[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

Well there we have it, you agree as they are your personal feelings too regardless of any supporting evidence.
It was humiliating, and perhaps she wishes to highlight this to ensure another expectant mother isn't shown up by this pariah.

Like I said, if it was that humiliating she wouldn't be getting it broadcast to the whole world. Also, why do I need to back up my personal opinions with supporting evidence, the risks may be small, but a life of an unborn child is more important than a glass of wine.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ben

Like I said, if it was that humiliating she wouldn't be getting it broadcast to the whole world. Also, why do I need to back up my personal opinions with supporting evidence, the risks may be small, but a life of an unborn child is more important than a glass of wine.

You don't have to repeat yourself ben, you don't have to back it ... I already checked there is no evidence that 125ml pw of wine has ANY adverse effect on foetal development.
So where does the supposition come from that it does?
Ignorance.

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

You don't have to repeat yourself ben, you don't have to back it ... I already checked there is no evidence that 125ml pw of wine has ANY adverse effect on foetal development.
So where does the supposition come from that it does?
Ignorance.

No, not ignorance. Ignorance is saying that there is no evidence so it must be fine, even though there is still a lot of uncertainty on that area.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ben

No, not ignorance. Ignorance is saying that there is no evidence so it must be fine, even though there is still a lot of uncertainty on that area.

That is pretty fuzzy logic ben, there is no evidence to support that that level of consumption is unsafe, and and yet you suggest that it is still uncertain...
When will it be certain?

[Benjamin]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

That is pretty fuzzy logic ben, there is no evidence to support that that level of consumption is unsafe, and and yet you suggest that it is still uncertain...
When will it be certain?

No, it is called playing it safe to the bundle of life that you are carrying and bringing into the world. And you worded your last sentence incorrectly, it's actually; there is no evidence to support that any level of consumption is safe.

[Kizzy]

Originally Posted by Ben

No, it is called playing it safe to the bundle of life that you are carrying and bringing into the world. And you worded your last sentence incorrectly, it's actually; there is no evidence to support that any level of consumption is safe.

No, It's called adhering to governmental guidelines which (once again) state that 1 125ml measure of wine per week has never been found to have any adverse effect on an unborn child.
I can't copy and paste but that is the information I've seen.
We all have our own opinions though, let's leave it.

[user104658]

Originally Posted by Kizzy

No, It's called adhering to governmental guidelines which (once again) state that 1 125ml measure of wine per week has never been found to have any adverse effect on an unborn child.
I can't copy and paste but that is the information I've seen.
We all have our own opinions though, let's leave it.

Right, and so the obvious thing to do is to risk becoming the first case of evidence that 125ml once a week can do harm.

That's the point here, really. "No evidence so far" doesn't mean it's impossible, just that there are no documented cases. Taking that risk is entirely up to the woman herself (although as I said I find needless risk taking with children, whether they're born yet or not, utterly selfish) - the decision not to be involved in it is, and should rightfully be, down to the person being asked to provide the alcohol.

There is a very slim chance that drinking a small amount is risking harm when pregnant, documented cases or not. Alcohol enters the bloodstream and alters brain chemistry (even small amounts) - an unborn baby directly shares it's mothers blood supply via the umbilical cord - therefore that alcohol may enter the child's bloodstream. Just because there's "no evidence yet"... It still doesn't sound like a particularly clever plan.

There is NO risk that NOT drinking is harmful. It's a no brainer.

I enjoy a drink every now and then, but honestly, if someone told me tomorrow that I can never have another sip so long as I live or risk (no matter how small) the health of my children, I'd really not be that bothered. I'd never so much as glance at the stuff again. What's 9 months?? Seriously! How about just, for less than one year, giving it a miss just incase?

I'd also add that if I was this young lad, I'd be informing the bar manager that I would still refuse service to pregnant women. If that cost me the job, so be it. A minimum wage is not worth compromising your morals.