even with my understanding of the vaccine issue not being quite where I want it to be yet, I see a really notable flaw in this reasoning.
First of all, the US does not administer a TB vaccine. Canada does, but we don't. The TB test that the doctors do here is not a vaccine against TB. People need to understand that even with every vaccine on the US market coursing through their veins, they are not immune to tuberculosis. I don't blame these people for their lack of understanding. I blame vaccine marketing for making people believe they're invincible because they got a needle in their arm.
Second, let's look at the other diseases mentioned above. They were measles, mumps, and hep a.
Click here for a list of measles symptoms from the Mayo Clinic.
Click here for mumps symptoms (this is also from Mayo).
Click here for symptoms of hepatitis a (Mayo again).
Of those three, Hep A is the most severe, but still not this black plague of death that people would have us believe it is. What's more, it's a rather uncommon vaccine to get, and is only routinely given in certain regions (like where I live). The MMR vaccine is pretty much ubiquitous here in the US, and in many other countries, and has been connected to all kinds of horrible health consequences, yet the diseases it immunizes against really aren't that bad. What the hell?
THIS is why I stopped vaccinating until I can make some sense of this whole issue. We are pumping our kids full of all kinds of horrible chemicals, including known carcinogens, to prevent them from getting diseases that really weren't all that bad in the first place. What's more, we're doing it when they are so young that they are particularly vulnerable to these toxins, AND the real kicker in that is that the things don't even work at that age!! So we're pumping our kids full of toxic sludge for NOTHING, and then for minimal benefit, with unknown risk. No thanks.
Will I vaccinate again in the future? More than likely, yes. I want to be sure I know what I'm doing with it, though. I don't want to get pushed around by a pediatrician like I did when Orren was a baby, and I attempted a delayed and selective vaccination schedule. I want to get it right this time, and until I do, nobody in this family is getting vaccinated against anything.
I leave you with two thoughts. First of all, the other night, a commercial came on the radio, the goal of which was to scare parents into vaccinating. At the end of it, it said, "A message from the American Academy of Pediatrics, sponsored by Synofi Pasteur." Do you see what I see? The people who make the product teamed up with the people who get paid to administer the product, to use fear mongering, to hawk the product to the masses. This is why I'm skeptical of doctors. It's an industry. They are in it to make a profit, and they are way too linked in with the pharmaceutical companies. Can I get an honest message that WASN'T paid for by somebody who's going to try to sell me something in a syringe?!!
And finally, this.
I got this from my friend, who also happens to be my La Leche League leader (not that that has anything to do with vaccinations), this morning. I found it so interesting that I ran it up my virtual flag pole, just to see who would salute. I also came out publicly with the fact that Chai 100% vaccine-free. I found the comments I got very interesting.
Most of all, I was very pleased that nobody told me I was endangering Chai by not vaccinating him yet. As you can see in the article, even this very pro-vaccine immunologist states that babies can't even produce the antibodies that vaccines are meant to stimulate production of, when they're under a year old, so vaccinating prior to a year is really pointless. Seeing that I got absolutely no "You suck at life and you're crazy!" comments (of which I usually get at least a few on my more controversial posts), shows that everyone at least read the article, and that was my point in posting it anyway.
What I did get were a lot of questions about whether I would vaccinate Chai after he was a year old. These, I answered very frankly, that I am working on choosing a vaccination schedule I can feel confident in, and am currently considering using the Finnish vaccination schedule, but that my understanding of this issue is a work in progress.
Vaccines are sort of my Achilles heel as a parent. I have a very solid understanding of a lot of topics, but the vaccine issue troubles me, and always has. Even when Erin was a baby, before I knew it was my right to refuse vaccines, or to make my own schedule for them, I didn't feel right about the whole thing. I felt like there had to be a better way. Even then, my gut feeling was telling me that it wasn't right to give all these vaccines to tiny little babies. When Erin was 1, I started to refuse some of the vaccinations, most notably, the chicken pox vaccine. I thought to myself, "Why would anyone bother to vaccinate for chicken pox? That's not even that bad an illness."
That brings me to my next point. Some of the comments I got were from people telling me that they knew someone who had Measles, Mumps, Hepatitis A, or Tuberculosis, so they were vaccinating on that basis. Fair enough, but even with my understanding of the vaccine issue not being quite where I want it to be yet, I see a really notable flaw in this reasoning.
First of all, the US does not administer a TB vaccine. Canada does, but we don't. The TB test that the doctors do here is not a vaccine against TB. People need to understand that even with every vaccine on the US market coursing through their veins, they are not immune to tuberculosis. I don't blame these people for their lack of understanding. I blame vaccine marketing for making people believe they're invincible because they got a needle in their arm.
Second, let's look at the other diseases mentioned above. They were measles, mumps, and hep a.
Click here for a list of measles symptoms from the Mayo Clinic.
Click here for mumps symptoms (this is also from Mayo).
Click here for symptoms of hepatitis a (Mayo again).
Of those three, Hep A is the most severe, but still not this black plague of death that people would have us believe it is. What's more, it's a rather uncommon vaccine to get, and is only routinely given in certain regions (like where I live). The MMR vaccine is pretty much ubiquitous here in the US, and in many other countries, and has been connected to all kinds of horrible health consequences, yet the diseases it immunizes against really aren't that bad. What the hell?
THIS is why I stopped vaccinating until I can make some sense of this whole issue. We are pumping our kids full of all kinds of horrible chemicals, including known carcinogens, to prevent them from getting diseases that really weren't all that bad in the first place. What's more, we're doing it when they are so young that they are particularly vulnerable to these toxins, AND the real kicker in that is that the things don't even work at that age!! So we're pumping our kids full of toxic sludge for NOTHING, and then for minimal benefit, with unknown risk. No thanks.
Will I vaccinate again in the future? More than likely, yes. I want to be sure I know what I'm doing with it, though. I don't want to get pushed around by a pediatrician like I did when Orren was a baby, and I attempted a delayed and selective vaccination schedule. I want to get it right this time, and until I do, nobody in this family is getting vaccinated against anything.
I leave you with two thoughts. First of all, the other night, a commercial came on the radio, the goal of which was to scare parents into vaccinating. At the end of it, it said, "A message from the American Academy of Pediatrics, sponsored by Synofi Pasteur." Do you see what I see? The people who make the product teamed up with the people who get paid to administer the product, to use fear mongering, to hawk the product to the masses. This is why I'm skeptical of doctors. It's an industry. They are in it to make a profit, and they are way too linked in with the pharmaceutical companies. Can I get an honest message that WASN'T paid for by somebody who's going to try to sell me something in a syringe?!!
And finally, this.
Tuesday, January 10, 2012
Erin hates her hair.
Erin hates how frizzy her hair is. I know the feeling. I hated my hair until the day I discovered flat ironing. I think I was like 23 then. No joke.
My first thought was that it was simple enough, I'd just flat iron her hair, too. Then I remembered, I nurse a baby for at least half the night, then drag my tired ass out of bed, make breakfast for all 3 kids and some coffee for myself, then get them all dressed, myself dressed, check all Erin's crap for school, and then get us all out the door by 7:15. I don't even have time to eat breakfast myself, far less flat iron my kid's hair.
Then it came to me via Pinterest. Sock bun curls. Apparently, the trick every female soldier knows has now caught on in the private sector! Well, I kicked myself for not thinking of it sooner. You see, in the Army, we wear something called a sock bun a lot. Most people with a female drill sergeant will learn it before basic is out. I did. Well, when you take your hair down at the end of the duty day, it looks pretty good, and only needs a little bit of shaking out and poofing up before it's passable for most any cantina's happy hour. Well, now more fashion forward civilian girls have taken our old military favorite, loosened it up slightly, and made it into a wonderful styling method!!
I knew this was our answer. So here's Erin, with a loose sock bun for tonight, and hopefully lovely princess-like curls tomorrow. Who said I never learned anything useful in the Army...
My first thought was that it was simple enough, I'd just flat iron her hair, too. Then I remembered, I nurse a baby for at least half the night, then drag my tired ass out of bed, make breakfast for all 3 kids and some coffee for myself, then get them all dressed, myself dressed, check all Erin's crap for school, and then get us all out the door by 7:15. I don't even have time to eat breakfast myself, far less flat iron my kid's hair.
Then it came to me via Pinterest. Sock bun curls. Apparently, the trick every female soldier knows has now caught on in the private sector! Well, I kicked myself for not thinking of it sooner. You see, in the Army, we wear something called a sock bun a lot. Most people with a female drill sergeant will learn it before basic is out. I did. Well, when you take your hair down at the end of the duty day, it looks pretty good, and only needs a little bit of shaking out and poofing up before it's passable for most any cantina's happy hour. Well, now more fashion forward civilian girls have taken our old military favorite, loosened it up slightly, and made it into a wonderful styling method!!
I knew this was our answer. So here's Erin, with a loose sock bun for tonight, and hopefully lovely princess-like curls tomorrow. Who said I never learned anything useful in the Army...
On choosing a pediatrician
One of our Ft. Bliss wives asked recently on an online group, how other moms go about choosing a pediatrician. That's a fair question, and I'm glad she asked. Most military families just haul their kids on post, and then complain when they aren't a fit for whatever doctor they're assigned at random. Still others take other people's word for what doctor is good, not taking into account that they may have completely different priorities as parents. While this group does better than the former, it's not by a lot. The fact that this woman even wants to interview pediatricians before her baby is born really speaks highly of her commitment to finding the right one. I've gotta love that.
Now, the thing I found very strange was the replies. The most common things mentioned were wait time, after hours procedures, what hospital they admit patients to when necessary, and what the office looks like. My list looked freakish by comparison, not that I mind. I was just surprised that not one person actually mentioned anything about the actual practice of medicine, or the way the doctor does that, in their list of things they look for. I now understand how so many parents get really crappy advice from their pediatricians. Pretty much anyone with a pretty office, separate waiting rooms for sick and well patients, and an efficient office staff, can be considered the best doctor in town, even if their practices are based on things that haven't been considered best practice in at least 20 years. I think that's ridiculous. I think parents need to ask for more in a pediatrician than a pretty waiting room and a short time spent there. This is my list of priorities for a pediatrician:
These are my MUST HAVES:
-Breastfeeding supportive
-Not obsessed with growth charts, and aware that the AAP growth charts are based on formula fed babies. Willing to measure my babies by the WHO growth chart, if any chart at all.
-Homebirth supportive
-OK with alternative vaccination practices
-Willing to use prescription medication as a last resort
-Intact-friendly, aware of proper care and normal development of non-circumcised boys.
These are my NICE TO HAVES:
-Open to homeopathic and holistic remedies
-No formula company merchandise around the office (a doctor who is receiving kickbacks from the formula companies is a lot more likely to push supplementing)
-Doesn't mind if parents don't want to do all the standard well baby visits.
-Supports attachment parenting practices
-Promotes best practice when it comes to carseat safety
Now, I understand that not everybody has the same priorities as I have, so here is a list of general questions I think new parents should consider asking pediatricians they are interviewing:
1) Under what circumstances do you think prescription medication is necessary?
Think about what you would prefer. Do you view medication as a last resort in your own life, or do you medicate for everything? What do you feel most comfortable doing with your baby?
2) (If having a boy) What is your view on circumcision?
You want to know this if you don't plan on it because if you have some cut-happy doctor who thinks it's the greatest thing ever, they're probably not at all intact-friendly. If you do plan on doing it, please reconsider. No, but really, if you do plan on it, you probably don't want a doctor who's a card carrying member of Intact America.
3) What's your view on vaccinations?
Again, this is a topic parents need to research, and figure out what they want to do with it. It's really important that your pediatrician at least accepts your views, even if they don't totally agree.
4) What alternative medical practices do you support the use of?
Homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture... If any of these are your cup of tea, you want to make sure you have a pediatrician who doesn't think they're the devil.
5) Under what circumstances do you think parents should bring their sick kids in to see you?
You want to know that their opinion on this lines up with yours.
6) What's your opinion on breastfeeding? What about breastfeeding past infancy?
7) What are your procedures for after hours calls?
8) How may other doctors and nurse practitioners are in this practice?
9) What's the average time spent in the waiting room?
10) Do you have separate waiting areas for sick and well patients?
Now, the thing I found very strange was the replies. The most common things mentioned were wait time, after hours procedures, what hospital they admit patients to when necessary, and what the office looks like. My list looked freakish by comparison, not that I mind. I was just surprised that not one person actually mentioned anything about the actual practice of medicine, or the way the doctor does that, in their list of things they look for. I now understand how so many parents get really crappy advice from their pediatricians. Pretty much anyone with a pretty office, separate waiting rooms for sick and well patients, and an efficient office staff, can be considered the best doctor in town, even if their practices are based on things that haven't been considered best practice in at least 20 years. I think that's ridiculous. I think parents need to ask for more in a pediatrician than a pretty waiting room and a short time spent there. This is my list of priorities for a pediatrician:
These are my MUST HAVES:
-Breastfeeding supportive
-Not obsessed with growth charts, and aware that the AAP growth charts are based on formula fed babies. Willing to measure my babies by the WHO growth chart, if any chart at all.
-Homebirth supportive
-OK with alternative vaccination practices
-Willing to use prescription medication as a last resort
-Intact-friendly, aware of proper care and normal development of non-circumcised boys.
These are my NICE TO HAVES:
-Open to homeopathic and holistic remedies
-No formula company merchandise around the office (a doctor who is receiving kickbacks from the formula companies is a lot more likely to push supplementing)
-Doesn't mind if parents don't want to do all the standard well baby visits.
-Supports attachment parenting practices
-Promotes best practice when it comes to carseat safety
Now, I understand that not everybody has the same priorities as I have, so here is a list of general questions I think new parents should consider asking pediatricians they are interviewing:
1) Under what circumstances do you think prescription medication is necessary?
Think about what you would prefer. Do you view medication as a last resort in your own life, or do you medicate for everything? What do you feel most comfortable doing with your baby?
2) (If having a boy) What is your view on circumcision?
You want to know this if you don't plan on it because if you have some cut-happy doctor who thinks it's the greatest thing ever, they're probably not at all intact-friendly. If you do plan on doing it, please reconsider. No, but really, if you do plan on it, you probably don't want a doctor who's a card carrying member of Intact America.
3) What's your view on vaccinations?
Again, this is a topic parents need to research, and figure out what they want to do with it. It's really important that your pediatrician at least accepts your views, even if they don't totally agree.
4) What alternative medical practices do you support the use of?
Homeopathy, chiropractic, acupuncture... If any of these are your cup of tea, you want to make sure you have a pediatrician who doesn't think they're the devil.
5) Under what circumstances do you think parents should bring their sick kids in to see you?
You want to know that their opinion on this lines up with yours.
6) What's your opinion on breastfeeding? What about breastfeeding past infancy?
7) What are your procedures for after hours calls?
8) How may other doctors and nurse practitioners are in this practice?
9) What's the average time spent in the waiting room?
10) Do you have separate waiting areas for sick and well patients?
Saturday, January 7, 2012
Fingerpaint: You're doing it wrong.
Erin and Orren got some fingerpaint for Christmas. I figured it would be a huge hit. What kid doesn't like to fingerpaint, right? I offered the stuff to Orren one day while Erin was at school. He wanted nothing to do with it. He didn't like to paint with his fingers, and the stuff was too thick to have much control of it with his brushes. He's a watercolor guy, plain and simple.
So, with four mostly unused tubes of fingerpaint on my shelf, I thought of an ingenious proposal this morning. "Hey, do you guys want to fingerpaint on the patio?" Oh yes, that was the right answer!! Basically, the lesson in this is that if your kid doesn't like to fingerpaint, don't dispair. They probably just don't like to fingerpaint on paper.
So, with four mostly unused tubes of fingerpaint on my shelf, I thought of an ingenious proposal this morning. "Hey, do you guys want to fingerpaint on the patio?" Oh yes, that was the right answer!! Basically, the lesson in this is that if your kid doesn't like to fingerpaint, don't dispair. They probably just don't like to fingerpaint on paper.
Thursday, January 5, 2012
Real facts. Do not fear them.
I am often disheartened by the way other parents view things. It's not that they're bad or malicious. It's that misinformation is so rampant, and people these days equate any attempt to educate, as judgment. Then add to that, that so many people are so much more concerned with defending their choices, than making good ones in the future, and the cycle just continues on and on. The day that information becomes cool, and people are not afraid to be taken out of their comfort zones, and objectivity becomes mainstream, we will see major steps in a better direction.
Here are some FACTS about some important parenting issues:
On birth:
-C-sections carry a 4x higher risk of death for mother and baby than any vaginal birth.
-Every intervention that exists carries some risk.
-Every hospital in the US has time limits on how long a mom can labor, and many have policies on what interventions they do routinely, such as monitors and IV's. These things DO impact the progress of labor.
-IV fluids during labor have been shown to make breastfeeding more difficult due to latch issues from engorged tissue.
-Epidurals are associated with a slowed progress of labor.
-Often, one intervention leads to another.
-Cytotec inductions have killed hundreds of women and babies.
-The World Health Organization has stated time and time again that homebirth with a trained midwife is at least as safe as hospital birth for low risk women and full term babies.
-When you homebirth, you are not without help if something goes wrong. Midwives are trained for YEARS before they practice on their own, so that they will know what to do when things go wrong.
-US C-section rates are 3x higher than the World Health Organization thinks they should be. This is often attributed to the amount of intervention that is done in hospital births.
-The US has some of the most interventionist obstetrical customs in the world, and one of the worst maternal/infant outcomes in the industrialized world. Coincidence? You decide.
-A cord around the neck is not indication for a c-section.
-Uncommon presentations (sunny side up, breech, brow presentation, etc) are not automatically indication for c-section either.
-ACOG does not consider women to be postdates until after 42 weeks, so a doctor who induces for postdates before 42 weeks, is going against the recommendation of his/her own professional organization.
-Even so, there is no great increase in mortality or morbidity at 42 weeks, although there is a slight uptick at 43. Some midwives are working to get ACOG to adjust its definition of postdates to 43 weeks.
-True cases of cephalo-pelvic disproportion (CPD, a "too big" baby) are pretty much unheard of in the industrialized world. If you have never suffered malnutrition, or applicable severe injury or disease, and you were told by your doctor that your baby was too big, he/she was probably wrong. If it's because they wouldn't come out when you were laboring on your back, the position is the problem, not the baby, and not you. The pelvic opening is the narrowest in the lithotomy position that most American women are forced to birth in.
Vaccines:
-The number of vaccines children receive today is double the amount we received growing up in the 80's.
-Vaccines contain additives such as lead, formaldehyde, and other known carcinogens and toxins.
-Many of the diseases we vaccinate against are not generally deadly. Chicken pox, measles, and mumps, just to name a few.
-A breastfed baby has immunity to any disease his mother has antibodies against, for as long as he gets most of his nutrition from breastmilk.
-Vaccine injury is real, and it happens thousands of times a year. Sometimes it is mild and temporary, like a rash. Sometimes it is severe and debilitating for life, like fibromyalgia. Sometimes it is death.
-Doctors are often compensated by the vaccine manufacturers for how many doses they can administer.
Circumcision:
-Circumcision rates are falling nationwide. Most boys in our sons' generation are intact.
-There is no way to properly anesthetize a baby and have him still be awake, and general anesthesia is too risky at such a young age. All babies undergoing circumcision feel pain, a lot of pain. A study done in Toronto on the stress hormone and brain wave patterns of babies during circumcision, was discontinued for ethics reasons. The findings were that telling.
-Over 100 babies in the US die of complications from circumcision every year.
-A study in Finland showed that only six out of one thousand intact males will require medically necessary circumcision later in life. That's 0.6%.
-Most problems that can necessitate circumcision later in life are caused by improper care as an infant or child. Learn proper intact care at www.drmomma.org.
-Circumcision rose to popularity in the US as a cure for masturbation. (Please google "Dr. Kellogg on circumcision" if you doubt me.)
-The US Navy released a study last month which showed NO correlation between STD transmission and circumcision status.
Carseats:
-A rear-facing passenger is 5x safer than a forward-facing passenger because she shell of the carseat absorbs nearly all of the crash forces, especially in front or side impact.
-96% of crashes with injury are front or side impact.
-There has never been a documented case of broken legs due to rear-facing. Broken limbs are far more common among forward-facing passengers, who are flung against the front seats on impact.
-In Sweden, where children rear-face to at least 3 years old, often 5 or 6, child traffic fatalities are nearly unheard of. In the US, where our laws only require rear-facing for one year, traffic fatalities are the leading cause of death for children under 14.
-There are seats on the US market that will keep even the tallest kid on the block rear-facing until at least 2, probably longer. You won't find them in your neighborhood Walmart store, but they exist.
-Most pediatricians are not Child Passenger Safety Technicians, and there is absolutely NOTHING taught in medical school about carseat safety. When your pediatrician advises on the subject, he/she is more than likely advising you based on his/her own views as a parent.
-The law DOES NOT say that you have to turn your child around at a year old and 20 pounds. It says that at that point, it becomes your choice.
Breastfeeding:
-Breastmilk is THE biologically appropriate food for human babies. This is why breastfed babies have fewer health issues.
-Moms who breastfeed for at least two years reduce their risk of breast cancer by 57%.
-Formula fed babies have a higher risk of SIDS than breastfed babies.
-Formula fed babies have statistically lower IQ's than breastfed babies.
-Formula feeding is associated with obesity, diabetes, and other health problems later in life.
-97% of the women in the world are totally capable of breastfeeding.
-The World Health Organization ranks baby feeding methods as follows:
1) Breastmilk directly from the breast
2) The baby's mother's own breastmilk in a bottle
3) The milk of another human mother
4) Formula
These are facts. To me, the facts present a very clear standard to aim for in parenting. Does that mean I do everything perfectly? No way. However, it is only because I am not defensive about the things I have done in the past that were not the best, that I am able to consistently improve, and keep getting closer and closer to the standard I have set for myself. In all but one of these areas, I have been flawed. I have never cut a baby, but I have failed at breastfeeding twice, had one crappy birth, forward-faced one baby at a year, and fully vaccinated one. Only when we realize that we don't always know best, can we move into more progressive ways of thinking, and act accordingly. Most activists I know have really screwed up a time or two. That's how they (we) end up so vocal about this stuff in the first place. It isn't because we think we're perfect parents. It's because we're not.
Here are some FACTS about some important parenting issues:
On birth:
-C-sections carry a 4x higher risk of death for mother and baby than any vaginal birth.
-Every intervention that exists carries some risk.
-Every hospital in the US has time limits on how long a mom can labor, and many have policies on what interventions they do routinely, such as monitors and IV's. These things DO impact the progress of labor.
-IV fluids during labor have been shown to make breastfeeding more difficult due to latch issues from engorged tissue.
-Epidurals are associated with a slowed progress of labor.
-Often, one intervention leads to another.
-Cytotec inductions have killed hundreds of women and babies.
-The World Health Organization has stated time and time again that homebirth with a trained midwife is at least as safe as hospital birth for low risk women and full term babies.
-When you homebirth, you are not without help if something goes wrong. Midwives are trained for YEARS before they practice on their own, so that they will know what to do when things go wrong.
-US C-section rates are 3x higher than the World Health Organization thinks they should be. This is often attributed to the amount of intervention that is done in hospital births.
-The US has some of the most interventionist obstetrical customs in the world, and one of the worst maternal/infant outcomes in the industrialized world. Coincidence? You decide.
-A cord around the neck is not indication for a c-section.
-Uncommon presentations (sunny side up, breech, brow presentation, etc) are not automatically indication for c-section either.
-ACOG does not consider women to be postdates until after 42 weeks, so a doctor who induces for postdates before 42 weeks, is going against the recommendation of his/her own professional organization.
-Even so, there is no great increase in mortality or morbidity at 42 weeks, although there is a slight uptick at 43. Some midwives are working to get ACOG to adjust its definition of postdates to 43 weeks.
-True cases of cephalo-pelvic disproportion (CPD, a "too big" baby) are pretty much unheard of in the industrialized world. If you have never suffered malnutrition, or applicable severe injury or disease, and you were told by your doctor that your baby was too big, he/she was probably wrong. If it's because they wouldn't come out when you were laboring on your back, the position is the problem, not the baby, and not you. The pelvic opening is the narrowest in the lithotomy position that most American women are forced to birth in.
Vaccines:
-The number of vaccines children receive today is double the amount we received growing up in the 80's.
-Vaccines contain additives such as lead, formaldehyde, and other known carcinogens and toxins.
-Many of the diseases we vaccinate against are not generally deadly. Chicken pox, measles, and mumps, just to name a few.
-A breastfed baby has immunity to any disease his mother has antibodies against, for as long as he gets most of his nutrition from breastmilk.
-Vaccine injury is real, and it happens thousands of times a year. Sometimes it is mild and temporary, like a rash. Sometimes it is severe and debilitating for life, like fibromyalgia. Sometimes it is death.
-Doctors are often compensated by the vaccine manufacturers for how many doses they can administer.
Circumcision:
-Circumcision rates are falling nationwide. Most boys in our sons' generation are intact.
-There is no way to properly anesthetize a baby and have him still be awake, and general anesthesia is too risky at such a young age. All babies undergoing circumcision feel pain, a lot of pain. A study done in Toronto on the stress hormone and brain wave patterns of babies during circumcision, was discontinued for ethics reasons. The findings were that telling.
-Over 100 babies in the US die of complications from circumcision every year.
-A study in Finland showed that only six out of one thousand intact males will require medically necessary circumcision later in life. That's 0.6%.
-Most problems that can necessitate circumcision later in life are caused by improper care as an infant or child. Learn proper intact care at www.drmomma.org.
-Circumcision rose to popularity in the US as a cure for masturbation. (Please google "Dr. Kellogg on circumcision" if you doubt me.)
-The US Navy released a study last month which showed NO correlation between STD transmission and circumcision status.
Carseats:
-A rear-facing passenger is 5x safer than a forward-facing passenger because she shell of the carseat absorbs nearly all of the crash forces, especially in front or side impact.
-96% of crashes with injury are front or side impact.
-There has never been a documented case of broken legs due to rear-facing. Broken limbs are far more common among forward-facing passengers, who are flung against the front seats on impact.
-In Sweden, where children rear-face to at least 3 years old, often 5 or 6, child traffic fatalities are nearly unheard of. In the US, where our laws only require rear-facing for one year, traffic fatalities are the leading cause of death for children under 14.
-There are seats on the US market that will keep even the tallest kid on the block rear-facing until at least 2, probably longer. You won't find them in your neighborhood Walmart store, but they exist.
-Most pediatricians are not Child Passenger Safety Technicians, and there is absolutely NOTHING taught in medical school about carseat safety. When your pediatrician advises on the subject, he/she is more than likely advising you based on his/her own views as a parent.
-The law DOES NOT say that you have to turn your child around at a year old and 20 pounds. It says that at that point, it becomes your choice.
Breastfeeding:
-Breastmilk is THE biologically appropriate food for human babies. This is why breastfed babies have fewer health issues.
-Moms who breastfeed for at least two years reduce their risk of breast cancer by 57%.
-Formula fed babies have a higher risk of SIDS than breastfed babies.
-Formula fed babies have statistically lower IQ's than breastfed babies.
-Formula feeding is associated with obesity, diabetes, and other health problems later in life.
-97% of the women in the world are totally capable of breastfeeding.
-The World Health Organization ranks baby feeding methods as follows:
1) Breastmilk directly from the breast
2) The baby's mother's own breastmilk in a bottle
3) The milk of another human mother
4) Formula
These are facts. To me, the facts present a very clear standard to aim for in parenting. Does that mean I do everything perfectly? No way. However, it is only because I am not defensive about the things I have done in the past that were not the best, that I am able to consistently improve, and keep getting closer and closer to the standard I have set for myself. In all but one of these areas, I have been flawed. I have never cut a baby, but I have failed at breastfeeding twice, had one crappy birth, forward-faced one baby at a year, and fully vaccinated one. Only when we realize that we don't always know best, can we move into more progressive ways of thinking, and act accordingly. Most activists I know have really screwed up a time or two. That's how they (we) end up so vocal about this stuff in the first place. It isn't because we think we're perfect parents. It's because we're not.
Monday, January 2, 2012
Random Monday Awesome...
Here is some random awesome from today.
The best article I have ever read on public breastfeeding is right here. <---- Click it. It's awesome. It's sarcastic, just in case you couldn't pick up on that (hey, I wouldn't be saying it if it hadn't happened), and basically, an awesome response to all the stupid comments people make about nursing in public.
Speaking of nursing in public, here's a picture Thak took of me and Chai on New Years Eve. We were at the mall to get Thak some new contacts (hey, who loves civilian vision insurance?! They actually pay for contacts!) Anyhow, we were having some gelato while we waited for Thak's contact prescription to be ready, and of course, Chai is a growing boy who needs to eat, so he had his snack while I had mine. I was impressed with the lack of dirty looks. Good for you, El Paso. That's one good thing I can say for this place. They've been good to us as far as nursing in public goes. Oh, and dark chocolate and coffee gelato is divine. Highly recommend. The gelato is its own awesome.
This is how I finished my day. When you both have iPhones, you can do FaceTime, which is basically like those video phones Weekly Reader told us we'd all have in the future. 1989 me finally thinks 2012 me is cool. Score!
In other awesomeness, just when I got off the phone with my mom this afternoon, and had mentioned in said conversation, that Chai had not cut any teeth yet, I noticed that Chai had, in fact, just cut a tooth. He had to have cut it this morning, because it wasn't there when he went to bed last night. He's been really fussy all day, and he was hard to get to bed tonight. I even gave him a dose of tylenol, his first ever, just because he was so uncomfortable. He's ok, though, and I'm glad he has a tooth now. It looks like he'll have another one within days, too. My little boy is growing up so fast... Even though he's the slowest one out of all my three to get teeth, it still seems fast.
I also find it pretty awesome that we might be within days of finding out where we're going. The assignment manager said that he would more than likely have assignments figured out while the guys are in Utah. If that is the way it actually works out, then we will know something within the next three weeks.
This is both awesome and completely lame. Chai has been sleeping very well in his own room. He sleeps until like 3 am and then he gets into bed with me and nurses the rest of the night away. I don't sleep well without him, though. I can't really fall asleep very well at all until he comes in. I resist the urge to go and get him before he wakes up, but the minute he wakes up, I'm there, and when I bring him into bed with me, I'm out the second he latches on. So many people love when their babies sleep for a long stretch at night. After so long of Chai not doing that, it kind of freaks me out that he does now, and in another room. It feels unnatural. I guess it's because we spend most of our day with me either wearing him, holding him, or playing with him, it's really strange to sleep apart from him. I liked having his crib sidecarred to my bed, where he was just an arm's reach away. I wish it had worked out to keep it like that for a little longer. As long as Chai's happy, though, that's really all that matters.
Orren has a piggy bank (ok, so it's a tomato sauce jar that I'm going to paper mache the outside of and let him paint, but it does the job). He got $5 for his birthday, and has found random change around the house and yard, and has put it all in his bank. He informed me today that he's saving up to buy Woody and Buzz action figures, from Toy Story. He might actually have enough when you factor in the gift card he got for Christmas. I think it's awesome that he's saving money, though. What a smart little boy he is!
The best article I have ever read on public breastfeeding is right here. <---- Click it. It's awesome. It's sarcastic, just in case you couldn't pick up on that (hey, I wouldn't be saying it if it hadn't happened), and basically, an awesome response to all the stupid comments people make about nursing in public.
Speaking of nursing in public, here's a picture Thak took of me and Chai on New Years Eve. We were at the mall to get Thak some new contacts (hey, who loves civilian vision insurance?! They actually pay for contacts!) Anyhow, we were having some gelato while we waited for Thak's contact prescription to be ready, and of course, Chai is a growing boy who needs to eat, so he had his snack while I had mine. I was impressed with the lack of dirty looks. Good for you, El Paso. That's one good thing I can say for this place. They've been good to us as far as nursing in public goes. Oh, and dark chocolate and coffee gelato is divine. Highly recommend. The gelato is its own awesome.
This is how I finished my day. When you both have iPhones, you can do FaceTime, which is basically like those video phones Weekly Reader told us we'd all have in the future. 1989 me finally thinks 2012 me is cool. Score!
In other awesomeness, just when I got off the phone with my mom this afternoon, and had mentioned in said conversation, that Chai had not cut any teeth yet, I noticed that Chai had, in fact, just cut a tooth. He had to have cut it this morning, because it wasn't there when he went to bed last night. He's been really fussy all day, and he was hard to get to bed tonight. I even gave him a dose of tylenol, his first ever, just because he was so uncomfortable. He's ok, though, and I'm glad he has a tooth now. It looks like he'll have another one within days, too. My little boy is growing up so fast... Even though he's the slowest one out of all my three to get teeth, it still seems fast.
I also find it pretty awesome that we might be within days of finding out where we're going. The assignment manager said that he would more than likely have assignments figured out while the guys are in Utah. If that is the way it actually works out, then we will know something within the next three weeks.
This is both awesome and completely lame. Chai has been sleeping very well in his own room. He sleeps until like 3 am and then he gets into bed with me and nurses the rest of the night away. I don't sleep well without him, though. I can't really fall asleep very well at all until he comes in. I resist the urge to go and get him before he wakes up, but the minute he wakes up, I'm there, and when I bring him into bed with me, I'm out the second he latches on. So many people love when their babies sleep for a long stretch at night. After so long of Chai not doing that, it kind of freaks me out that he does now, and in another room. It feels unnatural. I guess it's because we spend most of our day with me either wearing him, holding him, or playing with him, it's really strange to sleep apart from him. I liked having his crib sidecarred to my bed, where he was just an arm's reach away. I wish it had worked out to keep it like that for a little longer. As long as Chai's happy, though, that's really all that matters.
Orren has a piggy bank (ok, so it's a tomato sauce jar that I'm going to paper mache the outside of and let him paint, but it does the job). He got $5 for his birthday, and has found random change around the house and yard, and has put it all in his bank. He informed me today that he's saving up to buy Woody and Buzz action figures, from Toy Story. He might actually have enough when you factor in the gift card he got for Christmas. I think it's awesome that he's saving money, though. What a smart little boy he is!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
