Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 20 of 47 Posts

· Tales of a Scorched Earth
Joined
·
557 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Okay, I know this might be kind of sick, but I remember a story of a woman with 16 others on a stranded boat..the woman had breast milk, and the others survived off of that breast milk.

In a Survival situation, how long would breast milk go on for?

Here is the article of the survival:

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1355/is_11_99/ai_71251660/
 

· Registered
Joined
·
14,913 Posts
People, all the nutrients contained in breast milk come from the woman producing it. You are basically killing her because her body would be leaching vitamins, minerals, and fat from her body. She has no way to gain nutrition.
 

· Sorry About Your Feelings
Joined
·
20,768 Posts
Its unfair to the woman because it drains them of precious nutrients.

Face it, you just want to play with boobs post SHTF. :D: :p
(Joking of course)
 

· Tales of a Scorched Earth
Joined
·
557 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Its unfair to the woman because it drains them of precious nutrients.

Face it, you just want to play with boobs post SHTF. :D: :p
(Joking of course)
I wasn't trying to imply that we abuse the woman for her milk. Of course you would want her to have vitamins and nutrients..Just wondering the cost in nutrients= benefit of the milk. I don't know.

and yes I am a boob man :D
 

· Tough Chick
Joined
·
2,979 Posts
I am still trying to picture the breast that a cookie would come out of. Thanks for that, btw.:rofl:

Bear in mind that a mother's breast milk is uniquely tailored by God and/or nature to have the right mix of nutrients for her baby at its current stage of development. In other words, it would be somewhat like taking the prescription medication of a random stranger with whom you had very little in common.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
6,847 Posts
Absolutely bogus. In order to produce milk the woman has to eat. For every calorie she ate, at most she would produce only a tiny fraction of a calorie of milk. Therefor far more efficient to simply divide what food was available evenly. Ditto water.

Furthermore, they were only at sea 12 days. Normal people can stay alive for a month or longer without food. In that environment they would have needed several gallons of water a day just to survive. If she did suckle them, that isn't why they didn't starve or desiccate.

Even further, furthermore, a lactating woman dries up almost immediately under stress and in the complete absence of food and water. This story is probably the exaggerated product of someone's feverish, sun parched imagination.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
146 Posts
I agree.....I think the story is less than factual. In order to keep the milk flowing, the lactating mother needs lots of WATER.....and that, for ONE small baby.

That's probably why the author neglected to include in the story, "though the heroine saved their lives, she was suckled into a raisin."
 

· Founder
Joined
·
17,151 Posts
I dont guess yall have heard of a wet nurse? These are women who would breast feed babies when the mother could not produce enough milk, or when the mother dried up.

The practice of wet nurses has been documented all the way back to 100 B.C. I'am pretty sure it went on before that time, but written record exist describing the Romans having wet nurses.

The wives of some of the roman senators would turn the feeding of their children over to a full time wet nurse. That is so the wife could attend social parties and travel without having to feed the child. Sometimes, it was not "socially acceptable" for the wife of a high ranking senator to breastfeed the child. Those duties were turned over to the servants.

Even today, there is a group of parents who refuse to give their children formula (and I dont blame them). When a mother can not produce enough breast milk (or dries up), they will seek out a wet nurse.
 

· Knocked Down But Up Again
Joined
·
5,575 Posts
Yes, but a wet-nurse nurses only a small infant with a two-ounce stomach, NOT several grown adults. It's the rare woman who could accommodate that kind of demand.
 

· Stack It Deep.
Joined
·
649 Posts
Okay, I know this might be kind of sick, but I remember a story of a woman with 16 others on a stranded boat..the woman had breast milk, and the others survived off of that breast milk. In a Survival situation, how long would breast milk go on for?
Assuming no fresh water on the boat, she would die of thirst shortly after her breasts dried up.
 

· Born to prep
Joined
·
3,847 Posts
I think you are looking at this with the wrong slant. If you were a grail slaver a lactating woman would be very valuable to you. She would have about the same value as a pregnant woman that is about to produce some very succulent longpig.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
7,795 Posts
I wasn't trying to imply that we abuse the woman for her milk. Of course you would want her to have vitamins and nutrients..Just wondering the cost in nutrients= benefit of the milk. I don't know.
It's not efficient, in multiple ways. There's not much at all that comes out. Plus, you'd be better off directly eating the food that she'd have to eat in order to produce the milk because going through her is wasting nutrients.

Humans cannot really synthesize their own protein in the same way that a cow can just by eating grass, for the most part we have to steal it from other sources. So, the woman would have to be consuming protein in order to produce the protein in the milk, except this is inefficient and wasteful, it's more efficient to eat the food directly if possible. I suspect other nutrients are the same way.

If you were asking about a cow, who can take water and hay and make alot of milk, sure. Humans don't quite work the same though.
 
1 - 20 of 47 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top