15 karma · joined May 12, 2022
There are backups, which are safer than the alternative of starvation, which has a 100% fatality rate.
A homemade formula which killed 25% of children would still be 400% safer than the alternative of giving them nothing and having them all die.
No it hasn't. Not even close.
I think maybe this is the problem both specifically here and more widely, there's a major outbreak of 'not their jobitis' going on. The media are 'not my jobbing' this and ignoring the fact that distributing health information has very much been the job of the media in the past.
Maybe a similar issue with the FDA who 'not my jobbed' the inspections of the facility and 'not my jobbed' the reopening inspections of the facility and 'not my jobbed' other things they could have been doing, such as distributing safe formula-replacement recipes.
Maybe - to take a tangent - a similar issue with the Uvalde police who 'not my jobbed' actually interacting with a scenario. Seems to be a whole rash of people forgetting you have to actually interact with the world and take actions if you want things to happen, not just observe and write reports.
> Their recommendation is to talk with your doctor.
That's purely because of liability.
> This is realistically the only safe suggestion
No, that's point of the contention here.
> Please, please, please, cite your source on this.
The recipes for infant milk start on page 93.
https://oxfamilibrary.openrepository.com/bitstream/handle/10...
Yes. That's the issue we're having here. People are encountering that situation of being unable to find formula, meaning that their children are literally at risk of starving, asking for alternatives and being told 'there's just no viable alternative' by the media as though that information will make formula appear out of thin air. They are looking for that less than ideal short term solution from the media, which is responding oddly.
It is quite simple to provide short-term replacements for infant formula. Famine relief, missionary and other charities do have reliable and nutritious recipes for baby formula alternatives that can be made in bush conditions and over open fires in metal pots.
That's the weird thing about these interactions. If someone's asking for an alternative to infant formula - because they can't get any - the situation is already unsafe. Starvation has a 100% fatality rate.
Infant formula isn't part of the scenario being discussed. Alternatives are to be compared against starvation, as that is part of the scenario being discussed. Do alternatives have a 100% fatality rate? No. So why all the weird 'there's just no viable alternative' comments?
There's a consumer? So many of the companies that go pop in these situations are solutions in need of a problem; companies trying to singlehandedly invent a market out of thin air and convince consumers that something they've managed without their whole lives is now something they simply can't live without and must spend $30 a month on forever.
A lot of the dotcom bubble failures occurred for the same reason, field-of-dreams style companies expiring when 'if you build it, they will come' turns out not to be true for all given values of 'it.'
I would imagine she had a smartphone. Gmaps/Amaps is no match for Skydemon but it's a million times better than nothing.
If you're short a company and the company goes properly bankrupt then the shares are literally worthless paper, you just throw them away.
I've been in this situation with interactive brokers and the position just disappears. (You get the profit as though you closed the position at a price of zero.) Shares of something that doesn't exist similarly don't exist. They just vanish.
They have $78B of assets, not $78T. It wouldn't rival even the smallest of national defaults. Heavy rhetoric but a bit OTT don't you think?