First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
Post Reply Why isn't breast milk sold?
19097 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
No child "needs" breast milk per se, the majority of women who insist on it claim that it helps them bond with their child. Buying breastmilk wouldn't provide that for them. Many of the people who advocate for it being better than formula cite test scores and whatnot, while never addressing that having a fulltime job typically implies that it's a single mother doing the formula-making, leading to other discrepancies in studies that have been performed. The only real benefit that's been proven is that it boosts immune system development, mostly because it introduces antibodies into the childs gut that can be used as a very primitive type of vaccine.

That also said, people already do sell breastmilk to perverts. Camgirls have been known to charge premiums for that sort of crap.
riem2k 
11158 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
38 / M / Canada
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
There's a milk bar in Japan which supposedly offers such service, you can even drink directly from the source for 5,000 yen.
http://www.tokyoreporter.com/2009/08/06/lactating-ladies-nurse-customers-at-kabukicho-milk-bar/
478 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / United States
Offline
Posted 4/5/17
Because the thought of it would make me puke.
Posted 4/5/17
no
1006 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/6/17 , edited 4/6/17
I'm aware that donated breast milk goes through regulations but I'm not taking risks with the life of a baby, but if it is absolutely necessary to get donated milk for your baby, make sure it is coming from the right person.


Sharing breast milk may sound kooky or unsavory to some, but it's a growing practice that can carry benefits or risks for a baby, depending on who's doing it -- and how. While casual arrangements like Stiebel's experience are a relatively new trend, milk banking -- donating screened expressed milk for at-risk babies, for whom breast milk's immunity-boosting components can be lifesaving -- has been around for more than 100 years and is on the rise. Banking gets a thumbs-up from experts because donating moms adhere to strict lifestyle guidelines (no smoking or drinking). The women also go through a screening process to ensure that no diseases, such as HIV or hepatitis, are passed to the infant.


Diseases can be transferred to the baby.

That's why you should never breast feed a baby that it is not yours or let someone else breast feed your baby.


As for adults, I don't care how healthy you think it is, we don't need milk to survive and be healthy. If you need to drink milk so much but don't want to support the milk from cows, then drink better alternatives like Almond milk.
13193 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
☆Land of sweets☆
Offline
Posted 4/6/17
Cambodia banned exports of breast milk
some people want breast milk so much, they would import from other countries. in the case of Cambodia, they had to actually ban exports - presumably because women there would rather sell their milk then use it to breastfeed their own.

as for milk, soy milk tastes great. :p
9813 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
22
Online
Posted 4/6/17
39169 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M
Offline
Posted 4/6/17
That be the first industry where you'd have to pay the cows for their milk.....
107 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/7/17
Did anyone think of genetically engineering some milk cows to produce human milk? I thought I remembered reading a science article on something almost exactly like that.
11978 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M / Birmingham, UK
Offline
Posted 4/7/17
Women would not produce enough to meet demand (if there actually becomes a demand) and I can bet a lot of people would find it disgusting/wrong, people complain if a woman breastfeeds her baby in the open after all.

I'd have no problem with the idea but it's execution isn't really a possibility.
25394 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 4/7/17
This is a very tricky subject. Like some have brought up, there would have to be a lot of tests done and a system would probably have to be put in place where the woman has to be certified that she is free from diseases that would be transmitted through breast milk. There would also probably be two kinds of breast milk made available, pasteurized and non pasteurized. Someone trying to breastfeed their infant because the mother is no longer there or able to provide milk would benefit from getting the boost to the immune system and such, its not needed per say but it would be good to have. But also on that note, you would probably want to sell within your own region so that the child is getting the immunity from things it will possibly come across. Other consumers on the other hand wouldn't care for that and would probably prefer their milk as processed as their cow milk is to get rid of anything unnecessary.

And the topic of a mother having enough milk for their own child, it would really depend on the woman. For example in my family, we tend to run dry early on and don't produce much milk, it was really hard on my aunt who had twins, but everyone's body is different and there are some women who produce milk a plenty. They would probably be the ones that would end up selling their milk. They should just be sure to keep track of their own child's consumption rates to always ensure they have enough for them, and with that being the case the company that would potentially sell this milk would have to deal with the women setting their own quantities to sell and be alright with those numbers fluctuating. Businesses tend not to like that, which is where the problem would lie, but there may be potential work around that wouldn't short the child's milk supply and we just don't know because not much thought has been put into the subject.

And I think if more people were educated about female bodies, of sexuality and such in general then this topic would fair much better. In the course I am taking currently we just got finished with types of contraceptives and one of those contraceptives methods was actually breast feeding, or milking your breasts. If you are not unfortunate like female's in my family tend to be, then chances are you are able to produce breast milk for much longer than you think you can as long as you regularly milk yourself. Even if your child no longer needs your breast milk, as long as you regularly milk yourself as if they are still feeding, your body should think that it is still feeding the child and produce. Or in cases like someone earlier mentioned where the woman had an abortion yet still produced due to the hormones her body was circulating, she could potentially milk her breasts on a constant basis and produce milk despite not having a child to produce for. This method wont last forever however, but who knows how effective this method would be since we do not have proper statistical data on how long the average woman can milk her breasts and continue to produce. If it ends up being something like 6+ months after the child no longer needs milk themselves and the woman can sell anything produced after that date, then the next step would be a survey of how willing women who are currently lactating are to sell their milk. Once you get that average you would find out the average of pregnant women in the country and multiply it by that percent. That would potentially be the group that would be selling the breast milk and it would all depend on how big that number is.

Breast milk would probably also be a niche market, so even if the supply is lower than cow milk, as long as the market and supply line up to viable numbers to support a business then I see no reason for us not to sell breast milk and breast milk products.

And DurzanUlt, i don't think that's exactly how genetic engineering works. Like.... its a cow.... it wouldn't produce human milk unless we create some monstrous human cow hybrid, and on that topic it would probably be cheaper and more effective to genetically engineer a human to produce milk like a cow does, but that is unethical and would not happen. Like we graft and engineer plants to do crazy things, but they are a lot different from animal biology. I think one of the craziest thing we have been able to do as far as animal genetic engineering goes is make glow in the dark cats by inserting a gene that would produce florescent protein using jelly fish DNA and then breeding for that gene marker in the cats. That was quite a few years ago though and i haven't been keeping track of the crazy things we have done since, i just really like cats and glow in the dark cats sound awesome as fuck.

Here is an article on it for just some brief info.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-14882008
40919 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / HI
Online
Posted 4/8/17
I think the fact that it comes from another person is weird for some people.
5260 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
UK
Offline
Posted 4/8/17

jaragnaros wrote:

Women would not produce enough to meet demand (if there actually becomes a demand) and I can bet a lot of people would find it disgusting/wrong, people complain if a woman breastfeeds her baby in the open after all.

I'd have no problem with the idea but it's execution isn't really a possibility.


That's true, what woman would voluntarily get pregnant just to produce milk? We already have the calves problem from the dairy cow agriculture not to mention the unwanted chicks from the egg production.
6068 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / F / SoFlo
Offline
Posted 4/8/17 , edited 4/8/17
There probably are some people that actually sell their milk.
I know that there are people that sell their placenta. Some people cook it and eat it.
4309 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
23 / M
Offline
Posted 4/8/17

Kahluah wrote:

And DurzanUlt, i don't think that's exactly how genetic engineering works. Like.... its a cow.... it wouldn't produce human milk unless we create some monstrous human cow hybrid, and on that topic it would probably be cheaper and more effective to genetically engineer a human to produce milk like a cow does, but that is unethical and would not happen. Like we graft and engineer plants to do crazy things, but they are a lot different from animal biology. I think one of the craziest thing we have been able to do as far as animal genetic engineering goes is make glow in the dark cats by inserting a gene that would produce florescent protein using jelly fish DNA and then breeding for that gene marker in the cats. That was quite a few years ago though and i haven't been keeping track of the crazy things we have done since, i just really like cats and glow in the dark cats sound awesome as fuck.

Here is an article on it for just some brief info.
http://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-14882008


Are we talking like women with udders instead of tits or something? That imo would be a funny sight xD

And we have grown human ears on lab mice I think. I'm not going to try and cite a source though.

How much can a woman produce from her breasts though? I can't imagine a lot since one typically only needs to feed one at a time. And we know that size doesn't guarantee more production.

The idea that other people's milk going down our gullet instead of another animal's or even a plant bothering people just doesn't make sense to me.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.