Q. im thinking of items that people wouldnt already buy.. i was thinking i probably wouldn't want to put bibs or wash cloths because id be receiving those any how.. anything in partiuclar that you think would be items to remind people you'd like to receive?? thanks!
A. bear with me, I'm adding to this slowly as I think of stuff. I just had my shower and pretty much all of the stuff was clothing (we're very grateful but it would have been nice to have more practical items as well.)
boppy
bumbo
"sleep sacks"
how about bath products for baby- whatever is your favorite? I got a whole bucket of Johnson & Johnson baby bath products and a rubber ducky at Wal- Mart for $20.
Diapers, diapers, diapers!
wipes
diaper cream, Vaseline, etc
formula if using
breast pump if using
nursing cover (like a blanket that covers you but it clips around your shoulders- easier to handle)
baby monitor
thermometer
nail clippers
comb or brush
bulb syringe
diaper pail (optional)
rubber ducky :)
humidifier
infant bath tub
boppy
bumbo
"sleep sacks"
how about bath products for baby- whatever is your favorite? I got a whole bucket of Johnson & Johnson baby bath products and a rubber ducky at Wal- Mart for $20.
Diapers, diapers, diapers!
wipes
diaper cream, Vaseline, etc
formula if using
breast pump if using
nursing cover (like a blanket that covers you but it clips around your shoulders- easier to handle)
baby monitor
thermometer
nail clippers
comb or brush
bulb syringe
diaper pail (optional)
rubber ducky :)
humidifier
infant bath tub
Why did the democrats cause the financial meltdown?
Q. Under President Jimmy Carter, the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) was passed. It required federal financial institutions to encourage banks to give home loans to persons with little credit and low income. Economist Russell Roberts said that the CRA played a major role in creating the sub-prime mortgage crisis in the U.S.
Under Bill Clinton, the CRA was expanded and Clinton set targets for low-income home ownership at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Banks were forced by the federal government to provide bad loans to unqualified people.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is Chairman of the Financial Services Committee in the House of Representatives. In 2003, he said of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: �These two entities � Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac � are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.� In the late 1980s and early 90s, Frank was engaged in a sexual relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie Mae�s assistant director of product initiatives! Bill O�Reilly exposed Frank�s involvement in the mortgage crisis: YouTube - O 'Reilly - Barney Frank Had Affair with Fannie Mae Exec. Frank looked the other way, while our economy was being destroyed by federal policies created in Clinton and Carter Administrations. (Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae help fund the homosexual agenda.
In 2008, Freddie gave $20,000 to a Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) event; Fannie Mae gave nearly $19,000 to the same event. Freddie has donated $125,000 and Fannie donated $80,000 to homosexual groups since 2005.)
Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) is head of the powerful banking committee in the Senate. He and Barney Frank consistently resisted attempts by the Bush Administration to closely regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Dodd also got preferential treatment from Countrywide on two mortgages. Countrywide was one of the biggest subprime providers.
Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd received thousands of dollars in contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Dodd has received $133,900 since 1989; Frank received $40,100. (While in the Senate, Barack Obama received $105,849).
As long ago as 2003, President Bush was trying to get the House and Senate to carefully monitor the actions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. His efforts were rejected by Democrats.
Obama associates headed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the years that the crisis was getting out of control. Obama friend Franklin Raines ran Fannie Mae and collected $50 million from it. Obama friend Jamie Gorelick worked for Fannie Mae and earned $26 million; Jim Johnson, formerly Obama�s vice president search committee chairman, hauled in millions from his work with Fannie Mae as CEO.
ACORN, the socialist group that routinely engages in voter fraud, was involved in pushing for risky loans to people with bad credit histories or little money for down payments. ACORN intimidated banks in Chicago and elsewhere to give risky loans! Obama actually trained ACORN workers when he was a community organizer in Chicago! ACORN used provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act to delay or halt efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had lowered their credit standards!
Under Bill Clinton, the CRA was expanded and Clinton set targets for low-income home ownership at the Department of Housing and Urban Development and at Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Banks were forced by the federal government to provide bad loans to unqualified people.
Rep. Barney Frank (D-MA) is Chairman of the Financial Services Committee in the House of Representatives. In 2003, he said of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: �These two entities � Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac � are not facing any kind of financial crisis. The more people exaggerate these problems, the more pressure there is on these companies, the less we will see in terms of affordable housing.� In the late 1980s and early 90s, Frank was engaged in a sexual relationship with Herb Moses, who was Fannie Mae�s assistant director of product initiatives! Bill O�Reilly exposed Frank�s involvement in the mortgage crisis: YouTube - O 'Reilly - Barney Frank Had Affair with Fannie Mae Exec. Frank looked the other way, while our economy was being destroyed by federal policies created in Clinton and Carter Administrations. (Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae help fund the homosexual agenda.
In 2008, Freddie gave $20,000 to a Parents and Friends of Lesbians and Gays (PFLAG) event; Fannie Mae gave nearly $19,000 to the same event. Freddie has donated $125,000 and Fannie donated $80,000 to homosexual groups since 2005.)
Senator Christopher Dodd (D-CT) is head of the powerful banking committee in the Senate. He and Barney Frank consistently resisted attempts by the Bush Administration to closely regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. Dodd also got preferential treatment from Countrywide on two mortgages. Countrywide was one of the biggest subprime providers.
Barney Frank and Christopher Dodd received thousands of dollars in contributions from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac over the years. Dodd has received $133,900 since 1989; Frank received $40,100. (While in the Senate, Barack Obama received $105,849).
As long ago as 2003, President Bush was trying to get the House and Senate to carefully monitor the actions of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. His efforts were rejected by Democrats.
Obama associates headed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac during the years that the crisis was getting out of control. Obama friend Franklin Raines ran Fannie Mae and collected $50 million from it. Obama friend Jamie Gorelick worked for Fannie Mae and earned $26 million; Jim Johnson, formerly Obama�s vice president search committee chairman, hauled in millions from his work with Fannie Mae as CEO.
ACORN, the socialist group that routinely engages in voter fraud, was involved in pushing for risky loans to people with bad credit histories or little money for down payments. ACORN intimidated banks in Chicago and elsewhere to give risky loans! Obama actually trained ACORN workers when he was a community organizer in Chicago! ACORN used provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act to delay or halt efforts of banks to merge or expand until they had lowered their credit standards!
A. Well, they didn't. Someone seems to forget that just like in the Great Depression, this current mess was created by a decade of Republican legislation. And now they are crying like cry babies that it's Obama fault. Oh my! aren't they delusional.
cute mums,tell me about stuff you bought for baby and it was helpful,and other was waste of money?
Q. to make me form my mind on what to buy and what is waste of money..
my due is 24th of Sep. i like to be prepared..
please tell me about everything you bought or even intend to... car seats,strollers.. high chairs...bottles' brands.. pumps..strelisir..baby monitors....etc. everything :)
and please star to make many mums answer me, thanks <3 <3
my due is 24th of Sep. i like to be prepared..
please tell me about everything you bought or even intend to... car seats,strollers.. high chairs...bottles' brands.. pumps..strelisir..baby monitors....etc. everything :)
and please star to make many mums answer me, thanks <3 <3
A. This is from my personal experience... imo these were a waste of money
Baby carrier - never used, just always thought stroller was better or carrying my daughter myself
Baby sling - used it once and never used again, it was heavy and gave me a sore back (my daughter was light and still is light as a feather!) and it kept covering her face. I was also paranoid that she'd slip out, so I always had to put a hand underneath just incase =/
Baby monitor - Never used it, at all. I can hear my daughter cry from outside even, and our house isn't very large. Plus, the radiation.. ugh
Manual breast pump - used a handful of times. even during engorgement early stages of breastfeeding could not pump out no more than 3 ounces!
Nipple shields - breastfeeding has been smooth for me. don't require them.
Lamp - don't need one, she sleeps in the dark. :-)
Bouncer - only used it several times, she never liked it and would squirm out of it (loved her swing tho!)
and pretty much just extra clothes are a waste, johnsons & johnsons and those baby care products that have a ton of chemicals, preservatives (etc) my daughter had eczema so did not use them (we use organic), toys (you don't need that many until they are about 4 months when they discover their hands) i made the mistake of splurging hundreds when it was not necessary, also do not stack up on nappies, they go through quite a few growth spurts in the first 12 weeks.
A stroller, car seat, cot, bath/change table, are pretty much a MUST have item.
Baby carrier - never used, just always thought stroller was better or carrying my daughter myself
Baby sling - used it once and never used again, it was heavy and gave me a sore back (my daughter was light and still is light as a feather!) and it kept covering her face. I was also paranoid that she'd slip out, so I always had to put a hand underneath just incase =/
Baby monitor - Never used it, at all. I can hear my daughter cry from outside even, and our house isn't very large. Plus, the radiation.. ugh
Manual breast pump - used a handful of times. even during engorgement early stages of breastfeeding could not pump out no more than 3 ounces!
Nipple shields - breastfeeding has been smooth for me. don't require them.
Lamp - don't need one, she sleeps in the dark. :-)
Bouncer - only used it several times, she never liked it and would squirm out of it (loved her swing tho!)
and pretty much just extra clothes are a waste, johnsons & johnsons and those baby care products that have a ton of chemicals, preservatives (etc) my daughter had eczema so did not use them (we use organic), toys (you don't need that many until they are about 4 months when they discover their hands) i made the mistake of splurging hundreds when it was not necessary, also do not stack up on nappies, they go through quite a few growth spurts in the first 12 weeks.
A stroller, car seat, cot, bath/change table, are pretty much a MUST have item.
I asked a question yesterday about baby formulas not containg aha&dha, and which product to buy.?
Q. I have researched products in britain and they seem to have much less scary ingrediants. The companys I found are Holle, Hipp&Babynat. I have chosen Babynat, but thought the Holle product sounded good too. The only product that can be shipped directly to the usa is the Hipp formula.
A. I am sorry, I cannot answer your question. I breast feed. I do however understand why you do want formulas that are ara/dha free. I just wanted to post a little information so that other moms understand that what they put in formula is NOT what is in breastmilk. Maybe you can try one brand to see how your baby does with it? If he likes it, it doesn't constipate him etc... I would see which formula your baby handles the best.
NABA continues to receive daily inquiries regarding a number of issues related to the DHA/ARA supplementation of US infant formulas. What follows is a discussion of a few of the questions:
�We�ve been told that the new fatty acids are just like those in breast milk. Is this true?�
Actually these fatty acids are nothing like what is in breast milk and pose a number of known and unknown risks to the infants who consume them. The DHA is extracted from fermented microalgae (Cryptecodiunium cohnii) and the ARA is extracted from soil fungus (Mortierelle alpina). The breast does not use either of these items to manufacture its fatty acids, and these sources are new to the food chain. Each of the processed oils has its own fatty acid composition, adding a number of fatty acids to formula that already are contained in the plant oils mixed into the base formula. Human fatty acids are structurally different from those manufactured from plant sources. Human fatty acids interact with each other in a special matrix. Just because they perform as they do in human milk does not mean they will perform at all in an artificial construct.
�The formula rep told us that these formulas are FDA approved.�
Neither the fatty acids themselves nor the formulas containing them are FDA approved. In the words of the FDA, �The law does not require that FDA approve infant formulas but instead requires companies to provide certain information to FDA before they market new infant formulas. Manufacturers must provide assurances that they are following good manufacturing practices and quality control procedures and that the formula will allow infants to thrive. If such assurances are not provided, FDA will object to the manufacturer�s marketing of the formulas; however, the manufacturer may market the new infant formula over FDA�s objection.�
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qa-inf22.html
What the FDA receives is a notification by a manufacturer that its product is generally recognized as safe (GRAS). The FDA can then pose no questions or it can conclude that the notice does not provide sufficient data to determine assurances of safety. In 1999, the FDA determined that Wyeth Nutritionals� GRAS notice for use of these fatty acids did not provide sufficient data to assure safety of their use in infant formula. However, in an interesting turn of events, suddenly in 2001, the FDA raised no questions to Martek Biosciences and Mead Johnson who submitted GRAS notifications with assurances that none of the side effects of these fatty acids were a safety issue. Martek conducted its own GRAS evaluation and concluded that the DHA/ARA sources were GRAS. The FDA did not carry out its own investigation. The FDA states that any evaluation that the use of a food ingredient is safe is a time-dependent judgment based on general scientific knowledge and for this reason it expects infant formula manufacturers that use these ingredients to conduct scientific and rigorous post-market surveillance to monitor the babies that consume these products. Thus, the FDA did not pass its own judgment, did not evaluate these ingredients for safety, took the word of the manufacturer that DHA/ARA were safe, and has allowed 4 million babies per year to be the experimental group in a �scientific� study of what happen to babies who consume these products.
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g007.html
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g080.html
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g041.html
Most of the clinical studies of these fatty acid enriched formulas were short-term growth studies on small samples of infants. The FDA states that data that becomes available after the new ingredient enters the market must be considered as a �part of the totality of information about the ingredient,� which is why the FDA has asked (not required) the manufacturers to monitor babies who use this formula.
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qa-inf20.html
The babies who consume these formulas remain guinea pigs in an uncontrolled experiment that bypasses informed consent, as parents are unaware that even the FDA will not declare that these ingredients are safe.
http://www.flca.info/HTMLobj-156/DHA_article.pdf
NABA continues to receive daily inquiries regarding a number of issues related to the DHA/ARA supplementation of US infant formulas. What follows is a discussion of a few of the questions:
�We�ve been told that the new fatty acids are just like those in breast milk. Is this true?�
Actually these fatty acids are nothing like what is in breast milk and pose a number of known and unknown risks to the infants who consume them. The DHA is extracted from fermented microalgae (Cryptecodiunium cohnii) and the ARA is extracted from soil fungus (Mortierelle alpina). The breast does not use either of these items to manufacture its fatty acids, and these sources are new to the food chain. Each of the processed oils has its own fatty acid composition, adding a number of fatty acids to formula that already are contained in the plant oils mixed into the base formula. Human fatty acids are structurally different from those manufactured from plant sources. Human fatty acids interact with each other in a special matrix. Just because they perform as they do in human milk does not mean they will perform at all in an artificial construct.
�The formula rep told us that these formulas are FDA approved.�
Neither the fatty acids themselves nor the formulas containing them are FDA approved. In the words of the FDA, �The law does not require that FDA approve infant formulas but instead requires companies to provide certain information to FDA before they market new infant formulas. Manufacturers must provide assurances that they are following good manufacturing practices and quality control procedures and that the formula will allow infants to thrive. If such assurances are not provided, FDA will object to the manufacturer�s marketing of the formulas; however, the manufacturer may market the new infant formula over FDA�s objection.�
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qa-inf22.html
What the FDA receives is a notification by a manufacturer that its product is generally recognized as safe (GRAS). The FDA can then pose no questions or it can conclude that the notice does not provide sufficient data to determine assurances of safety. In 1999, the FDA determined that Wyeth Nutritionals� GRAS notice for use of these fatty acids did not provide sufficient data to assure safety of their use in infant formula. However, in an interesting turn of events, suddenly in 2001, the FDA raised no questions to Martek Biosciences and Mead Johnson who submitted GRAS notifications with assurances that none of the side effects of these fatty acids were a safety issue. Martek conducted its own GRAS evaluation and concluded that the DHA/ARA sources were GRAS. The FDA did not carry out its own investigation. The FDA states that any evaluation that the use of a food ingredient is safe is a time-dependent judgment based on general scientific knowledge and for this reason it expects infant formula manufacturers that use these ingredients to conduct scientific and rigorous post-market surveillance to monitor the babies that consume these products. Thus, the FDA did not pass its own judgment, did not evaluate these ingredients for safety, took the word of the manufacturer that DHA/ARA were safe, and has allowed 4 million babies per year to be the experimental group in a �scientific� study of what happen to babies who consume these products.
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g007.html
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g080.html
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~rdb/opa-g041.html
Most of the clinical studies of these fatty acid enriched formulas were short-term growth studies on small samples of infants. The FDA states that data that becomes available after the new ingredient enters the market must be considered as a �part of the totality of information about the ingredient,� which is why the FDA has asked (not required) the manufacturers to monitor babies who use this formula.
http://www.cfsan.fda.gov/~dms/qa-inf20.html
The babies who consume these formulas remain guinea pigs in an uncontrolled experiment that bypasses informed consent, as parents are unaware that even the FDA will not declare that these ingredients are safe.
http://www.flca.info/HTMLobj-156/DHA_article.pdf
Powered by Yahoo! Answers
Title Post: do you have any ideas for items to put on a baby registry?
Rating: 96% based on 987 ratings. 4,3 user reviews.
Author: Unknown
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
Rating: 96% based on 987 ratings. 4,3 user reviews.
Author: Unknown
Thanks For Coming To My Blog
No comments:
Post a Comment