I get asked this question a lot. And then it's usually followed by an emphatic, "I could never do that." If you would've talked to me about homeschooling a few years ago, that would've been my response too.
But then Heavenly Father changed my mind.
Here's my story. When it was just about time for AJ to go to Kindergarten, I started to get a pit in my stomach. Then the time came for her first day. I walked her to the bus stop with the camera like a good mother and showed her my (fake) excitement in her first day of school. I didn't cry until the bus was out of sight. I'm not sure if I stopped crying until I saw the bus return later that day. I made Brent follow the bus to school that whole first week. I kept being assured by other mothers that the pit in my stomach would go away. I kept waiting for that to happen. It didn't.
At this same time, I kept feeling promptings from the Holy Ghost that I needed to be doing something different in regards to our family. I couldn't figure out what it was. We'd gotten pregnant with Lady, so it wasn't that we needed to add to the family......that was being taken care of. I was wracking my brain trying to figure out what change needed to occur. I prayed about it for what seemed like forever. Then one day I was reading something on the internet and somebody mentioned homeschooling. Have you ever gotten an answer to a prayer that was like somebody punching you in the chest? I think I actually had a physical reaction when I read that word.
My first thought was, "You've got to be kidding me. I'm not a 'homeschooling' kind of mom." But I couldn't deny the answer I'd received. So I began to pray about it and I started to research it like crazy. The more I prayed about it and researched it, the more my confidence grew in the fact that *I could do this*. It also helped that Heavenly Father thought I could do it. :) The pit in my stomach slowly started to go away.
Then came the day thatI decided to talk to Brent about it. I was very nervous. His initial reaction was much like mine....
"WHAT?!?!"
But after talking to him about the research I'd done and the confirmation I'd felt through prayer, he agreed that we could try it for a while. The next question was when to start. How do you go about pulling your kid out of school? Should I pull Roo out too? (He was in preschool at the time and we'd just had some incidents which I wasn't happy about....ie: the teacher telling him he'd cut something out wrong and colored something wrong. What the heck? How does a 3 year old do either of those things *wrong*?)
The answer came shortly before Christmas break. At parent-teacher conference. First of all, let me say that AJ loved school. She's quite the social butterfly (remember what AJ stands for?). I went into PTC expecting to hear what all my teachers told my parents....."Ann is a great student, but we can't get her to stop talking. It doesn't matter who she sits by, we've moved her all over the classroom. She just can't stop talking to her neighbors."
What I got was quite different. Her teacher was a very nice lady. She sat down with me and showed me all the curriculum and art projects AJ had been working on. She showed me where AJ was in each subject. She talked about AJ's penmanship and other such silliness. I was starting to get frustrated. "I KNOW all that stuff. You send home most of her schoolwork anyway. I see this. Tell me what she's like in school. Tell me about my daughter....who her friends are....how she behaves in class....what her favorite recess activity is." I knew a lot of those answers already anyway, from talking to AJ herself about it, but I wanted to know what the teacher knew about my daughter. After all, it's not like she's a wallflower. The teacher couldn't tell me ANYTHING about her besides what was on paper. I left extremely disappointed. Why was I sending my daughter to this person who didn't even KNOW her to be taught by her?
After much thought, I realized why I was angry, sad, and disappointed. It was because I was jealous. This other woman got to be the one with my daughter when she learned new things. She got to see all of the "A-ha!" moments. She got to see her reaction to new things and new experiences. And yet she was missing it all. She didn't notice those moments. She didn't notice AJ's reactions and feelings. And who can blame her? Like I said, she was an extremely nice lady, but she had a classroom full of 25 5 year olds. How can you even begin to get to know them all (except the "naughty" ones (who I don't believe are really, truly naughty, just not able to sit at a desk for 4 hours)), let alone *notice* any of the extra things that happen, like "A-ha!" moments?
Then it hit me.....*I* know my daughter. *I* know her learning style. *I* know how to teach her. So why shouldn't I?
It was then that I decided that AJ wouldn't be going back to school after the Christmas break. Brent and I had some really good talks with her before we did all of this and she agreed that she'd like to try homeschooling. So I pulled her and Roo out of school at Christmas break and they haven't been back since.
There were a number of other reasons that were shown to me through all of my research and prayers too. I started to do some math and the thought of AJ going to 1st grade made that pit in my stomach return immediately. The thought of her being somewhere else everyday for LONGER than she was at home (not counting sleeping) did not give me any warm fuzzies. I *knew* that I couldn't send her away from home for 8 hours everyday. It would break my heart. I had been praying a lot about how to teach my kids the gospel and how to teach them the importance of family relationships and about the morals and values I wanted to instill in them. With the state of the world being what it is today, I felt like I wouldn't be able to accomplish all that I waned to accomplish in the few minutes we might have together after school (somewhere between homework, chores, playing with friends, eating dinner, any extra curricular activities, and bedtime). Also I read in the scriptures and in a number of conference talks and Ensign articles where it was reiterated that parents are responsible for teaching their children. In my praying, I found out that, for me, this meant in all aspects.
There have been a number of rough patches along the way. Brent and I have strong personalities and we haven't made any children who are lacking in that area. And I've learned that Roo has a totally different learning style than AJ, which has brought about challenges for myself because I've had to *learn* how to teach him. I LOVE the fact that I'm still learning. I love that I learn something new about my kids everyday. I love that I've been able to figure out different ways to teach Roo. (I still need to find some more). And I love that I haven't sent him to a place where they expect him to learn ONE way and if he doesn't learn that way, well then he's just out of luck. I am sure there are aspects of public school that he would LOVE, but I can't help but wonder what would happen to his already-fragile self esteem (he takes failure very personally and can have a hard time recovering) if he were in a system where he was failing just because of the way something was being taught to him....not because he couldn't learn it.
Tink has really taken off in the last year as well and is doing a lot of independent learning. She is a strong-willed little spirit and is like her mama and loves checking off her list everyday. She and AJ usually do their independent study up in their room together. AJ helps her if she needs it. I love that relationship.
And Lady is in Kindergarten (technically) this year. She's learning how to read and add and is really gaining speed lately. She loves our "preschool" time when I read and play with her and June. June just wants to be a part of everything. When we have scripture time, she gets out her Book of Mormon (a hand-me-down from AJ) and sits and "reads" along with us. It's awesome.
Every year since we started, we've done things a little (or a lot) different from the year before. And I keep learning about new ways and new techniques and styles of learning and homeschooling. I am so drawn to unschooling, but I don't know if I have the fortitude to follow through with it. It is a LOT of work for the mom, but it is so appealing. I think it's the ideal way to keep a child interested in learning and really teach them HOW to learn. That's really my goal....to keep my kids' love of learning alive and to teach them HOW to learn. (I'm still learning this myself as well....I have to un-learn a lot of things from school.) A book I've read recently has really shifted my paradigm. It's "The Element" by Sir Ken Robinson. It's a really intriguing read.
I'm not trying to preach here, really. I know homeschooling isn't for everybody. But it's started to really take off in the last few years since we started. There are a lot of co-ops and some really great online groups that you can join and get advice and feedback. It really is a different world, even from when we started. The biggest thing for me is just getting to be with my kids everyday. I wouldn't trade our experiences for anything. Everyday is certainly not sunshine and roses, but we're learning and growing together and I love it.
Showing posts with label different. Show all posts
Showing posts with label different. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 5, 2013
Tuesday, September 18, 2012
Vaccines
This is another one of those "different" posts. I thought it timely to discuss this since we currently have Pertussis (Whopping Cough) in our house.
I will start by giving a bit of background. I had my first 2 kids vaccinated almost fully. Tink was vaccinated fully (but delayed) up until the age of 2. Lady has received 2 vaccines in her life, June has received 1, and Buddy has received none.
Out of all the parenting topics I've researched, I have read the most about birth and vaccines. I've read at least 3 or 4 books about vaccines, numerous articles and medical journal entries (online), and many, many websites-- pro AND anti vax websites.
I've come away with a good amount of knowledge about the diseases and the vaccines......and absolutely no clear line indicating what path I should take for my children.
I don't believe there is a "right" or "wrong" in regards to vaccines. There is just "choice." And I'm glad we have that choice to make for our children, but man, it's a big burden for me.
I'll discuss a few of the vaccines (not all of them) and things that I have learned and reasons why we no longer vax....at least at the moment.
Pertussis (Whooping Cough)
Last week Buddy came down with cough/cold symptoms. We weren't surprised since our neighbors across the street had the same thing a few days prior and they'd been over at our house playing. I tend to not worry too much about cold symptoms. Otherwise the kids would never get to play with any of their friends for 6-8 months of the year. And my kids have great immune systems and tend to not get sick very often anyway. June started coughing at night as well during this time and had a couple of nights where she needed some menthol rub on her chest to help her sleep.
A few days later, Buddy's coughing was getting worse....especially at night. It wasn't the "barking seal" cough of Croup.....we've dealt with that before. Then Friday night, he started to "whoop" on the intake. Brent suggested that it might be Whooping Cough, so I listened to kids with Whooping Cough on Youtube and decided that's most likely what he had. I called the doctor's office in the morning. Luckily my ped's office has a clinic open on Saturdays at a different location. We drove up there later that morning. They took a swab from Buddy's nose and said they'd call us with the results. They also started him on antibiotics. They called the next day and said it was positive for Pertussis. No surprise.
While we were at the office, the nurse was quite nice to us in the beginning. Then after the doctor asked us if Buddy was vaccinated and I told him no, the nurse's tone changed quite considerably. But all-in-all, it actually wasn't as hostile as I had prepared myself for.
I called my neighbor to let her know it was Pertussis since she has a 3 month old baby girl and I was really worried about her. And guess what she told me. Her kids are vaccinated. (And they all have Whooping Cough, including the baby.) This confirmed what I had been reading. The Pertussis vax is one of the least effective vaccines. And in most of the outbreaks, the majority of cases are children who have been vaxed. Back when the shot given was DTP, they used a whole-cell Pertussis vaccine in it. It was more effective than the current vax, but caused a lot more side effects as well. So they developed the acellular version....which is why we now have the DTaP shot. This shot is not nearly as effective, but causes less side effects.
I'd read a lot about Pertussis with my last few babies. My ped recommended I get the DTaP shot for Lady before her first winter and for June before her first winter. I conceded and they each got the shot. But they only got just that one shot. For the vaccine to be as effective as possible (which isn't very effective anyway), I should have taken them back for more shots throughout the winter. I chose not to. During those winters, we heard of no one around us getting Pertussis, although I did read about outbreaks in other states. When Buddy was born last year right before winter time I was faced with the same dilemma. This time I chose to not give him any shots. It was just what felt right.
And I will fully admit that when I realized Buddy had Pertussis, I felt guilt. I wondered if I could have kept this from happening. But the truth is that he probably would have gotten it even if he'd been vaxed.
Now, there are stories on both sides of this issue....heart-wrenching stories. My friend posted one recently on FB that made it seem like every parent who chose not to vaccinate against Pertussis (and chose not to get the booster for themselves) was selfish and putting their child at risk. If it were this simple, the answer would be obvious. But it just isn't this simple. Believe me, I wish it were. No one should bully another parent into or out of vaccinating their children.
Pertussis is usually mild, if even symptomatic, in adults. But the younger the child/baby with it, the scarier this disease is. This is why I was concerned about my neighbor. There are still deaths from this disease. There always have been, even when they used the more effective DTP shot. This is why I am very vigilant when I have a new baby. I didn't go back to church for a while after Buddy was born. And when I did, I kept him in the wrap and did not pass him around at all. I didn't let people touch him. And when we got home from church, before the kids did ANYTHING else, they all washed their hands extremely well. And we got lucky. Buddy didn't get it last year, when it would have possibly been much worse for him.
The news and the commercials on tv would have you believe that if everyone was vaccinated, that we wouldn't have the problem with the outbreaks, but this just isn't true. In reading about vaccines, I found out that there are different types of diseases.....those that can be potentially eradicated and those that will most likely never be. Pertussis is one of the latter. Small pox was eradicated because there was just one strain. They made a vaccine for it, and everybody was quite compliant in getting the vaccine, so they were able to get rid of it completely. Pertussis has multiple strains. AND these strains mutate. So there is really no way to make a vaccine that will confer immunity to every single strain and every single mutation. This is why Pertussis outbreaks wax and wane.
And now they're finding out that the vaccine also wanes. They originally believed it to confer life-long immunity, but now they've realized that it's often as little as 4 years, if that, depending on the strain you are exposed to.
Unfortunately for us, having the disease naturally also doesn't confer life-long immunity. But it confers immunity for a lot longer than the vaccine, although there are still those who get it multiple times. The assumption is that they're exposed to different strains each time.
So now they want everybody to get a booster shot for Pertussis every few years. For how long? Apparently a lifetime. I just can't wrap my head around that.
Chicken Pox (Varicella)
This one is a really frustrating vaccine for me. I honestly wish it had never come on the market. It came out a couple of years before AJ was born and was just coming into popularity when she was little. So I had her vaxed against it. Roo and Tink were as well. I really wish I wouldn't have done that. As with the Pertussis vax, they are finding that the vaccine wanes and in just a few short years, the children no longer have immunity. The problem with this is that the older a person is when they get Chicken Pox, the worse the disease usually is. It is not a fun disease, by any means, but unlike Pertussis, it is MUCH more dangerous for a teenager or adult to get it than it is a child. And getting the vaccine at a young age is leaving children vulnerable at an age when the disease will be much more devastating. So guess what they want you to do. That's right, get a booster every few years. Although they still can't even agree on how often one will need a booster.....most are saying every 5 years. So every 5 years......for a LIFETIME.....my children will possibly need to get another vaccine. I am not ok with this.
Luckily the Chicken Pox vaccine is similar to the Pertussis vaccine in that those who have been vaxed can still get the disease, they usually just get milder symptoms. So my hope is that once I feel Buddy is old enough, I can find someone with Chicken Pox and purposefully expose my children. I'm sure many of you have balked at the idea of a "Chicken Pox Party," but this is what it has come to. I would MUCH rather my children get the disease naturally and have life-long immunity conferred than have to get a vaccine every 5? years for the rest of their lives. The problem people like me are encountering now, is that it is VERY hard to find "wild" Chicken Pox. There are many kids who get the disease FROM the vaccine. So they go on to expose other kids, but now they're finding that that version isn't so great at conferring life-long immunity either.
Polio (IPV)
This is the one that I hear about most often from my parents' generation. And rightly so. They lived through it. It was a scary disease. My father-in-law likes to tell me about the "iron lung" he saw some of his friends have to use. And the debilitations they were left with. I have no doubt about any of that. It is a horrific disease. It was interesting to me to find out, though, that only a small percentage of people who got it were affected by it for an extended period of time. That's not to say that it wasn't scary. It was. You didn't know whether you would be one that would have horrible complications or whether you'd be one that came away unscathed.
What I also found interesting in my reading was that the disease was declining quite a while before the vaccine came out. Most people believe that the vaccine is what got rid of Polio. But there is evidence that this isn't so. If you look at diseases, they tend to have a life span. Polio was apparently "dying" before the vaccine "saved" everyone. There is further evidence of this because when the US came out with a "mandatory" vaccine program for Polio, Great Britain did not. And if you look at the numbers, Polio in Great Britain died out at the same rate as Polio in the US. In fact, there were many people at that time that got Polio FROM the vaccine because they used a live vaccine!
My father-in-law thinks that this generation has become complacent because we haven't lived through the fear of this disease. And that may very well be true. But there is a lot more to it than that. Polio is no longer a threat like it was when he was young. He attributes this to Salk and his vaccine. I do not agree. And that's ok. We are both coming from different perspectives.
Unfortunately Polio has not been completely eradicated worldwide. It hasn't been reported in the US for a long time. And the few cases that were (the last one being in 1993) were imported from outside the US. So there is still a risk of getting it......albeit minuscule.
Hepatits B
I actually don't really have a problem with this vaccine itself. What I do have a problem with is vaccinating babies against it when there is no risk whatsoever of them getting it. (Obviously there are some babies born to high-risk mothers, and those babies should get the vaccine. But this is not the majority of cases.)
HPV (Human Papillomavirus)
This is one that scares me to death. There have been so many horrible side effects seen with this vaccine. They usually give it to pre-teens/teens to try to prevent HPV in hopes of preventing cervical cancer. Honestly, if you are the mother to a pre-teen or teenage daughter and your doctor is telling you she needs this vaccine, PLEASE research it. Research the HECK out of it. There have been more deaths from this vaccine than you can imagine. And there have been many horrendous reactions that have life-long complications involved. My belief is that this one should have been pulled off the market LONG ago, but for some reason ($$$), it has not been. If it were a drug causing these same issues, they would've pulled it already, no question.
My thoughts on vaccines in general
Oh goodness, where to start?
You know how before a drug comes on the market it has to be tested for a long time to see what, if any, negative side effects they might find? And then even when a new drug does make it onto the market, many of them are recalled because of side effects that they were not aware of? Well, vaccines go through no such testing. I mean, how fast did the H1N1 vaccine hit the market? There was no way to do reliable short-term studies, let alone long-term studies of the vaccine. That one scared the crap out of me.
And some of the other vaccines have gone through what you could call long-term studies.....with the general population being the guinea pigs for the experiment. This really bothers me.
Many people have asked me if I think vaccines cause Autism. Even saying those 2 words in the same sentence these days will result in a "Pfft." reaction for most people. The man who originally made that claim was discounted, right? Right. He absolutely was. That doesn't mean he wasn't headed in a viable direction.
So....do I think vaccines cause Autism? No. I do not. Do I think there is a correlation? Absolutely. I have many friends who have kids with Autism. There are many homeschoolers who choose to keep their children with Autism home instead of sending them to school. One of these friends and I have had many discussions on the topic. There are so many factors that there is no way to say THIS-CAUSES-THIS. Her son was born healthy and happy. And he developed that way up until 18 months. They went in for their regular well-child and he got his vaccinations. His mother said it was almost immediate. She said on nearly a daily basis she could watch her son drift further and further away. He is now completely non-verbal and his communication level is almost non-existent. In talking with her I found out a few things. Many of the people who claim that vaccines cause no harm point out that Autism has always been around. And this is true. But late-onset Autism (meaning they didn't have it from birth) has not. And it has risen drastically and in correlation with the increase in vaccines over the years.
Side note: Did you know that if you are from my generation (I was born in 1979), you probably received around 10 vaccines total before you went to Kindergarten. Children now? They receive 36. 36! And 26 of those are given by the time they turn 2. You can't tell me this hasn't had an impact on our children's health.
So.....what my friend (and I) believe about vaccines and Autism.....
There is usually a genetic link in regards to Autism. The likelihood of one of your children being diagnosed with it is greater if someone in your family has it. We believe that some kids are genetically pre-disposed to getting Autism. They have a switch that can be flipped. And that vaccines (along with possibly other things) can flip that switch. Not even necessarily one vaccine, like that one scientist was trying to prove with the MMR vaccine. But that the build-up of them can lead to the switch being flipped. For some reason it is much more prevalent in boys than in girls.
Vaccines are full of things that, if someone offered them to you on a spoon, you'd never ingest them. And yet, we willingly inject them into our bloodstream. This is another thing that bothers me about vaccines. When someone contracts a disease, they usually get it through contact with bodily fluid or direct contact with a carrier. A lot of these diseases enter the body through an orifice (eyes, nose, mouth). The body then sends the immune system into gear to combat it. It usually takes a long time for a disease to get to the bloodstream (if it ever does). And yet we are injecting these vaccines (dead diseases) directly into the bloodstream. The body's immune system does NOT react in the same way it would if we contracted the disease naturally. This is why many vaccines do not confer life-long immunity while contracting the disease naturally does. So I guess you could say the system of delivery bothers me, along with MANY of the ingredients in the vaccines. There are toxins in all of them. And I have a hard time being ok with putting that into my child's body on purpose.
One thing that bothers me about vaccines is when they're called "immunizations." Because this infers that they confer immunity. Many of them do not. In fact, none of them actually claim to confer 100% immunity. But this paragraph is probably just me being picky. I'm kind of big on semantics. (This is why I say "children with Autism" instead of "Autistic kids." Because Autism shouldn't define them.)
Back to worrying about the health of our children and how vaccines affect their health.....
Like Autism, there are probably multiple factors that contribute to childhood illness and also illnesses later in life. There are many childhood illnesses that I wonder about, though. More and more children are being diagnosed with cancer, autoimmune diseases, and allergies (which all have correlations to the immune system) than ever before. I have to wonder if the increase in vaccinations has a lot to do with this.
The next book I want to read on this subject is this one. Sounds interesting. ;) Here is a write-up about it.
So.....for now we're not vaccinating. I may change my mind in the future. In fact, I plan to read up on some again, now that Lady is 5 and see if there are any that I really want her to have. There are many that she doesn't need now that she's 5.
There are very few parenting decisions that I feel have an absolute right or wrong. I do believe that there are "good enough," "better," and "best" choices to be made in most situations. I honestly don't even claim to be making the "best" decision in regards to this. I'm just doing what feels right right now. That may change in the future. A lot of study and a lot of prayer goes into these decisions for me. I feel like I'm "playing it safe" by not vaccinating. I have many friends who choose to "play it safe" by vaccinating. And that's ok.
I will start by giving a bit of background. I had my first 2 kids vaccinated almost fully. Tink was vaccinated fully (but delayed) up until the age of 2. Lady has received 2 vaccines in her life, June has received 1, and Buddy has received none.
Out of all the parenting topics I've researched, I have read the most about birth and vaccines. I've read at least 3 or 4 books about vaccines, numerous articles and medical journal entries (online), and many, many websites-- pro AND anti vax websites.
I've come away with a good amount of knowledge about the diseases and the vaccines......and absolutely no clear line indicating what path I should take for my children.
I don't believe there is a "right" or "wrong" in regards to vaccines. There is just "choice." And I'm glad we have that choice to make for our children, but man, it's a big burden for me.
I'll discuss a few of the vaccines (not all of them) and things that I have learned and reasons why we no longer vax....at least at the moment.
Pertussis (Whooping Cough)
Last week Buddy came down with cough/cold symptoms. We weren't surprised since our neighbors across the street had the same thing a few days prior and they'd been over at our house playing. I tend to not worry too much about cold symptoms. Otherwise the kids would never get to play with any of their friends for 6-8 months of the year. And my kids have great immune systems and tend to not get sick very often anyway. June started coughing at night as well during this time and had a couple of nights where she needed some menthol rub on her chest to help her sleep.
A few days later, Buddy's coughing was getting worse....especially at night. It wasn't the "barking seal" cough of Croup.....we've dealt with that before. Then Friday night, he started to "whoop" on the intake. Brent suggested that it might be Whooping Cough, so I listened to kids with Whooping Cough on Youtube and decided that's most likely what he had. I called the doctor's office in the morning. Luckily my ped's office has a clinic open on Saturdays at a different location. We drove up there later that morning. They took a swab from Buddy's nose and said they'd call us with the results. They also started him on antibiotics. They called the next day and said it was positive for Pertussis. No surprise.
While we were at the office, the nurse was quite nice to us in the beginning. Then after the doctor asked us if Buddy was vaccinated and I told him no, the nurse's tone changed quite considerably. But all-in-all, it actually wasn't as hostile as I had prepared myself for.
I called my neighbor to let her know it was Pertussis since she has a 3 month old baby girl and I was really worried about her. And guess what she told me. Her kids are vaccinated. (And they all have Whooping Cough, including the baby.) This confirmed what I had been reading. The Pertussis vax is one of the least effective vaccines. And in most of the outbreaks, the majority of cases are children who have been vaxed. Back when the shot given was DTP, they used a whole-cell Pertussis vaccine in it. It was more effective than the current vax, but caused a lot more side effects as well. So they developed the acellular version....which is why we now have the DTaP shot. This shot is not nearly as effective, but causes less side effects.
I'd read a lot about Pertussis with my last few babies. My ped recommended I get the DTaP shot for Lady before her first winter and for June before her first winter. I conceded and they each got the shot. But they only got just that one shot. For the vaccine to be as effective as possible (which isn't very effective anyway), I should have taken them back for more shots throughout the winter. I chose not to. During those winters, we heard of no one around us getting Pertussis, although I did read about outbreaks in other states. When Buddy was born last year right before winter time I was faced with the same dilemma. This time I chose to not give him any shots. It was just what felt right.
And I will fully admit that when I realized Buddy had Pertussis, I felt guilt. I wondered if I could have kept this from happening. But the truth is that he probably would have gotten it even if he'd been vaxed.
Now, there are stories on both sides of this issue....heart-wrenching stories. My friend posted one recently on FB that made it seem like every parent who chose not to vaccinate against Pertussis (and chose not to get the booster for themselves) was selfish and putting their child at risk. If it were this simple, the answer would be obvious. But it just isn't this simple. Believe me, I wish it were. No one should bully another parent into or out of vaccinating their children.
Pertussis is usually mild, if even symptomatic, in adults. But the younger the child/baby with it, the scarier this disease is. This is why I was concerned about my neighbor. There are still deaths from this disease. There always have been, even when they used the more effective DTP shot. This is why I am very vigilant when I have a new baby. I didn't go back to church for a while after Buddy was born. And when I did, I kept him in the wrap and did not pass him around at all. I didn't let people touch him. And when we got home from church, before the kids did ANYTHING else, they all washed their hands extremely well. And we got lucky. Buddy didn't get it last year, when it would have possibly been much worse for him.
The news and the commercials on tv would have you believe that if everyone was vaccinated, that we wouldn't have the problem with the outbreaks, but this just isn't true. In reading about vaccines, I found out that there are different types of diseases.....those that can be potentially eradicated and those that will most likely never be. Pertussis is one of the latter. Small pox was eradicated because there was just one strain. They made a vaccine for it, and everybody was quite compliant in getting the vaccine, so they were able to get rid of it completely. Pertussis has multiple strains. AND these strains mutate. So there is really no way to make a vaccine that will confer immunity to every single strain and every single mutation. This is why Pertussis outbreaks wax and wane.
And now they're finding out that the vaccine also wanes. They originally believed it to confer life-long immunity, but now they've realized that it's often as little as 4 years, if that, depending on the strain you are exposed to.
Unfortunately for us, having the disease naturally also doesn't confer life-long immunity. But it confers immunity for a lot longer than the vaccine, although there are still those who get it multiple times. The assumption is that they're exposed to different strains each time.
So now they want everybody to get a booster shot for Pertussis every few years. For how long? Apparently a lifetime. I just can't wrap my head around that.
Chicken Pox (Varicella)
This one is a really frustrating vaccine for me. I honestly wish it had never come on the market. It came out a couple of years before AJ was born and was just coming into popularity when she was little. So I had her vaxed against it. Roo and Tink were as well. I really wish I wouldn't have done that. As with the Pertussis vax, they are finding that the vaccine wanes and in just a few short years, the children no longer have immunity. The problem with this is that the older a person is when they get Chicken Pox, the worse the disease usually is. It is not a fun disease, by any means, but unlike Pertussis, it is MUCH more dangerous for a teenager or adult to get it than it is a child. And getting the vaccine at a young age is leaving children vulnerable at an age when the disease will be much more devastating. So guess what they want you to do. That's right, get a booster every few years. Although they still can't even agree on how often one will need a booster.....most are saying every 5 years. So every 5 years......for a LIFETIME.....my children will possibly need to get another vaccine. I am not ok with this.
Luckily the Chicken Pox vaccine is similar to the Pertussis vaccine in that those who have been vaxed can still get the disease, they usually just get milder symptoms. So my hope is that once I feel Buddy is old enough, I can find someone with Chicken Pox and purposefully expose my children. I'm sure many of you have balked at the idea of a "Chicken Pox Party," but this is what it has come to. I would MUCH rather my children get the disease naturally and have life-long immunity conferred than have to get a vaccine every 5? years for the rest of their lives. The problem people like me are encountering now, is that it is VERY hard to find "wild" Chicken Pox. There are many kids who get the disease FROM the vaccine. So they go on to expose other kids, but now they're finding that that version isn't so great at conferring life-long immunity either.
Polio (IPV)
This is the one that I hear about most often from my parents' generation. And rightly so. They lived through it. It was a scary disease. My father-in-law likes to tell me about the "iron lung" he saw some of his friends have to use. And the debilitations they were left with. I have no doubt about any of that. It is a horrific disease. It was interesting to me to find out, though, that only a small percentage of people who got it were affected by it for an extended period of time. That's not to say that it wasn't scary. It was. You didn't know whether you would be one that would have horrible complications or whether you'd be one that came away unscathed.
What I also found interesting in my reading was that the disease was declining quite a while before the vaccine came out. Most people believe that the vaccine is what got rid of Polio. But there is evidence that this isn't so. If you look at diseases, they tend to have a life span. Polio was apparently "dying" before the vaccine "saved" everyone. There is further evidence of this because when the US came out with a "mandatory" vaccine program for Polio, Great Britain did not. And if you look at the numbers, Polio in Great Britain died out at the same rate as Polio in the US. In fact, there were many people at that time that got Polio FROM the vaccine because they used a live vaccine!
My father-in-law thinks that this generation has become complacent because we haven't lived through the fear of this disease. And that may very well be true. But there is a lot more to it than that. Polio is no longer a threat like it was when he was young. He attributes this to Salk and his vaccine. I do not agree. And that's ok. We are both coming from different perspectives.
Unfortunately Polio has not been completely eradicated worldwide. It hasn't been reported in the US for a long time. And the few cases that were (the last one being in 1993) were imported from outside the US. So there is still a risk of getting it......albeit minuscule.
Hepatits B
I actually don't really have a problem with this vaccine itself. What I do have a problem with is vaccinating babies against it when there is no risk whatsoever of them getting it. (Obviously there are some babies born to high-risk mothers, and those babies should get the vaccine. But this is not the majority of cases.)
HPV (Human Papillomavirus)
This is one that scares me to death. There have been so many horrible side effects seen with this vaccine. They usually give it to pre-teens/teens to try to prevent HPV in hopes of preventing cervical cancer. Honestly, if you are the mother to a pre-teen or teenage daughter and your doctor is telling you she needs this vaccine, PLEASE research it. Research the HECK out of it. There have been more deaths from this vaccine than you can imagine. And there have been many horrendous reactions that have life-long complications involved. My belief is that this one should have been pulled off the market LONG ago, but for some reason ($$$), it has not been. If it were a drug causing these same issues, they would've pulled it already, no question.
My thoughts on vaccines in general
Oh goodness, where to start?
You know how before a drug comes on the market it has to be tested for a long time to see what, if any, negative side effects they might find? And then even when a new drug does make it onto the market, many of them are recalled because of side effects that they were not aware of? Well, vaccines go through no such testing. I mean, how fast did the H1N1 vaccine hit the market? There was no way to do reliable short-term studies, let alone long-term studies of the vaccine. That one scared the crap out of me.
And some of the other vaccines have gone through what you could call long-term studies.....with the general population being the guinea pigs for the experiment. This really bothers me.
Many people have asked me if I think vaccines cause Autism. Even saying those 2 words in the same sentence these days will result in a "Pfft." reaction for most people. The man who originally made that claim was discounted, right? Right. He absolutely was. That doesn't mean he wasn't headed in a viable direction.
So....do I think vaccines cause Autism? No. I do not. Do I think there is a correlation? Absolutely. I have many friends who have kids with Autism. There are many homeschoolers who choose to keep their children with Autism home instead of sending them to school. One of these friends and I have had many discussions on the topic. There are so many factors that there is no way to say THIS-CAUSES-THIS. Her son was born healthy and happy. And he developed that way up until 18 months. They went in for their regular well-child and he got his vaccinations. His mother said it was almost immediate. She said on nearly a daily basis she could watch her son drift further and further away. He is now completely non-verbal and his communication level is almost non-existent. In talking with her I found out a few things. Many of the people who claim that vaccines cause no harm point out that Autism has always been around. And this is true. But late-onset Autism (meaning they didn't have it from birth) has not. And it has risen drastically and in correlation with the increase in vaccines over the years.
Side note: Did you know that if you are from my generation (I was born in 1979), you probably received around 10 vaccines total before you went to Kindergarten. Children now? They receive 36. 36! And 26 of those are given by the time they turn 2. You can't tell me this hasn't had an impact on our children's health.
So.....what my friend (and I) believe about vaccines and Autism.....
There is usually a genetic link in regards to Autism. The likelihood of one of your children being diagnosed with it is greater if someone in your family has it. We believe that some kids are genetically pre-disposed to getting Autism. They have a switch that can be flipped. And that vaccines (along with possibly other things) can flip that switch. Not even necessarily one vaccine, like that one scientist was trying to prove with the MMR vaccine. But that the build-up of them can lead to the switch being flipped. For some reason it is much more prevalent in boys than in girls.
Vaccines are full of things that, if someone offered them to you on a spoon, you'd never ingest them. And yet, we willingly inject them into our bloodstream. This is another thing that bothers me about vaccines. When someone contracts a disease, they usually get it through contact with bodily fluid or direct contact with a carrier. A lot of these diseases enter the body through an orifice (eyes, nose, mouth). The body then sends the immune system into gear to combat it. It usually takes a long time for a disease to get to the bloodstream (if it ever does). And yet we are injecting these vaccines (dead diseases) directly into the bloodstream. The body's immune system does NOT react in the same way it would if we contracted the disease naturally. This is why many vaccines do not confer life-long immunity while contracting the disease naturally does. So I guess you could say the system of delivery bothers me, along with MANY of the ingredients in the vaccines. There are toxins in all of them. And I have a hard time being ok with putting that into my child's body on purpose.
One thing that bothers me about vaccines is when they're called "immunizations." Because this infers that they confer immunity. Many of them do not. In fact, none of them actually claim to confer 100% immunity. But this paragraph is probably just me being picky. I'm kind of big on semantics. (This is why I say "children with Autism" instead of "Autistic kids." Because Autism shouldn't define them.)
Back to worrying about the health of our children and how vaccines affect their health.....
Like Autism, there are probably multiple factors that contribute to childhood illness and also illnesses later in life. There are many childhood illnesses that I wonder about, though. More and more children are being diagnosed with cancer, autoimmune diseases, and allergies (which all have correlations to the immune system) than ever before. I have to wonder if the increase in vaccinations has a lot to do with this.
The next book I want to read on this subject is this one. Sounds interesting. ;) Here is a write-up about it.
So.....for now we're not vaccinating. I may change my mind in the future. In fact, I plan to read up on some again, now that Lady is 5 and see if there are any that I really want her to have. There are many that she doesn't need now that she's 5.
There are very few parenting decisions that I feel have an absolute right or wrong. I do believe that there are "good enough," "better," and "best" choices to be made in most situations. I honestly don't even claim to be making the "best" decision in regards to this. I'm just doing what feels right right now. That may change in the future. A lot of study and a lot of prayer goes into these decisions for me. I feel like I'm "playing it safe" by not vaccinating. I have many friends who choose to "play it safe" by vaccinating. And that's ok.
Sunday, April 24, 2011
What I Believe About Food (Post Edit at Bottom)
I have put off writing these posts for over a year now, because I wanted to wait until we "had it down" and were doing everything right. I've recently realized that may never happen. I still have goals, but I also know Brent and myself and we have always had ups and downs and we probably always will. This will most likely be our life-long struggle.
This is going to be a tricky post to write. Let me start by saying: PLEASE don't get offended by what I might say here. These are my feelings and opinions and beliefs about things that I have learned over the past few years of reading about what true health really is. (And no, I don't think that my family and I are living it (yet).) I know it's hard and I think everybody has their own issues with food. I would just like to pass on what I've learned about food. If you believe differently, that's just fine.
*Standing up: "Hello, my name is Ann and I am a foodaholic."
One of the (many) reasons Brent and I get along so well is that we both LOVE food. No, really. I know a lot of people say that. We really mean it. We love to try new things, we love our taste buds being challenged with new flavor, we love to tweak recipes to make them even better. Brent loves to cook too. While I don't love to cook, I sure love to eat. And I always enjoy the finished product, even if the production of it isn't top on my list of things I enjoy.
About 7 years ago, we came to the realization that our love affair with food had gotten us in trouble. Brent weighed 290 and I topped out at just over 200. Most people know Brent and I have always struggled with our weight. We still do. Neither of us hit the gene pool jackpot in the category of metabolism. Add that to our obsession with tasty treats and you've got a recipe (ha! pun!) for fat.
There's no other way to put it. We were fat. So we decided it was time to do something about it. We started going to Weight Watchers. We learned a lot there and together we were able to lose a whole person: 135 lbs! I got down to my pre-marriage weight and Brent got thinner than anyone had ever seen him before. Really. This started our path toward being healthier. You'd think that was it, right?
Wrong.
While Weight Watchers was a great catalyst in helping us start learning more about health, it isn't the be-all, end-all of healthy eating. They're all about calorie-input vs. calorie-output, which is great. Obviously if you're eating more than you're burning off, you're going to gain weight (and we did). But after a few months we started to feel like there was more that we wanted to do. More than just buying 45 calorie/slice bread and 100 calorie/pack Oreos. We wanted to be healthier, not just skinnier.
We came out to UT for a family reunion the next summer and had some long talks with Brent's brother and his wife. You see, they'd recently gone vegetarian. We were curious. We had all the same questions I've been asked over and over.
"So what do you eat?"
"How do you get enough protein?"
"So what do you eat?"
"What about your kids?"
"So what do you eat?"
And lastly, "Why?"
The last question turned out to be the most important, and the focus of this blog post. I'll get to the other questions in later posts.
V & P started talking about the Word of Wisdom and we immediately started rolling our eyes. But then P challenged us to read it and pray about what it meant for us. I'd never even considered praying about the WoW. So Brent and I took her challenge. And the first time we read through it, it was like I was reading it for the first time. I knew, even before praying, what it meant for us. And then I prayed and it was confirmed. We were going veggie.
I would challenge anybody who just rolled their eyes at my last paragraph to go to Section 89 in the Doctrine & Covenants and read it again. But before you read, pray. And then read with an open mind. It might surprise you to find a few verses that are usually left out during Sunday School lessons.
We obviously all know the "Do Nots" of the Word of Wisdom. They are ingrained in our little brains from the time we're in nursery. But not much is said about the "Do's." I have an opinion about this. (SURPRISE!!!) I think that the "Do Nots" were more important for the early saints of the church. Because they weren't aware of the negative affects of tobacco or coffee or black tea. (This is true up until probably 50-60 years ago.) They were probably aware of the affects of alcohol, but it was a good reminder to stay away from it because of its addictive nature. In today's world, Mormons and non-Mormons alike know about these things having a negative impact on our bodies. And while there are still those that need reminders or new members who need to get rid of addictions, for the most part, this isn't the part of the Word of Wisdom that most members struggle with.
And in contrast, the "Do's" part of the Word of Wisdom isn't something that the early saints seemed to struggle with. They ate whole grains and fruits and vegetables in the seasons thereof. They used their bodies (exercise). They really didn't need these reminders nearly as much as the saints of today. The "Do's" are what we SHOULD be studying and talking about in Sunday School. And yet it's usually the part that gets skipped over. Why is that? Is it because people are uncomfortable talking about it? Or is it because so many members are barely even aware that the Word of Wisdom contains these things?
The "Do Nots" have been repeated thousands of times in lessons by the time we're adults. I think most people think that's all there is to the Word of Wisdom. But if you look closely, it's SOOOOOO much more than that. It's the ultimate "diet" guide....the ultimate "healthy lifestyle" guide. No other book (and believe me, I've read many) is nearly as complete at giving you a full picture of how to take care of your bodies, especially in so few words. :)
Let's start at the beginning.
1 A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
This was originally given as a guideline, but later, Wilford Woodruff made it a commandment. Key words here: this is for the "temporal salvation of all saints in the last days."
3 Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.
Some people like to argue that they shouldn't be held to the same standards because they "won't get addicted" to the harmful substances God warns about, but this verse makes it clear. These guidelines were set in place "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints."
And the truth of the matter is, we all have our areas of weakness when it comes to the Word of Wisdom.
4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—
I LOVE this verse. Heavenly Father knew that our diets would deteriorate so incredibly, and knew that there would be conspiring men with evil in their hearts at the center of the food industry (and the tobacco industry, but my focus here is on food).
Verses 5-9 are about the "Do Nots." And since we pretty much have all of those memorized, let's move on to verses 10 and 11.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving.
To me, this talks not just about herbs being used as food, but also as medicine.
Now on to the "controversial" part:
12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
This is where most Sunday School lessons stop. They don't like to go on to the next verse because it makes people uncomfortable. And if they stop here, they can say, "Everybody can define "sparingly" for themselves." But the truth of the matter is, Heavenly Father defined "sparingly" for us in the next verse:
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.
"It is pleasing unto me that they should NOT be used" and then He goes on to tell us the times it is ok to use them (sparingly).
That is the verse that registered with me when we first read it 7 years ago. And have we followed it perfectly ever since? Heavens no. But we are always trying and the "meat thing" really isn't something we struggle with often.
But wait! There's more! God then goes on to tell us about grain.
14 All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth;
So grain is for us AND for all the animals. And what about those animals? He reminds us yet again:
15 And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.
At this point, people like to point out this scripture:
D&C 49:18
And whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God;
But the thing is, God is not forbidding anyone from eating meat (and neither am I). He's telling us EXACTLY the times when "it is pleasing unto Him" that we use them. (In times of winter, cold, or famine.) That is not the same as forbidding or abstaining completely.
Let's move on.
16 All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—
17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.
All grain and fruit and vegetables are "good for the food of man."
And He cares so much about the animals that He tells us what grain is good for each of them. Does this sound like a God who would approve of the current meat and dairy industry?
(For anyone who doesn't understand the current state of the meat and dairy industry or who thinks that there are not "evil men conspiring against us," watch any of these documentaries. And there are more to be found if you so desire.)
And now comes one of my favorite parts that is also often skipped over during Sunday School. The promises that Heavenly Father makes to us if we follow His Word of Wisdom.
18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;
20And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint.
21And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.
So not only are we promised that we will have "health in our navel and marrow in our bones," (our physical bodies will be healthy), we are also promised blessings of an intellectual nature. We will have "wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures." I italicized the part that I have found to be true already in my own life. The frustrating thing is, that in today's world, the truth about health and food is HIDDEN TREASURE. Most people really are fooled into believing that unhealthy food is healthy. They are fooled by "conspiring men." I believe this without a shadow of a doubt.
Verse 20 has come true in my life and in Brent's. The healthier we eat, the more energy we have. And then we are better able to exercise regularly, which in turn makes us even healthier!
And verse 21 is a beautiful ending. But I ask you to think about it a little deeper. What "destroying angels" do we face today? What is killing off people right and left? I'll tell you the top 3 killers in America today:
1. Heart Disease
2. Type 2 Diabetes
3. Cancer
(Can't remember if that's the right order or not.)
These are the "destroying angels" of today.
These 3 things are ALL preventable.
They are ALL "diseases of affluence," meaning they're only found at such high rates in countries where gluttony reigns supreme....where food is found in abundance, and where it is taken through process after process before ending up on our plates in nowhere near the condition in which it started. FOOD is the #1, #2, and #3 cause of death in America. How sad is that? Especially when we have food in such abundance, we can easily choose fruits, veggies, and grains "in the season thereof" nearly year-round. (Although is it best to find food grown as locally and "in season" as possible, there is no denying we are extremely spoiled in the options available to us.)
Food is not only fuel, it is medicine. Just like food can CAUSE all of these diseases, it can also PREVENT them. THIS is what Heavenly Father is trying to teach us by giving us the Word of Wisdom. He's not only telling us what NOT to eat (in fact, it really only mentions meat in that category, besides coffee/tea/alcohol), He's telling us exactly what TO eat to make our bodies as healthy as possible. I am so thankful that Brent and I gained a testimony of the Word of Wisdom when we did. I was really worried about being left a widow at a young age because of Brent's health. It happens to people every day.
And while we still struggle with always choosing to put GOOD food into our mouths, we are 10 million times better than we were 7 years ago. And we have continuous goals to keep improving and keep improving. In future posts, I will talk about what changes we've made and tell you all about the "hidden treasures of knowledge" that Brent and I have learned along the way. But I wanted to start with this post, because at the end of the day, this is what it comes down to and the reasoning behind WHY we eat the way we do.
POST EDIT:
I forgot one of my most important points!!! If you'll notice, NOWHERE in the WoW does it say, "Moderation in all things." It's a Mormon Myth that that phrase is part of the Word of Wisdom and it comes up in nearly every Sunday School lesson about the WoW. In fact, that phrase is not found ANYWHERE in the scriptures. Nor has it been spoken over the pulpit. We mentioned this in Sunday School once, and a lady in our ward went searching through the church's archives looking for the source of this myth. She found it a total of 2 times. Once it was said by a member of the 70 in a different context. And once it was said by Pres. Joseph F. Smith. Except that he added a word. He said, "Moderation in all GOOD things." I like that because people like to use this phrase as an excuse to eat crap. Because they're "eating it in moderation." That is not at all the intent behind Pres. Smith's statement.
And you know, if you think about it, we are NOT a church of "moderation." In fact, most people consider us quite extreme. In the scriptures, it DOES say, "Feast upon the words of Christ." not just read the scriptures every once in a while. It says, "Pray always." not just pray whenever we have a need arise. We are a peculiar people in that we are expected to -and tend to- live our religion full-time, not just when it's convenient, or "for show."
This is going to be a tricky post to write. Let me start by saying: PLEASE don't get offended by what I might say here. These are my feelings and opinions and beliefs about things that I have learned over the past few years of reading about what true health really is. (And no, I don't think that my family and I are living it (yet).) I know it's hard and I think everybody has their own issues with food. I would just like to pass on what I've learned about food. If you believe differently, that's just fine.
*Standing up: "Hello, my name is Ann and I am a foodaholic."
One of the (many) reasons Brent and I get along so well is that we both LOVE food. No, really. I know a lot of people say that. We really mean it. We love to try new things, we love our taste buds being challenged with new flavor, we love to tweak recipes to make them even better. Brent loves to cook too. While I don't love to cook, I sure love to eat. And I always enjoy the finished product, even if the production of it isn't top on my list of things I enjoy.
About 7 years ago, we came to the realization that our love affair with food had gotten us in trouble. Brent weighed 290 and I topped out at just over 200. Most people know Brent and I have always struggled with our weight. We still do. Neither of us hit the gene pool jackpot in the category of metabolism. Add that to our obsession with tasty treats and you've got a recipe (ha! pun!) for fat.
There's no other way to put it. We were fat. So we decided it was time to do something about it. We started going to Weight Watchers. We learned a lot there and together we were able to lose a whole person: 135 lbs! I got down to my pre-marriage weight and Brent got thinner than anyone had ever seen him before. Really. This started our path toward being healthier. You'd think that was it, right?
Wrong.
While Weight Watchers was a great catalyst in helping us start learning more about health, it isn't the be-all, end-all of healthy eating. They're all about calorie-input vs. calorie-output, which is great. Obviously if you're eating more than you're burning off, you're going to gain weight (and we did). But after a few months we started to feel like there was more that we wanted to do. More than just buying 45 calorie/slice bread and 100 calorie/pack Oreos. We wanted to be healthier, not just skinnier.
We came out to UT for a family reunion the next summer and had some long talks with Brent's brother and his wife. You see, they'd recently gone vegetarian. We were curious. We had all the same questions I've been asked over and over.
"So what do you eat?"
"How do you get enough protein?"
"So what do you eat?"
"What about your kids?"
"So what do you eat?"
And lastly, "Why?"
The last question turned out to be the most important, and the focus of this blog post. I'll get to the other questions in later posts.
V & P started talking about the Word of Wisdom and we immediately started rolling our eyes. But then P challenged us to read it and pray about what it meant for us. I'd never even considered praying about the WoW. So Brent and I took her challenge. And the first time we read through it, it was like I was reading it for the first time. I knew, even before praying, what it meant for us. And then I prayed and it was confirmed. We were going veggie.
I would challenge anybody who just rolled their eyes at my last paragraph to go to Section 89 in the Doctrine & Covenants and read it again. But before you read, pray. And then read with an open mind. It might surprise you to find a few verses that are usually left out during Sunday School lessons.
We obviously all know the "Do Nots" of the Word of Wisdom. They are ingrained in our little brains from the time we're in nursery. But not much is said about the "Do's." I have an opinion about this. (SURPRISE!!!) I think that the "Do Nots" were more important for the early saints of the church. Because they weren't aware of the negative affects of tobacco or coffee or black tea. (This is true up until probably 50-60 years ago.) They were probably aware of the affects of alcohol, but it was a good reminder to stay away from it because of its addictive nature. In today's world, Mormons and non-Mormons alike know about these things having a negative impact on our bodies. And while there are still those that need reminders or new members who need to get rid of addictions, for the most part, this isn't the part of the Word of Wisdom that most members struggle with.
And in contrast, the "Do's" part of the Word of Wisdom isn't something that the early saints seemed to struggle with. They ate whole grains and fruits and vegetables in the seasons thereof. They used their bodies (exercise). They really didn't need these reminders nearly as much as the saints of today. The "Do's" are what we SHOULD be studying and talking about in Sunday School. And yet it's usually the part that gets skipped over. Why is that? Is it because people are uncomfortable talking about it? Or is it because so many members are barely even aware that the Word of Wisdom contains these things?
The "Do Nots" have been repeated thousands of times in lessons by the time we're adults. I think most people think that's all there is to the Word of Wisdom. But if you look closely, it's SOOOOOO much more than that. It's the ultimate "diet" guide....the ultimate "healthy lifestyle" guide. No other book (and believe me, I've read many) is nearly as complete at giving you a full picture of how to take care of your bodies, especially in so few words. :)
Let's start at the beginning.
1 A Word of Wisdom, for the benefit of the council of high priests, assembled in Kirtland, and the church, and also the saints in Zion—
2 To be sent greeting; not by commandment or constraint, but by revelation and the word of wisdom, showing forth the order and will of God in the temporal salvation of all saints in the last days—
This was originally given as a guideline, but later, Wilford Woodruff made it a commandment. Key words here: this is for the "temporal salvation of all saints in the last days."
3 Given for a principle with promise, adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints, who are or can be called saints.
Some people like to argue that they shouldn't be held to the same standards because they "won't get addicted" to the harmful substances God warns about, but this verse makes it clear. These guidelines were set in place "adapted to the capacity of the weak and the weakest of all saints."
And the truth of the matter is, we all have our areas of weakness when it comes to the Word of Wisdom.
4 Behold, verily, thus saith the Lord unto you: In consequence of evils and designs which do and will exist in the hearts of conspiring men in the last days, I have warned you, and forewarn you, by giving unto you this word of wisdom by revelation—
I LOVE this verse. Heavenly Father knew that our diets would deteriorate so incredibly, and knew that there would be conspiring men with evil in their hearts at the center of the food industry (and the tobacco industry, but my focus here is on food).
Verses 5-9 are about the "Do Nots." And since we pretty much have all of those memorized, let's move on to verses 10 and 11.
10 And again, verily I say unto you, all wholesome herbs God hath ordained for the constitution, nature, and use of man—
11 Every herb in the season thereof, and every fruit in the season thereof; all these to be used with prudence and thanksgiving.
To me, this talks not just about herbs being used as food, but also as medicine.
Now on to the "controversial" part:
12 Yea, flesh also of beasts and of the fowls of the air, I, the Lord, have ordained for the use of man with thanksgiving; nevertheless they are to be used sparingly;
This is where most Sunday School lessons stop. They don't like to go on to the next verse because it makes people uncomfortable. And if they stop here, they can say, "Everybody can define "sparingly" for themselves." But the truth of the matter is, Heavenly Father defined "sparingly" for us in the next verse:
13 And it is pleasing unto me that they should not be used, only in times of winter, or of cold, or famine.
"It is pleasing unto me that they should NOT be used" and then He goes on to tell us the times it is ok to use them (sparingly).
That is the verse that registered with me when we first read it 7 years ago. And have we followed it perfectly ever since? Heavens no. But we are always trying and the "meat thing" really isn't something we struggle with often.
But wait! There's more! God then goes on to tell us about grain.
14 All grain is ordained for the use of man and of beasts, to be the staff of life, not only for man but for the beasts of the field, and the fowls of heaven, and all wild animals that run or creep on the earth;
So grain is for us AND for all the animals. And what about those animals? He reminds us yet again:
15 And these hath God made for the use of man only in times of famine and excess of hunger.
At this point, people like to point out this scripture:
D&C 49:18
And whoso forbiddeth to abstain from meats, that man should not eat the same, is not ordained of God;
But the thing is, God is not forbidding anyone from eating meat (and neither am I). He's telling us EXACTLY the times when "it is pleasing unto Him" that we use them. (In times of winter, cold, or famine.) That is not the same as forbidding or abstaining completely.
Let's move on.
16 All grain is good for the food of man; as also the fruit of the vine; that which yieldeth fruit, whether in the ground or above the ground—
17 Nevertheless, wheat for man, and corn for the ox, and oats for the horse, and rye for the fowls and for swine, and for all beasts of the field, and barley for all useful animals, and for mild drinks, as also other grain.
All grain and fruit and vegetables are "good for the food of man."
And He cares so much about the animals that He tells us what grain is good for each of them. Does this sound like a God who would approve of the current meat and dairy industry?
(For anyone who doesn't understand the current state of the meat and dairy industry or who thinks that there are not "evil men conspiring against us," watch any of these documentaries. And there are more to be found if you so desire.)
And now comes one of my favorite parts that is also often skipped over during Sunday School. The promises that Heavenly Father makes to us if we follow His Word of Wisdom.
18 And all saints who remember to keep and do these sayings, walking in obedience to the commandments, shall receive health in their navel and marrow to their bones;
19And shall find wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures;
20And shall run and not be weary, and shall walk and not faint.
21And I, the Lord, give unto them a promise, that the destroying angel shall pass by them, as the children of Israel, and not slay them. Amen.
So not only are we promised that we will have "health in our navel and marrow in our bones," (our physical bodies will be healthy), we are also promised blessings of an intellectual nature. We will have "wisdom and great treasures of knowledge, even hidden treasures." I italicized the part that I have found to be true already in my own life. The frustrating thing is, that in today's world, the truth about health and food is HIDDEN TREASURE. Most people really are fooled into believing that unhealthy food is healthy. They are fooled by "conspiring men." I believe this without a shadow of a doubt.
Verse 20 has come true in my life and in Brent's. The healthier we eat, the more energy we have. And then we are better able to exercise regularly, which in turn makes us even healthier!
And verse 21 is a beautiful ending. But I ask you to think about it a little deeper. What "destroying angels" do we face today? What is killing off people right and left? I'll tell you the top 3 killers in America today:
1. Heart Disease
2. Type 2 Diabetes
3. Cancer
(Can't remember if that's the right order or not.)
These are the "destroying angels" of today.
These 3 things are ALL preventable.
They are ALL "diseases of affluence," meaning they're only found at such high rates in countries where gluttony reigns supreme....where food is found in abundance, and where it is taken through process after process before ending up on our plates in nowhere near the condition in which it started. FOOD is the #1, #2, and #3 cause of death in America. How sad is that? Especially when we have food in such abundance, we can easily choose fruits, veggies, and grains "in the season thereof" nearly year-round. (Although is it best to find food grown as locally and "in season" as possible, there is no denying we are extremely spoiled in the options available to us.)
Food is not only fuel, it is medicine. Just like food can CAUSE all of these diseases, it can also PREVENT them. THIS is what Heavenly Father is trying to teach us by giving us the Word of Wisdom. He's not only telling us what NOT to eat (in fact, it really only mentions meat in that category, besides coffee/tea/alcohol), He's telling us exactly what TO eat to make our bodies as healthy as possible. I am so thankful that Brent and I gained a testimony of the Word of Wisdom when we did. I was really worried about being left a widow at a young age because of Brent's health. It happens to people every day.
And while we still struggle with always choosing to put GOOD food into our mouths, we are 10 million times better than we were 7 years ago. And we have continuous goals to keep improving and keep improving. In future posts, I will talk about what changes we've made and tell you all about the "hidden treasures of knowledge" that Brent and I have learned along the way. But I wanted to start with this post, because at the end of the day, this is what it comes down to and the reasoning behind WHY we eat the way we do.
POST EDIT:
I forgot one of my most important points!!! If you'll notice, NOWHERE in the WoW does it say, "Moderation in all things." It's a Mormon Myth that that phrase is part of the Word of Wisdom and it comes up in nearly every Sunday School lesson about the WoW. In fact, that phrase is not found ANYWHERE in the scriptures. Nor has it been spoken over the pulpit. We mentioned this in Sunday School once, and a lady in our ward went searching through the church's archives looking for the source of this myth. She found it a total of 2 times. Once it was said by a member of the 70 in a different context. And once it was said by Pres. Joseph F. Smith. Except that he added a word. He said, "Moderation in all GOOD things." I like that because people like to use this phrase as an excuse to eat crap. Because they're "eating it in moderation." That is not at all the intent behind Pres. Smith's statement.
And you know, if you think about it, we are NOT a church of "moderation." In fact, most people consider us quite extreme. In the scriptures, it DOES say, "Feast upon the words of Christ." not just read the scriptures every once in a while. It says, "Pray always." not just pray whenever we have a need arise. We are a peculiar people in that we are expected to -and tend to- live our religion full-time, not just when it's convenient, or "for show."
Monday, January 31, 2011
What Boobs Are For--Part II
Happy New Year! (A little late.)
In my last post, Misty left a comment that I LOVED, but that also made me a little sad. She talked about how she normally nurses her youngest (nearly 3yo) at home now so that she doesn't have to deal with the judgements of others by nursing in public. I don't blame her at all. It just makes me sad that this is her reality. (A lot of women's reality, including mine.) This is exactly the subject I wanted to discuss in Part II. Not just nursing a toddler in public, but nursing ANY baby in public. Why is it so shunned? And why do I feel like it's possibly even more frowned-upon in the LDS society? (Not always the case, but I'll get into why I believe it to be so later.)
A few months back, I had a friend from AZ get kicked out of a McDonald's (yes, you read that right.....out of family-friendly Mickey-D's) for nursing her baby (who was less than a year old at the time....I believe he was around 6 months old). The McD's worker went so far as to "walk" them out to their cars (she was with another friend and their children), threatening to call the police! Nothing was done about it until the local news got involved and ran the story. I was shocked by the comments on the news website. There were a lot of supportive comments, but there were also a lot of hate-filled, ugly, disgusting comments as well. All because this woman decided to feed her child. And if you're thinking, "Well, she must have been showing a lot of skin," you're wrong. She does not like to expose herself, and therefore she keeps herself very well covered when nursing. In fact, I have yet to see ANY woman breastfeeding in public who is showing even a remotely offensive amount of skin. I see much more skin watching the teens walk through the mall in their skin tight clothes and shirts that leave nothing to the imagination. And yet nobody's kicking them out of McDonald's. Why is this?
I believe it's because our society is so hung up on the sexual nature of breasts that we've completely forgotten what their INTENDED purpose is. If you want to show cleavage down to your navel at an awards show, you make it onto the "Best Dressed" list. But if you dare show any of that skin with a baby attached to it, you're waging a war on modesty and decency! This is so demented!
When this happened to my friend, a nurse-in was held at the McDonald's a few days later, and we held a virtual nurse-in on Facebook. (Basically a page that you "liked" to show your support for nursing in public.) A "friend" left a comment on my feed about how that was taking things too far and "there's something to be said for modesty" and "What about the people who aren't in our same 'season' of life (ie those without kids or those whose kids are older)?" and "What about the possibility of a 13yo boy without any siblings or experience seeing a woman breastfeeding.....what about being sensitive to him?"
Honestly, I wanted to smack her. But I refrained and tried to show her my perspective. Nursing isn't about being modest or immodest. It's about feeding a baby. Is there a possibility that you might see a little bit of skin or (heaven forbid) nipple while watching someone nurse a baby? Yep. I'm sure that people who've been around me have seen more skin than I realize when I'm feeding my babies. But do I care? Absolutely not. My "friend" who thinks nursing in public is immodest would see that as being confrontational. But I disagree. I never purposely show skin, but I also don't freak out if I'm not as fast with my shirt as my baby is in turning her head. It happens. Has someone around me ever been uncomfortable by my nursing? Most likely. But as I said to my "friend," my responsibility lies in feeding my baby, not in making sure everyone around me is ok with me feeding my baby.
Also, you can't please everybody. Some people are offended by it no matter how many layers a woman puts over the "offending activity." I know a lot of women who choose to use a nursing cover. I've even given them out as gifts before because I think I would've been more comfortable using one when AJ was a baby. It took us a while to get the hang of things and more often than not I needed 2 hands to nurse her and it was nearly impossible to keep my boob covered up. So I used a blanket instead, which fell off constantly. So annoying. So I think those nursing covers are a great idea for anyone who's not super comfortable or is less-than-coordinated, as I was. But I don't use them now. I think I tried them with Tink, but by then I was a lot more comfortable (and coordinated) and didn't feel the need to use one. Plus I actually think they draw MORE attention to the "offending activity." It's no secret what's going on under one of those things. ;) What I worry about with the nursing covers is that women feel the need to use them for everybody else's benefit and that bothers me. If a woman is more comfortable, HERSELF, using one, then more power to her. But if she's doing it because that's what is politically correct in this society, then that makes me crazy.
I had a lengthy conversation with another great friend who didn't like breastfeeding pictures because she worried that it perpetuated the p*rn problem. I don't know whether it does or doesn't, but I do think this subject is at the root of one of my issues with the opposition of nursing in public. In today's society boys and men are taught that boobs are for one thing and one thing only AND that they're these great, mysterious balls of wonder put on women purely for male enjoyment. I think this is at the heart of why the p*rn industry is so huge right now (along with the plethora of ways it's available). If we take away the mystery and wonder with our young boys and teach them first and foremost the intended purpose of boobs and the rest of women's bodies, then HOPEFULLY they won't be so caught up in trying to get a glimpse of them.
It's one of the things I believe to be at the root of the p*rn problem within the church these days. Because boobs-in-the-act-of-breastfeeding are lumped together with boobs-in-general when discussing modesty, boobs have this mystery and secrecy behind them that would stir anybody's curiosity. I found out something recently that made me jump for joy. It hasn't always been this way within the church. Remember WAY back in the day.....I'm talking pioneer-times? When the women would be covered from neck to ankle? Well, that was true at all times EXCEPT when breastfeeding! Surprise! Because it was NORMAL back then. That's how you fed your baby. And it was completely acceptable and normal, EVEN during Sacrament Meeting. -gasp!- Want proof?
(photo courtesy of http://rixarixa.blogspot.com/)
This is a photo of a painting at the Church History Museum. You can see the full version here along with a couple other close-ups depicting breastfeeding in the early days of the church and a great blog post about it. I love it! Here's another great post about nursing in the church. (This post is another great read about exposing children to nursing.)
This shows me that it is a fairly recent development in our society for nursing to be considered "immodest" or something that needs to be taken to another room.
I was talking to my brother and sister-in-law about this last night and expressing my concern that maybe the LDS society was a little TOO modest (specifically within our homes) and if the human body wasn't such a mystery that only serves to pique the curiosity of young men and young women, that MAYBE we wouldn't have as big of a fight against porn as we currently do. My brother pointed out that there are societies that are more modest than we are. Muslims, for example, cover much more than we do when outside of the home. BUT I don't know that they are as modest INSIDE their homes. One of my good friends in MI was Muslim and she invited me to a few get-togethers with her friends and family. These were female get-togethers, but there were children present (male and female children). All the women took off their hijabs while inside and "got comfortable." During one of these parties, a number of the women did some belly dancing, and wore the associated clothing. This is the only example I have to go on since we don't have many Muslim neighbors here in UT. But it was interesting to me that, at least in the case of these women, their "modest" clothing was worn only when men were around. This showed me that their boys grew up seeing their mothers not-fully-clothed. Another question I had, which I don't know the answer to, is whether or not there is as much of a problem with pornography in the Muslim society as there is in the LDS society. So once again, lots of questions, which I don't have the answers to. I only have theories.
So maybe nursing in public (and around young children, especially) isn't the cure for p*rn, but I think it is probably a good defense. There will always be p*rn and there will always be men and women who struggle with it, but my hope (at least for my children) is that because they have been exposed to what *real* bodies look like and what their purpose is, they will be less likely to get caught up in the mystery surrounding them.
Poor Roo is kind of an on-going experiment. Being my one and only son, I guess it's safe to say I'm testing out my theory on him. I'm going to confess something that I may get berated for. But so-be-it. I'm not advocating this for everybody, but so far it's working for us. Brent and I decided long ago that we wouldn't hide our bodies from our children until 1 of us (either the kids or the parents) felt uncomfortable. So far, Brent has felt uncomfortable with AJ around, so she knows she can't be in the bathroom when he's getting in and out of the shower. I don't think AJ could care less. She was old enough when we stopped letting her in that I'm sure she remembers what his body looks like. And she's still seen Roo naked now and again, so it's not like she doesn't know what a penis looks like. (The younger 3 girls still all see me and Brent naked almost daily.) Many women would frown on the fact that Roo still sees me naked. But I am very comfortable with my body (I guess having 5 kids and multiple hands and faces in your nether region will do that to you). Not that I'd go stand out on my porch naked as a jaybird for all the neighbors to see, but I don't mind those who are close to me seeing me naked. Roo is not yet uncomfortable with this. I recently told a friend this and she was shocked because her 6yo son would be mortified to see her naked. He's into the "EW, girls! Cooties! Yuck!" thing. Roo hasn't ever gotten into that, most likely because he's homeschooled and has no idea that girls are supposed to be gross yet. None of his homeschool friends have told him otherwise and apparently neither have his church or neighborhood friends, since many of them ARE girls. ;)
I'm not sure how much longer this relationship will go on. I'm sure one of us will start to feel uncomfortable fairly soon. But for now, he still walks in on me while I'm getting dressed, and we have a conversation. The whole time I'm watching for signs of discomfort from him, but there haven't been any yet. He looks me in the face. His eyes don't wander, even though I know he's seeing my whole body. And he never gives any indication that this is anything but normal. It makes me happy. Because when he's bombarded by images of scantily-clad women and websites showing stars covering nipples and groins, he's going to know what's underneath those stars. And the FIRST image of a naked woman that is planted in his mind will be that of his mother (or some of the other women that we've watched on birth videos and such). NORMAL female bodies. And he's going to know that a vagina gives birth and that boobs feed babies. And that sometimes (most times) women's bodies don't look like they do on the magazines and that THAT'S OK. Because his father, who he looks up to and admires as his hero, LOVED this woman who had a less-than-magazine-image body. In fact, it had -gasp!- stretch marks from babies and it had -gasp!- pubic hair and it sometimes even had -gasp!- hairy legs! And those boobs that he'll eventually learn from society are purely sexual, he'll be able to remember his mother feeding all of his sisters and know that their most important purpose is for the nourishment of children.
This is my hope and my prayer, anyway. Like I said, Roo is kind of an on-going experiment. But it's one I believe in (duh, otherwise I wouldn't be doing it).
So this probably goes way deeper than just nursing in public. But I believe this is where it starts. One of my fears is that my last baby won't nurse until s/he is old enough to remember nursing. And then s/he won't see it on a daily basis like his/her siblings. And there won't be enough women around who go against the norms of society and dare to feed their babies in front of my children. Oh, how I want more women to give my children this opportunity -- to see someone besides their mother nursing a baby.
Now when I see a woman nursing in public (which is still a rare occasion, unfortunately), I go out of my way to give her a smile.
Here are a couple more great blogs about breastfeeding in public (2 of these are referenced above):
http://www.nursingfreedom.org/2010/08/why-children-should-witness.html
http://aworldofwisdom.blogspot.com/2010/08/should-children-be-exposed-to.html
http://rixarixa.blogspot.com/2010/08/breastfeeding-history-moment-lds.html
ps I have a friend who hates that I use the word "boobs." And I admit, it's not the prettiest word. But I don't love the word "breasts." Our children know that word, and know what they are, but we use "boobs" more in this house (not that we go around saying these words numerous times a day), so that's why I used that word in this post. Sorry for those that hate that word. Maybe I should have said "milk bags." :)
pps I should have made it more clear before, but just to make sure I'm understood.......I DO think boobs are for more than just breastfeeding. They most definitely serve a sexual purpose and I think this is as God intended. They are multi-functional, for sure. BUT I do believe their most important role (and the one that should NOT be hidden away) is that of baby nurturer.
Monday, December 20, 2010
What Boobs Are For-- Part I
I'm going to do a 2-part rant about breastfeeding. I'm doing it in 2 parts to (hopefully) keep it all readable lengths. Because I have a lot to say (as usual). Also, because I have 2 separate ideas I would like to discuss.
http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/20/want-smarter-kids-consider-breastfeeding/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+time/topstories+(TIME:+Top+Stories)
The first point I'd like to talk about is extended breastfeeding. It's been on my mind a lot lately since I have an 18 month old who still nurses a number of times a day. I'll start by telling you about an experience I had Saturday. I'm still not sure what to do about it. Maybe you can help me decide.
I was in desperate need of new nursing bras since the ones I was currently using were the same bras I bought when Lady was born and I've been using them consistently since then. They were also about 3 sizes too big and it was getting harder to hide the wrinkles under my shirts. After attempting to find some at JCPenney (they only had about 4 varieties and the ladies there weren't helpful AT ALL), Macy's and Dillard's (which don't even carry nursing bras-- which is discrimination, if you ask me), I was at a loss. Luckily my friend came over to do my hair a couple of weeks ago and told me about a local little shop that specializes in maternity/nursing wear. I was so happy! So I went there Saturday and fell in love as soon as I walked into the store. It was FULL of bras! I knew I'd be able to find something there. And even better than the amount of bras was the service I received from the sweet, little lady who was working there that day. We were the only 2 in the store and she helped me figure out the right size and helped me adjust each bra just right so I could really see/feel the differences. It was the best bra-shopping experience of my life!
Except for one detail.
When I first told the lady (we'll call her Lorraine) that I needed a nursing bra, she asked me how old my baby was. I told her, "18 months." She took a longer-than-necessary pause and then the conversation went like this:
Lorraine: "Oh." As if she didn't know what to do with that information. She then asked, "How long do you nurse your babies?"
Me: "I don't really have a set time limit. I'd like to continue however long my baby would like to."
Lorraine: "How long is the longest you've nursed?"
Me: "This is actually about when my last baby quit because I was pregnant with current-baby and my milk dried up and she didn't like that. But I'm not pregnant now and current-baby is still going strong!"
Lorraine: "Oh. Well, I had a friend whose daughter was old enough to actually ask for "chi chi." I just think that's too old. But that's just my opinion, of course."
Me (surprised at the direction this conversation is taking, and not quite sure how to handle it): "Well, it's just so good for them. And it doesn't stop being good for them just because they can ask for it."
Lorraine: "True."
Me: "It's certainly better than cow's milk."
(Which, if you think about it, is also breast milk, just from a bovine instead of a human. I'd much rather my baby be getting breastmilk from her own species, MEANT for her own species.)
Lorraine: "Hmm. Well, I know that in 3rd world countries, where they don't have a lot of food, they nurse their children until they're MUCH older than they do here. I guess it's just not kosher here."
Me: "Yeah, I envy those societies. They know what they're doing. That's what's natural."
Lorraine: "So, what do you think about that bra? It's a nice fit, isn't it?"
Thus ends the awkward conversation.
This is not the first time I have been questioned about my nursing practices, but it is the most lengthy questioning I've experienced. I was caught off-guard because I'd (wrongly) assumed that a woman who worked in a pro-breastfeeding job would actually have a little more knowledge than the average person who just takes the "norms" of society and aligns their thinking accordingly.
I am ashamed to admit, I actually used to think the same way as her. I might've even uttered similar words about not nursing "after they can ask for it".........before I became a mother.
The thing is, when you're in the middle of motherhood, nursing is just something you do everyday (and night). And there wasn't ever a time when I looked at my baby and thought, "Now you're too old to nurse." Each day, they were just one day older than yesterday. And what sense does that argument make anyway? Just because a child can ask for something, we shouldn't give it to them? What if they were asking for a bottle, or a glass of water? And some babies as small as 6 months old can sign for milk. Does that mean they should be cut off? It's just a silly, silly nonsense reason for weaning a child.
Some of my biggest regrets as a mother are the ending of my nursing relationships with each of my 3 oldest children. With AJ, I bottlefed along with breastfeeding because I was too scared to nurse in public, and also because I was in school still and wanted the reassurance that somebody else could feed my child. None of my children since her have ever had a bottle. We don't even own any now. AJ was 9 months old when she started getting all 4 of her top (middle) teeth at the same time. The bottle was easier for her, so she started refusing to nurse. NOW I understand that this was just a nursing strike and I could've pushed through it and continued our nursing relationship. I didn't know that back then, and I had no support to continue nursing. My mother had nursed each of her children for 6 months and thought that was plenty of time. (And in her defense, it was a LOT more time than most women were nursing in that era.)
With Roo, it was such a struggle to nurse him from the beginning. I saw a lactation consultant for 4 MONTHS! My nipples bled for the first 2 months because we could just not get his latch right. So I was not about to give up soon after. My goal was a year, and I made it there. At that point, Roo fell madly in love with food. Real food. And he lost interest in nursing. Again, I could've pushed through and kept the relationship going if I'd have realized it was so good and important. But I didn't.
With Tink, I mistakenly thought that I had to quit nursing to get pregnant again, even though my period had long since returned. So I weaned her at 15 months. She wasn't ready to quit. This is really one of my biggest regrets as a mother. Because it wasn't in any way Tink's choice. It was mine. I still mourn the loss of our nursing relationship.
Finally with Lady I knew better. I got pregnant while nursing, and about halfway through the pregnancy, my milk dried up. I would've kept going. I was actually looking forward to tandem-nursing. But Lady would have nothing to do with it. Our nursing relationship ended when she was 18 months old.
Recently, I've had a few people ask me how long I plan to nurse June. My answer is, "As long as it is beneficial for both of us." She still loves it and I still love it. Just yesterday she was being restless in Sacrament meeting and I whispered in her ear, asking her if she was excited for Nursery. Well, all she heard was "nurse" and got a huge smile on her face and immediately flopped herself back in my arms, ready to go. I laughed out loud, and then I nursed her. :)
Breastfeeding a toddler is very different than breastfeeding an infant. It has its pros and cons, just like anything else. But, in my opinion, the pros far outweigh the cons. I love the cuddle time. I love talking to her and knowing she understands what I'm saying. I love singing to her and seeing her smile while still trying to hold on to her latch. I love having something at my disposal that can immediately calm an agitated, sad, hurt, or frustrated toddler.
Did you know that breastmilk changes as the baby grows up? Toddler milk is quite different than infant milk. It has MUCH more fat in it. You know how doctors tell you children are supposed to drink whole cow's milk after they're a year old because of the high fat content? Well, guess what! Toddler breastmilk does the SAME THING, only it's actually made for the species that's drinking it.
So back to my experience with Lorraine. I'm unsure what to do about it, if anything. Part of me wants to write a letter, expressing my concern about the lack of support some new mothers might feel when talking to someone with these biases. Part of me wants to call her and talk to her over the phone. And part of me just wants to let it go, knowing I can't save the world. The trouble is, it's misinformation and opinions, based on cultural norms rather than biological/natural norms, that perpetuate the problem. As long as people who think like her keep walking around speaking their opinion, it's going to continue to be hard for new mothers to see past that and have the confidence to keep nursing their children. Ugh.
I feel like women today don't have the support they need to breastfeed in the first place, let alone breastfeed beyond a year. I was reading about another country, recently, (I believe it was the Netherlands, but I'm not certain and I can't find the link now) where they have a postpartum nurse/doula that comes to live with the mother for 2 weeks after birth (the Netherlands also have one of the highest rates of homebirth). She acts as a lactation consultant, and takes care of the new mother's every need. Why, oh why, don't we have anything like that here? There are some places where you can see a lactation consultant for free, but they are rare. And most new moms aren't particularly excited about leaving their house over and over to seek help. They have lactation consultants in the hospital, but in my experience, some are better than others. And there's the problem of them only seeing you once or twice during your stay. For me, I felt like I needed someone with me at each nursing session, to help me gain confidence and to just be there for moral support. I think things would've gone much smoother had I had that kind of support. And I think the number of breastfeeding women would increase if there was just some type of support system in place for new mothers. What is currently available is sadly lacking.
So leave me a comment and tell me what you think I should do in regards to Lorraine. I can't make up my mind.
And for anyone who'd like to read more about extended breastfeeding, there are lots of support groups, including La Leche League. Here are a few more good blog posts I've found:
http://compulsivewriter.com/?p=162
http://www.breastfeedingmomsunite.com/2009/05/the-pros-and-cons-of-breastfeeding-a-toddler/
(This one has some more links at the end.)
http://www.accidentalpharmacist.com/2010/12/extending-breastfeeding-beyond-year.html
(This one has a lot of good links at the end as well.)
http://healthland.time.com/2010/12/20/want-smarter-kids-consider-breastfeeding/?xid=rss-topstories&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+time/topstories+(TIME:+Top+Stories)
And just for fun, here's a video that went around during National Breastfeeding Week, and is what my title references.
Wednesday, May 19, 2010
Going Green
UPDATE AT THE BOTTOM!!!
I'm going to do my best to keep this post friendly, informative, and devoid of politics for all of my readers that don't like the controversy that I keep getting into. :)
Over the last few years, I've tried to lessen the amount of garbage we go through, the chemicals that come in contact with my children and in my house, and basically just reduce our carbon footprint. Some of this I've done because it's best for the environment, some of it because it's just plain cheaper, and some of it I've done because I believe it's what's best for the health of my family.
Here are some of the things we do:
Laundry
- I switched to a more natural detergent without brighteners, enzymes, yucky chemicals, and perfumes. I originally got it for my cloth diapers because regular detergents aren't good for them. But now I use it for everything. I got it in bulk (4 boxes) on Amazon.com about 2 years ago for $50 and we're still working on our 2nd box. Country Save is what I use, but I've heard good things about Charlie's and Allen's Naturally, also. If you make the switch and feel like you need a softener, try vinegar in the rinse cycle.
- We have a front-load energy-efficient washer, which is one of the reasons we don't go through much detergent.
- I hang dry my cloth diapers most of the time. I use the dryer for them a little more often in the winter since they take a lot longer to dry then. But in the summer time, it's a breeze (literally) to hang them up outside. They dry so fast that way! Brent and I have talked about putting up a clothesline outside for our clothes too. Maybe that will happen this summer!
- I no longer use fabric softener or dryer sheets. Like I said above, instead of fabric softener, try a bit of vinegar. And I use dryer balls instead of chemical-filled dryer sheets. This is also good for cloth diapers if I do put them in the dryer since residue is left on the dryer from the dryer sheets that make the cloth diapers repel water (which obviously isn't what you want when it comes to cloth diapers).
Personal Hygiene
- First we got rid of antibacterial soaps in our house. There are numerous articles showing that there really aren't benefits to using antibacterial soaps in a home setting. Hospital settings, maybe beneficial. But their overuse is causing all sorts of problems and has the potential of causing many more, some foreseeable, some not.
- I got a bunch of the "foaming" soap dispensers since they save on the amount of soap used. And I make my own mixture to go in them. I bought a big refill container of regular handsoap (gel, non-antibacterial) and I mix a 2:1 ratio of water to soap in the foaming dispensers. Makes one of those refill containers last a LONG time! I think sometimes people forget that the most important aspect to hand washing is vigorous, prolonged (20-30 seconds) scrubbing. The soap is just there to aid in getting the dirt off easier, but the scrubbing is what gets the germs off.
- Shampoo and Conditioner:
This is one I've been playing around with for a while. I've always had greasy hair and had to shampoo everyday. I often wondered how pioneer women went a week or more at a time without washing their hair. I figured I would've just been the ugly, greasy lady nobody would want to date. :) But then I started looking into it more and found out about people going shampoo-less. Meaning they never washed their hair. How is that possible? So I started digging deeper. And I found that there are varying degrees of it and different things work for different people and different hair types. I've known for a while that using shampoo only worsens the amount of grease in my hair because it strips all of the natural oils each day, but I didn't know what to do about it.
Over the last couple of years I have come to learn that baking soda is one of God's gifts to us. It has SOOOO many uses. One of them is being an alternative to shampoo. Vinegar is another awesome thing. And apple cider vinegar works great as an alternative to conditioner. Who knew?
Here are a couple of great sites about it:
http://www.naturemoms.com/no-
http://www.instructables.com/
http://ezinearticles.com/?No-
http://www.naturallycurly.com/
I haven't gone to strictly baking soda and ACV yet, but that's my goal....and who knows? Maybe if I keep going, I can be like the pioneer women and wash my hair with just water once a week or so. Wouldn't that be amazing? At the moment, I'm using a shampoo and conditioner that don't have as many of the harsh, abrasive, toxic, stripping chemicals in them. It's the Tresemme Naturals line. I've heard that the Suave Naturals line is also pretty good at leaving the harsher chemicals out (plus it's super cheap).
I haven't switched out my soap yet. Waiting to finish out the box we got from Costco. But again, really all that's needed to get clean is warm water and scrubbing. And soap is SOOO drying for the skin. So the only places I use soap now is in my armpits and "down there." The rest of my body gets clean just by being in the water and any shampoo running down. :)
For the kids, I used to use shampoo and conditioner on them every single time they took a bath (2-4 times a week, depending on the season). I no longer do. I let their natural oils keep their hair and scalp healthy. For AJ, I use the same shampoo and conditioner as I use, but we only use a little bit. Just a squeeze about the size of a dime of shampoo for the top of her head. I don't shampoo the ends....too drying. Then a squeeze about the size of a quarter of conditioner for the ends of her hair only. (I wash my hair this same way.) For Roo, he has such little hair now that he uses just a small amount of shampoo. For the little girls, I don't use shampoo at all. But I use a bit of conditioner on the ends just to make it easier to comb out. And for soap, we only have them soap up in their armpits and the parts under their underwear. :) (That is, unless Lady's gotten into the markers again and then we'll use it wherever she's created art on herself.)
Here is a great website that has all of the ingredient info for so many of the products we buy. It rates them on a scale of 0-10, with 0 being the least toxic and 10 being the most. It also breaks it down so that you know which ingredients are the toxic culprits. (The new Tresemme Naturals line isn't on there yet, but a lot of the Suave Naturals are.) I've used this site now a number of times in looking for deodorant, shampoo/conditioner, lotion, make-up, sunscreen, etc. It's awesome! Right now I'm researching toothpastes to make a switch in that department too.
- Speaking of deodorant, I've made the switch to a less toxic deodorant. The aluminum in regular antiperspirants is really not good for us and is absorbed into our skin when we apply it. I switched to Tom's of Maine. It's just a deodorant (not antiperspirant), but I've found that it doesn't last all day. So if I want to still smell good for Brent when he comes home from work, I need to apply it twice during the day. I've just ordered Ban invisible solid online (it's on its way to us now!) for both Brent and myself. It got good reviews on Amazon, so I'm hoping it works a bit better for me. I'll have to let you know once we get it. :)
- Now we'll be getting into the "strictly feminine" aspects of personal hygiene. :)
A few years ago, I heard about an alternative to pads and tampons. After years of using tampons I made the switch and I haven't looked back since. I never really was comfortable with the thought of tampons being inside of me in such a "personal" area for a week out of every month, but the thought of using pads instead was just too......icky. (Plus they still have awful chemicals as well.) I hated the 6 weeks postpartum when I HAD to wear pads......Babies are the ones who usually get diaper rash, but it was Mama that did when it came to me and pads. So uncomfortable!
So let me introduce you to my new best friend...... the Diva Cup. Pure bliss. There's a bit of a learning curve (no worse than learning to use tampons), and it comes with a "stem" at the bottom that I snipped off for comfort's sake, but once you get it down it's AWESOME! No trying to remember to keep tampons everywhere under the sun (purse, glove compartment, diaper bag, every drawer in every bathroom, etc.). No more chemicals in your "personal space" all week. No more diaper rash from yucky pads. It's a beautiful thing.
And for those of you who still prefer pads, I have an alternative as well......Mama Cloth. Now most of you might react with "ICK!" But let me tell you, either way you're dealing with an "ick" factor. This "time of the month" that we deal with is just icky any way you look at it. So there's a choice to be made whether we deal with the "ick" factor of nasty chemicals making their way into our most private of areas or whether we deal with the "ick" factor of touching something somewhat unpleasant for a few moments, but we're then able to wash it right off of our hands. I have a friend that I adore who once said, "There's not anything that the human body can produce that CAN'T be washed off." So true. And for those of you who enjoy supporting work-at-home-moms, you're probably familiar with Etsy. It's my new favorite place to shop. There are plenty of women there who can make the perfect Mama Cloth for you! My friends who use Mama Cloth just keep a small trash can (with a lid) in their bathroom just for these and a small wetbag in their purse for when they're out and about. Then they toss them in the washer and wash on hot and they're good to go.
These things may seem expensive up-front (kind of like cloth diapers), but they are SO MUCH CHEAPER in the long run. You can find Diva Cups on sale for between $15-$20. That's probably about 1-2 months worth of tampons for me. And the Diva Cup will last so much longer! Same with the Mama Cloth. A bigger expense in the beginning, but it won't take too many months to pay them off! And if you happen to sew, then it can be even cheaper! Just make your own! There are plenty of sites with tutorials and patterns.
- Along the same lines as Mama Cloth is, of course, cloth diapers. I know lots of women who just toss their Mama Cloth in with their diapers at the end of the day. Cloth diapering has been one of my favorite switches that we've made. The cloth wipes we use (you know, those super-cheap baby washcloths you can buy like 12 for $3 at Walmart) really come in handy too. But I already did a whole post about that, so I won't repeat myself here.
-I feel like I should also mention one thing for those of you who may want to take this type of thing and run with it. It's not something that we've done at our house, but I'll never say never. It is reusable toilet paper. Enough said.
Cleaning Products
A couple of years ago when I started wanting the kids to help with the cleaning more, I realized I really didn't like the idea of them spraying and coming in contact with all of the chemicals in the cleaners I'd always used. So I, again, researched alternatives. There are some good options you can buy at the store. But I found the best alternative for us.
- Baking soda and vinegar. My kids could eat the cleaner and they'd be fine! (Not that they'd want to....yuck!)
We use these 2 things for pretty much all of our cleaning now. (My friend, Jen, did a similar post today about cleaning supplies. She has some great ideas as well and I love all of her reusable stuff. But I wanted to correct one thing..... Vinegar IS a disinfectant because of the acetic acid in it.)
Each bathroom is equipped with a spray bottle of 1 part vinegar, 2 parts water. There are 2 washcloths also. One for the toilets, one for the sinks/counters/tub. (Using the same one for everything gives me the heebie-jeebies.) The vinegar/water also works great on the mirrors. Also in each cabinet is a tall tupperware container of baking soda. This is for the toilets, tubs, and any hard-to-scrub spots on the counters/sinks. The kids just open the container and shake a bit into the toilet and the tub and then scrub away! Works great!
You can also find a spray bottle and container of baking soda under my kitchen sink. It's all I use in the kitchen now as well. I also use vinegar and water to mop my floors. It's always done a great job! This is currently the mop I use, but I'm thinking about getting one like this instead. I don't like having to wrap the elastic edges over my current mop every time I rinse it out and I think I'd like to have the microfiber pads instead of cotton.
Costco has 2 big jugs of vinegar for like $3 or something like that.....SO CHEAP! And they also have a big bag of baking soda....can't remember how much it is, but I'm pretty sure it's less than $5. Again....SO CHEAP!
We used to use so many throw-away products.... Lysol/Clorox disinfecting wipes, Swiffer dust cloths, Swiffer wet cloths, dryer sheets, I can't even count the number of different cleaners I had all over the house (Bleach, detergent, fabric softener, toilet cleaner, Windex, a bathroom spray, a kitchen spray.) All of that has been tossed out now, and I'm all about reusable stuff.
Want to know my new favorite cleaning secret? Microfiber towels. Really, they have a million different uses. I bought a big package of them from Costco when I first started cloth diapering. I planned on using them as inserts for my pocket diapers, but I found other inserts I liked better. Now I use the microfiber towels every day for other things.
They make the perfect duster. There's one in each of the kids' rooms for dusting each week. I rotate them about once a month.
They're super-absorbent, so I use them all the time in the kitchen. I keep a bottom drawer full of them and just pull one out whenever I need it. I use them almost exclusively instead of paper towels now in the kitchen. If there's a spill, the microfiber towels will get it up twice as fast.
I keep one on the counter for when I'm cutting up veggies and constantly washing them off and needing to dry my hands off. I use them for wiping up my children. I use at least 2-3 a day. And the best part is, you just toss them in the washer along with the regular kitchen towels and rags, and use them again and again! In fact, we just bought another huge pack from Costco. I can't seem to find them online to post a link, but they're in the automotive section at the store. Ours are bright yellow.
- I'm currently searching for some cloth napkins. I'll probably order those from Etsy as well.
Misc. Going Green Stuff
I know that there are a lot of things we could be doing, but aren't. Here are some more miscellaneous things we do along with some things we WANT to do, but aren't doing yet.
- We try to limit our sprinkler use. We turn them on in the evenings or early morning. And we just switched out some of the sprinkler heads to more efficient ones (instead of spraying, they have tubes you hook on that go to specific spots like bushes and plants).
- We use the energy-efficient lightbulbs. And I like them just fine, but they scare me a bit because if you break them, you practically have to call a HazMat team to clean it up.
- We use rechargeable batteries where we can.
- We have ceiling fans in all the bedrooms (except Tink's and Lady's room...still trying to figure that one out) to cut down on a/c use.
- We recycle. Our recycle bin is usually more full than our garbage bin.
- We use glass tupperware instead of plastic and we don't microwave on/in plastic containers.
- We just put down cork flooring which is a sustainable resource (quicker recovery than wood).
- We try to take quick showers/baths.
- We teach the kids to turn off the lights when they leave a room (this one is still a work in progress).
- Brent built 2 garden boxes this year. :)
We have yet to plant anything in them, but that's the ultimate goal! We're considering getting 1 or 2 of these. (They're $99 each at Costco right now.) But we'll probably only get them if we get a garden in.
- If we don't do a garden ourselves this year, our stake does a "Community Garden" with some land that the church owns next to our building. We can participate in that by helping plant and weed and reap the rewards when it's time to harvest!
- We buy local produce when we can. There's a small produce stand (owned by a family in our ward) just outside of our subdivision and another larger produce stand just up the street. I buy as much as I can from them throughout the summer.
- Eating vegetarian/vegan is considered green since we're not supporting the meat/dairy industry and farms.
- We have energy-efficient appliances.
- We just had a company come fill our attic with a whole lot more insulation than was currently up there. Right now there are some rebate incentives going on, so it really didn't cost all that much when all was said and done.
- We try not to drive too much. (Or maybe this has less to do with being green and more to do with the fact that I have 5 kids to haul around with me everywhere I go and therefore really try to condense my errands to as few as possible and try to be as efficient as possible with them.) ;)
- We've gone to paper-less billing for most of our bills. There are still some companies that are apparently behind the times and not offering this yet. But with those that do, I LOVE online payments.....so quick and easy and they help my stamps last a LOT longer!
- I'm currently looking into dishwasher detergent and toothpaste alternatives. So if you already know of some, let me know!
There are probably a few things I'm not thinking of and even more that I haven't even thought of doing. So give me your ideas. What things do you like to do to be more green, natural, or cheap?
I can edit them in at the bottom of the post as you comment. :)
----------------------------------------------------------
EDITED TO ADD:
Be forewarned that Etsy is a dangerous place. I found some cloth napkins I want and in doing so, found more things I want. These are great! (There are all sorts on there!) I bought some cloth bags from Harmon's that I love, but I need to be better at remembering to take them in the store with me. :)
There are also these and these. For those of you who send your kids to school with lunch, there are a LOT of reusable sandwich baggies and lunch bags/boxes.
I also found these and I really want some for the bread Brent makes each week. The woman who makes them has a blog that has inspired me a bit. Going plastic-free (as much as possible). Intriguing. I'll have to think on that a bit. We've already done quite a bit of that already, but she showed me even more ways I can be better.
Seeing stuff like this makes me realize I should just learn how to sew better. But the reality is that I have about 10 sewing projects that are needing to be worked on (and have been in need for longer than I care to share.....THAT'S how embarrassing it is). So the reality is that it might be worth my money to let someone else sew these things for me. Thank goodness for talented women!
****My awesome dental hygienist sister-in-law answered my request for a new toothpaste! She emailed me this response:
"Fun post Ann!! As far as a tooth paste goes. . .try your tried and true BAKING SODA!! Seriously, it works great! Technically, you don't really need a tooth paste to remove plaque from your teeth. . .water would be just fine as well. All the stuff they put in toothpaste is just for marketing anyway. The key to tooth brushing is at least 2 min of gentle brushing (not hard, fast scrubbing. . . leave that for the hands)"
See? Baking soda rocks! (Along with vinegar!)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
