Tag Archive: Human breast milk


Mom held in airport for hours after refusing to let TSA x-ray her breast-milk gets $75,000 in legal settlement

By Associated Press

A Southern California woman who was held at a Phoenix airport four years ago after refusing to have her breast milk X-rayed said Wednesday she has reached a tentative settlement with the Transportation Security Administration.

Stacey Armato, who filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court in Phoenix, said TSA officials have tentatively offered her $75,000, along with promises to retrain agents and clarify its guidelines on screening breast milk.

The reassurances about revised training and rules were more important than the monetary compensation, she said.

Refused: Stacey Armato of Hermosa Beach, California, was held at a Phoenix airport in 2010 after refusing to have her breast milk for son Lorenzo, pictured, x-rayed

Refused: Stacey Armato of Hermosa Beach, California, was held at a Phoenix airport in 2010 after refusing to have her breast milk for son Lorenzo, pictured, x-rayed

‘We had been waiting for them to really kind of confirm that they would be retraining everybody and making these policy updates,” Armato said. “When we finally got confirmation of that, that was really reassuring.’

TSA spokesman Ross Feinstein declined to comment on a “pending matter.” He confirmed that current TSA regulations classify breast milk as liquid medication. As a result, parents are permitted to bring an amount larger than the 3 ounces normally allotted for liquids.

According to the agency’s website, officers now use a bottled liquid scanner system in most airports to screen medically necessary liquids for explosives or other threats. The system uses lasers, infrared or electromagnetic resonance, rather than X-rays.

That was not an option at the time for Armato, who said she was accustomed to having a visual inspection for breast milk when traveling.

Armato, of Hermosa Beach, said she asked for an alternate screening of her breast milk at a security checkpoint at Phoenix Sky Harbor International Airport on Feb. 1, 2010. She cited concerns about exposing the milk to radiation.

According to a 2013 complaint from Armato, agents denied her request and then detained her in a glass enclosure for 40 minutes.

 

Read More Here

Enhanced by Zemanta


Drawing by Gonneke and released into public domain on Wikimedia Commons

 

The Cornucopia Institute logo and header

April 9th, 2014

Sustainable Pulse

  • Urine testing shows glyphosate levels over 10 times higher than in Europe
  • Initial testing shows Monsanto and Global regulatory bodies are wrong regarding bio-accumulation of glyphosate, leading to serious public health concerns
  • Testing commissioners urge USDA and EPA to place temporary ban on all use of Glyphosate-based herbicides to protect public health, until further more comprehensive testing of glyphosate in breast milk is completed.

In the first ever testing on glyphosate herbicide in the breast milk of American women, Moms Across America and Sustainable Pulse have found ‘high’ levels in 3 out of the 10 samples tested. The shocking results point to glyphosate levels building up in women’s bodies over a period of time, which has until now been refuted by both global regulatory authorities and the biotech industry.

The levels found in the breast milk testing of 76 ug/l to 166 ug/l are 760 to 1600 times higher than the European Drinking Water Directive allows for individual pesticides. They are however less than the 700 ug/l maximum contaminant level (MCL) for glyphosate in the U.S., which was decided upon by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) based on the now seemingly false premise that glyphosate was not bio-accumulative.

 

Read More Here

Enhanced by Zemanta

Miami Mother Helps Open Florida’s First Nonprofit Milk Depot

PRWeb | February 14, 2013
Photo: PRWeb

The Gathering Place and Mothers’ Milk Bank of North Texas to Accept Breastmilk Donations from South Florida Mothers and help feed premature, medically fragile infants. Breastfeeding moms who want to become donors can be screened at no charge.

(PRWEB) February 14, 2013

A South Florida mother’s quest to get enough donor breastmilk to feed her son has led to a Florida first: a nonprofit human milk depot to collect breastmilk donations from lactating women.

Mothers, babies and maternal and pediatric health specialists will celebrate the grand opening of the first nonprofit human milk depot with a ribbon-cutting ceremony on Tuesday, February 19 at 10 a.m. at The Gathering Place, a pregnancy, childbirth and parenting resource center at 5810 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, FL 33137.

The ribbon-cutting symbolically “opens” the deep freezer unit which will store breastmilk donations from women in South Florida. A milk and cookies toast will follow remarks from Ana Rodriguez, who gives to the milk depot, as well as lactation consultant Mirine Dye, MPH, IBCLC.

Miami is the first Florida city to open a nonprofit milk depot, giving lactating mothers a drop off location for donations of much-needed breastmilk. The depot at The Gathering Place will be serviced by the Mothers’ Milk Bank of North Texas, a nonprofit milk bank that provides donor human milk to hospitals in 10 states. Women who are currently breastfeeding infants under one year old are eligible to be screened at no charge to become human milk (aka breastmilk) donors.

The Mothers’ Milk Bank of North Texas fills prescriptions written by physicians for premature and medically fragile babies who need the life-giving and sustaining nutrition of donor human milk to thrive. There are more than 35,000 babies born each year in Dade County, and although hospitals in the region prescribe donor human milk to NICU babies, a milk collection depot did not exist until now.

Co-owner of The Gathering Place Tamara Taitt decided to open the milk depot after she was approached by Florencia Martinez, a mom who attends classes at The Gathering Place and shared how her son’s severe allergies affected him. “He couldn’t digest anything other than breastmilk,” said Martinez “He would suffer devastating intestinal distress and bleeding, it was terrifying to us.”

 

Read Full Article Here

**********************************************************************************************************

Local10.com News

Watch Video Here

Food Quality: An Issue As Important As Safety

Opinion
Food safety is important, but it is not the only consideration when choosing foods.
For example, for people in the U.S., the aversion to dog meat and horse meat is more a cultural matter than a safety issue. For Jews and Muslims, the aversion to pork might have begun as a safety issue historically, but now it is more a religious and cultural matter. Some people shun genetically modified foods because they fear such foods would be unsafe to eat, and some shun them for other reasons, such as their environmental or economic impacts. Some people prefer eggs from free range chickens not because it makes a big difference in the quality of the eggs, but because of their concerns about animal cruelty. Foie gras was banned in California because of concerns about animal cruelty, not food safety. Pink slime may be viewed as disgusting even if it is safe to eat. Some people might wish to avoid certain foods because they are farmed or manufactured in ways that harm the environment. No one has argued that whale meat or turtle meat is unsafe. Shark fin soup is not unsafe. Products might be shunned because they are produced under onerous conditions for workers. Some people think particular foods should be controlled because they increase the likelihood of becoming overweight.
Snack manufacturers argue that there are no bad foods, only bad diets. What should regulatory agencies do about that, especially when many people do have bad diets?
A clear distinction should be drawn between unsafe products and unsafe practices. If infants are fed with tea or cola, perhaps along with breast milk or infant formula, they might not get sick immediately, but they may experience health consequences in the future. What about the case in which, to save money, one grandmother diluted the infant formula by half, because, she said, the baby wouldn’t know the difference? Here it is not the products but the practices that are unsafe. Where does one draw the line between safety concerns in the traditional sense, i.e. pathogen contamination, and other food-related concerns?
Agencies with responsibilities for food regulation should be explicit about what is within the scope of their work, and what is excluded. They should explain how they do their work, and be plain about its limitations. This is important because non-specialists don’t make sharp distinctions between questions such as “is it safe for you?” and “is it good for you?” Many people take approval of a product by an official-sounding agency as an endorsement of that product. The manufacturers take advantage of this. They know that if they claim something has been approved by an agency, many customers will think that means it is good for you, or has other virtues. On close examination we might see that approval is actually based on little more than the manufacturers submitting the proper forms, with the agency making no independent assessment of any kind.
If the national food regulatory agency’s mandate is to look only at safety in the narrow sense of worrying about immediate harm to users, which agencies would attend to other considerations that might be important?
To illustrate, there is good evidence that long chain fatty acids in the diets of pregnant women and infants affect the child’s development, not only physically but also intellectually. Ocean fish and beef from grass-fed cows have good fatty acids in them. However, some industrially produced meats – cultured fish fed mainly with grains and cows fed with grains rather than grass – are not as rich in these crucial fatty acids. How should factors that affect consumers’ long-term intellectual development be addressed? Which government food agencies should look after them?
If infant formula manufacturers make bogus claims that synthetic fatty acids added to infant formula make important contributions to infants’ development, who will call on them to account for these claims? If these are not safety issues, what should we name them?

TSA forces new mom to pump milk out of her breasts in public restroom before boarding the plane

Sunday, March 04, 2012
by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
Editor of NaturalNews.com

(NaturalNews) As NaturalNews readers already well know, the real agenda of the TSA has absolutely nothing to do with airport security (TSA security is a joke) and everything to do with “prisoner training” the public. It’s all about humiliation and dehumanization. It’s about teaching the slave citizens that they are animals to be ordered around by a bunch of lawless government tyrants who only impersonate actual law enforcement officers (TSA “officers” are not sworn officers in any way, and they have no law enforcement training).

The latest example of all this involves a Hawaiian mother who recently attempted to board an airplane in Lihue, Hawaii. She was carrying a breast pump and several emptybottles to hold her breast milk later on. For those who may not know, many new moms frequently use breast pumps to fill bottles with their own natural mother’s milk which they later give to their children.

Remarkably, upon seeing these empty bottles, the TSA agent in charge lapsed into a power trip frenzy and told her that she could not carry empty bottles on the airplane!

Now the TSA targets empty bottles, too

Hold on a second. First we’re told we can’t carry FULL bottles of water or other liquids because, we’re told, those liquids could be mixed together using some totally fictitious laboratory process to make a liquid bomb. Now we’re told we can’t carry EMPTY bottles on the airplane, too? How’s that? Are we soon going to be told that empty bottles pose a threat to national security because they might contain invisible bomb materials that nobody can see?

(Where does the TSA invent all this crap, anyway? Sometimes I think they just sit in the back room and play a break-time game called “Who can come up with the zaniest rule that the intimidated travelers will follow?”)

So — get this — the woman was told by the TSA that she would have to fill the empty bottles with breast milk before she could board the plane. This is apparently the TSA’s whacked-out logic on making sure none of those dangerous “empty bottles” get on the airplane, for whatever reason.

Except there is no “breast milking station” at the airport, of course. So where did the TSA direct this woman to go pump her breast milk? You guessed it — the public restroom.

“I asked him if there was a private place I could pump and he said no, you can go in the women’s bathroom,” the woman said. “I had to stand in front of the mirrors and the sinks and pump my breast in front of every tourist that walked into that bathroom. I was embarrassed and humiliated and then angry that I was treated this way.”

You may have noticed this directive was issued by a male TSA agent. I can just see the scene now, with some pot-bellied sloth-like power-tripping pervert man saying, “Go milk your breasts in the bathroom!” and thinking to himself, “Or maybe I’ll milk ’em for ya, what do you think about that?” It’s a fact, by the way, that the TSA conducts multiple naked body scanner screenings on attractive women so that the perverts running the scanning imagery boards can get off in the back room.

Getting back to the new mom, after she pumped the plastic bottles full of breast milk, she was then allowed to board! (Gosh, I’m surprised she wasn’t then raided at gunpoint by the FDA for trafficking raw milk!)