BREASTFEEDING BOOBYTRAPS

 

BREASTFEEDING BOOBYTRAPS:

Five cultural misconceptions that come between baby and breast

A few weeks ago my 15-month-old son weaned from breastfeeding. It was an event that passed almost unnoticed because it happened so gradually, and it was a day or two before I realized he hadn’t nursed. When I stopped to think about it, I knew it was the right time for both of us. He was happily going through his day—naps, bedtime and all— without skipping a beat, and I hardly felt a twinge when I realized that part of our relationship was over.

Although it’s a bit early to reminisce, when I think about our breastfeeding time, I do so with complete happiness. It is an aspect of our relationship that kept us close, gave him comfort, and was enjoyable for us both. When I think of the early days, though, I’m a little amazed that we persevered. The first weeks weren’t easy, and I don’t think we settled into a comfortable rhythm until my son was two or three months old. It’s not uncommon to hear of breastfeeding challenges, and sadly, the stories often end with a switch to formula and a declaration that breastfeeding “just didn’t work for us” or “I’m just one of those people that’s not able to breastfeed.”

Unfortunately, we live in a culture that, for all its promotional support of breastfeeding, isn’t very conducive to it. Many women quit after a few difficult weeks due to frustration and lack of support. It’s a shame women don’t always find the support they need through that initial hump, allowing them to develop the fulfilling breastfeeding relationship so many expectant mothers want. There is support out there, and knowing up front what to expect can go a long way toward success. Knowing what pitfalls to avoid is also important, and something that can be difficult to do when cultural norms are so ingrained. Below, I’ve put together a list of five cultural misconceptions that can sabotage the best-intentioned new mother in her attempt to establish a healthy breastfeeding relationship with her baby:

MISCONCEPTION #1

If a baby cries often, especially after eating, they must have reflux.

The truth is, doctors don’t really know why babies cry. Some babies cry more than others, and a pediatrician has to discern from a mother’s description if the crying and accompanying symptoms are actually problematic. It isn’t an exact science, and a diagnosis often has more to do with a particular doctor’s style and experience than anything else. Many doctors only feel comfortable when they diagnose and prescribe, and very few have any formal training in breastfeeding.

Many women don’t know that in spite of the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation to breastfeed for at least one year, most medical schools don’t teach anything about breastfeeding. So if a woman comes in with a baby who cries shortly after eating, a doctor will often think “illness.” In fact, it could just be that the baby is hungry again. Breast milk digests very quickly, and breastfed babies generally need to eat at least every two hours, if not more. In the early days it’s not uncommon for an infant to nurse for an hour, sleep for an hour, and then wake to nurse again. This doesn’t last forever, but if a new mother isn’t ready, it could easily give her the impression something could be wrong.

MISCONCEPTION #2

The easiest way to travel with baby is to carry him in a removable car seat.

This cultural phenomenon is reflective of brilliant marketing. Car seat and stroller manufacturers created the “travel system” a few years ago and touted it as the latest convenience. Move baby from car to home to store to another car without disturbing them! He can stay safely strapped in while you do everything you need to do!

It sounds nice, but the result is that the baby spends an awful lot of time in a car seat and not very much time being held. While it might not seem as though this would necessarily affect breastfeeding, one of the keys to successful nursing is building a tactile relationship where the baby gives cues and the mother responds.

When the baby isn’t in his mother’s arms, it’s more difficult to sense what he needs. The subtle cries that distinguish a soiled diaper from hunger can take longer for a mother to decipher, and the resulting frustration can have a negative impact on a budding breastfeeding relationship. For the best chances of success at breastfeeding, keep the car seat in the car, and wear the baby in a sling or carrier to keep him close.

MISCONCEPTION #3

A baby should sleep in a separate bedroom, and absolutely never in the same
bed as her mother.

Open any parenting magazine and you will see page after page of beautifully appointed nurseries: bassinets trimmed in frilly materials, cribs decorated with flowers or airplanes, and matching mobiles that play soothing tunes while the baby nods off. It seems ideal—happy colors, soft fabrics, quiet sounds. In fact, though, babies like being close to Mom, and they don’t notice if the crib bumper matches the wallpaper. For breastfeeding mothers, it’s easier if the baby is close at night, too.

Breastfed babies wake up often (even well beyond the six weeks that many people say a baby “should” sleep through the night), and having the baby close at hand can make the frequent wake-ups easier. Sleeping with the baby in the same bed can be done safely when proper precautions are taken. Dr. Sears’ “Safe Cosleeping” article details how co-sleeping may make nighttime breastfeeding much easier and even prevent SIDS.

MISCONCEPTION #4

If you don’t get your baby on a feeding and sleeping schedule early, you will encounter discipline problems.

Relying on this cultural norm can sink a breastfeeding relationship faster than receiving free formula in the mail. When newborns emerge from the womb, they are leaving an environment where they were always warm, fed, and, in essence, held. Coming into a world where they can get cold, hungry and put down is a big shock. There’s no need to enhance the shock by withholding food so they can get on a schedule that works for your lifestyle. Far from creating discipline problems, responding to your baby’s needs creates a relationship of trust and shows her that she has people she can count on.

Breastfeeding on baby’s cue also helps mother’s body adjust appropriately to the amount of food the baby needs. Women’s milk supplies are based on demand, so the more often a woman nurses, the more milk she produces. Nursing often and for as long as the baby wants ensures that there is plenty of milk to sustain a breastfeeding relationship.

MISCONCEPTION #5

Breastfeeding is natural, and therefore should be easy. If it’s not, then you’re probably not able to breastfeed.

I almost hate to write about this one, because I don’t want discourage new or expectant mothers from breastfeeding because of the possibility that it might be difficult. But in more than a year of attending La Leche League meetings, a common theme with new mothers is that breastfeeding was a lot harder than they expected. It could be that many mothers go to La Leche League meetings because they are having difficulty, but I suspect many mothers who don’t seek help experience the same thing. Breastfeeding is somewhat like creating a well-balanced meal of fresh ingredients. Natural, yes, but not necessarily easy.

Like cooking, it’s often easier to open a can of formula or mix up a bottle in the same way it’s easier to open a package of frozen pizza and pop it in the oven. Breastfeeding is really about learning a new skill and building a relationship—two things that aren’t always easy or intuitive. Of all the women I’ve talked to who had initial difficulties breastfeeding but went on to nurse long-term, each one said she would go through it all again, challenging first weeks and all. If you are struggling with breastfeeding but want to continue, find support. La Leche League is a wonderful resource, and every area has lactation consultants or experienced mothers who are willing to help. Breastfeeding is so much more than feeding your child; it’s the intention of a precious relationship that requires our focused dedication for achievement.

Suchada Eickemeyer is the founder and owner of the holistic parenting website Mama Eve (mamaeve.com). A former Army officer and aerospace engineer, she is now a full-time mom, and her perspective on motherhood has been influenced by the different family dynamics she observed living in Southeast Asia and Germany, and traveling throughout Asia, Europe, Australia and the Middle East. The mother of two boys, she promotes breastfeeding and natural birth in her community through political advocacy and by supporting organizations like La Leche League, and has provided advice and guidance to women throughout the United States and around the world. View article resources and author information here: pathwaystofamily
wellness.org/references.html.



Women don’t always find the support they need through that initial hump,
allowing them to develop the fulfilling breastfeeding relationship so many
expectant mothers want. There is support out there,
and knowing up front what to expect can go a long way toward success.

What’s in Your Grocery Basket?

Jeffrey M. Smith is the head of the Institute for Responsible Technology. An internationally acclaimed filmmaker and author, his first book, Seeds of Deception, made him the world’s foremost consumer advocate for non-GMO choices.

PATHWAYS: Welcome and thank you for talking with Pathways readers and the Pathways Connect community.
SMITH: Thank you for having me. It is so good to speak to parents because so many people are not as concerned about what they put in their mouths until they have kids. And kids are most at risk to the potential dangers of genetically modified food, so I am thrilled to be talking to families.

PATHWAYS: Can you explain to our readers the difference between what our grandparents did, with cross-breeding plants and animals on the farm to create stronger varieties, and today’s genetically engineered organisms?
SMITH: For centuries, we have been crossing plants and animals through natural sexual reproduction. Plants and animals in the same species carry traits from the parents  to create new offspring. But in genetic engineering they can take single genes or combinations of genes from anywhere in the plant or animal kingdom, so we have insects or viruses being inserted into plants. Now, not only is this carrying genes that would never naturally be in there, so it creates new things in our food supply—it is creating new combinations that are not tested—but also the very process of genetic engineering causes massive collateral damage throughout the plant’s DNA. The natural functioning DNA is different after it is genetically modified. This includes hundreds of thousands of mutations and changes in the way the natural genes function. This is a very primitive technology, and a very side-effect prone technology. It is something that has never been done before in nature, and yet the products are being pushed onto our plates without any regard for the serious health consequences. And we’re already seeing serious health consequences in the animals and humans that are eating these foods.

PATHWAYS: On your website—ResponsibleTechnology.org—you have a list of some of the more interesting combinations.

A few of them are:
•  Spider genes were inserted into goat DNA, in hopes that the goat milk would contain spider web protein for use in bulletproof vests.
•  Cow genes turned pigskins into cowhides.
•  Jellyfish genes lit up pigs’ noses in the dark.
•  Arctic fish genes gave tomatoes and strawberries tolerance to frost.
•  Potatoes that glowed in the dark when they needed watering.
•  Human genes were inserted into corn to produce spermicide.

SMITH: These are some of my favorites. Eventually, they will try to take out the mothering gene from livestock so they won’t feel sad when they remove their children from them. It’s a mad scientist field going on right now.

PATHWAYS: So the term “Frankenfood” is well earned. It is not an exaggeration, but an appropriate description. Why would anyone want to create corn that can produce spermicide?
SMITH: They are turning plants into factories. They figure if they can insert a gene into a plant to create something they are looking for, the plant can become the factory. In theory it sounds economical,  but imagine if that corn cross-pollinated. I have talked to farmers  in the Midwest who have noticed that their cows and pigs were  becoming sterile, and some were convinced it was the spermicidal corn that got mixed up. The idea of putting drug-making plants  outdoors where they can be cross-pollinated, or moved by animals or accidentally mixed up, is one of the less intelligent aspects of this technology—which is already suffering from brain-cell deficiency.

PATHWAYS: So, this is not a product that was or is being developed for the benefit of our children, or with their wellness in mind. From the beginning, GMO products were the result of a business plan, straight up, and you point that out in the introduction to your book, Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically-Engineered Foods You Are Eating. In your book, you talk about how Monsanto paid the consulting company Arthur Anderson to come up with a plan to help them corner the market on the world’s food supply. This plan led to Monsanto purchasing and patenting traditional seed and seed companies, engineering suicide and GMO seeds, and then not labeling these products in supermarkets so we don’t even know we’re eating them.
SMITH: You are absolutely right about this being a plan to help Monsanto fulfill their goal of converting 100 percent of the seeds in the world to become genetically engineered and patented. One of their biggest assets has been the control over the U.S. government decision mechanism. In 1999, when documents were made public through a lawsuit, what became clear was the overwhelming consensus of scientists who helped to create GMOs; they were warning the industry in 1991 of their dangers, which are allergies, toxins, new diseases and nutritional problems. But those documents also revealed that the U.S. FDA was under orders from the White House to promote biotechnology. So their response was to create a position—a person who would be in charge of GMO policy. They gave that position to Michael Taylor, Monsanto’s former attorney and vice president, who is now the U.S. food-safety czar. When he was in charge, he ignored the scientists and allowed the foods on the market. Now, years later, their concerns have been vindicated: The American Academy of Environmental Medicine says that everyone should avoid GMOs, that every doctor should prescribe non-GMO diets, and that they are actually linked to things like reproductive problems and immune system problems, accelerated aging, gastrointestinal problems, organ damage, etc. So, this business plan was a hijacking of our regulatory agencies.

PATHWAYS: And a part of that business plan is lack of consumer awareness, and no labeling? Even if we wanted to make informed choices, there is no labeling. [Note: You can download or print out a Non-GMO Shopping Guide from ResponsibleTechnology.org.]
SMITH: Yes, that is by design. And if you ask an American if they eat GMO foods, 60 percent will say no, even though most Americans are eating it at almost every meal. The FDA continues to be under orders to promote biotechnology; it is one of their explicit mandates. They ignore the desire of the 95 percent of Americans who want GMOs labeled in order to promote the economic interests of five companies. Labeling these foods would destroy the biotech industry. Even if we only had five percent of shoppers avoiding GMOs, that would be enough to eliminate GMOs from the market. Our organization is equipping consumers to do this with information and the shopping guide, so we will  create a tipping point of consumer rejection to drive GMOs out  of the food supply.

PATHWAYS: How does the U.S. compare to other countries, like the European Union, Japan and Australia? Are their consumers  allowed to know what they are eating?
SMITH: Absolutely. They have labeling in almost every other industrialized country, but not in the U.S. or Canada. In other countries, consumers have rejected the GMO food companies and they have followed consumer demand.

PATHWAYS: The traction consumers in other countries have been able to get with their informed choices is inspiring. However, in December 2010, a round of WikiLeaks revealed that [in 2007] our own U.S. ambassador to France, Craig Stapleton, recommended taking action against pro-informed-choice activists in Europe. In the WikiLeaks document, he states, “Moving to retaliation will make clear that the current path has real costs to EU interests and could help strengthen European pro-biotech voice.” Stapleton went on to specifically recommend the U.S. government “calibrate a target retaliation list that causes some pain across the EU since this is a collective responsibility, but that also focuses in part on the worst culprits. The list should be measured rather than vicious and must be sustainable over the long term, since we should not expect an early victory.”So, according to this document, there is a “measured and sustainable” plan in place to wear down European consumer rights organizations who continue to make headway to preserve informed choices for their families and children. If our government is collaborating with the biotech industry, both in the U.S. and abroad, and clearly there is long-standing collaboration, then apparently we as consumers are going to need our own “measured and sustainable plan” for informed choice.
SMITH: And that’s what we’re doing at ResponsibleTechnology.org. We invite people to join the Non-GMO Tipping Point Network, where they can joint up with local and national groups. The focus is to bring proper and true information out to our communities and targeted groups like healthcare practitioners and parents, schools and campuses, religious and spiritual organizations, green groups, etc. Our experience is that most Americans want  to hear this knowledge. So we have audios, videos, pamphlets and books to get out to them. We have developed a measured  and sustainable way of educating consumers and it is having  an impact. The fourth fastest-growing food claim among all food brands this year is “Non-GMO.” I am also seeing an unprecedented number of parent groups, doctors and health food stores who are becoming actively vocal on this issue, and I have been traveling around the U.S. for eight years getting the word out.

PATHWAYS: Your website is full of information and inspiring videos, but one of the newest programs invites everyone to become a Dragonslayer.
SMITH: In the myths of dragon slaying there was always an invincible armor around the dragons, but there would always be a chink in the armor, some weak spot exploited by the dragon slayer to slay it. The biotech industry is like a dragon right now, a modern dragon, and the chink in the armor is consumer concern based on informed consumers. The biotech industry has captured the minds of politicians, farmers and mainstream media, but they know consumers are the top of the food chain. Not everyone can take up arms and travel to 32 countries like I do, but they can support us and be a part of the team. So we have this extended family of supporters who can contribute time or money or both. We are seeing an unprecedented upsurge in consumer awareness and action right now.

PATHWAYS: For readers who want to make informed choices  in their grocery stores, how can they tell the GMO products  apart from Non-GMO? If you are buying certified organic,  you’re safe, but I heard trying to decipher the coding on produce was a myth.
SMITH: It is a myth. But what is happening now, despite federal lack of labeling laws or any regulation, companies are starting  to label their own products as Non-GMO.

PATHWAYS: Is there a simple plan of action for parents and  practitioners to follow?
SMITH: Well, first, I have talked to a lot of parents, and many  of them say, “I can’t believe I fed my kid this!” I tell them to  remember we all do the best we can, and if we don’t know, we don’t know. But worrying and fear are toxic. We don’t want to deal with two toxins, GMOs and worry. Once we know, we can  get armed with a shopping guide and do much better. We do  the best we can and move forward. The first thing people say when I hand them a shopping guide is, “Can I have some more  to hand out to friends?”

PATHWAYS: And this Non-GMO Shopping Guide is a downloadable app now, as well as being a pdf on your website. So, what is the simplest way for parents to get started?
SMITH: There are four tips to simplify the question of what is GMO and what is not GMO. The easiest and first step is to buy certified organics, because that means it has been tested and  not just labeled. Second, companies are volunteering to label their products as Non-GMO who participate in the Non-GMO  Project, so they have to be verified that it means the standard Non-GMO. We have thousands of these companies listed in  the shopping guide. Third, use products that are listed in our shopping guide. Fourth, avoid the at-risk ingredients, which  is like a mine field when you get to processed food. You won’t  know if the names of the ingredients are derived from soy or corn. Aspartame, for example, is from genetically-modified  microorganisms. We have a list of those at-risk ingredients on  our shopping guide.
It may seem like a lot of work for someone who is just getting into this, but it is really only a period of brand changing. You  figure out what your new brand is—after removing all of the other stuff from your cupboard.

PATHWAYS: So what is the good news?
SMITH: The good news is, we are in the process of creating a tipping point. In 1999, when a gag order was lifted from GMO scientists in the United Kingdom, the press went wild, and within a few weeks the consumers knew about the risks of GMOs and refused to buy them. We have not had the benefit of a high-profile major scandal in the U.S., like they did in Europe, to bring attention to GMOs, but even a slow-burning campaign going from parent to parent in the U.S. was able to get labeling on dairy products with no bovine growth hormone, rBGH.
So now we are focusing our attention on kicking GMOs out of the food supply. For that, we have three basic messages: one, health dangers; two, how to avoid; and three, the fact that we only need five percent of U.S. shoppers—of the 95 percent who say they don’t want them—to avoid GMOs to create a tipping point. Right now we have 150 people a week in a training program learning to speak on and hold seminars on GMOs. We have an opportunity right now to be the force of change!
I ask people to choose to feel empowered by this information so they will feel not like a victim, but like a victor. We can have more control over the food we choose and not have it dictated to us by the biotech industry and its enforcers in Washington. We will all benefit when we achieve a tipping point and reclaim a Non-GMO food supply.

The full audio interview with Lisa Reagan and Jeffrey M. Smith can be found on Pathways’ website, pathwaystofamilywellness.org. Pathways Connect Gathering Groups will find the resources and citations in this article hyperlinked in this issue’s Dialogue and Resource Guide. Part One of this feature on GMO mythbusting, “Beyond the Fields We Know,” appeared in Pathways 29, the Spring 2011 issue. The Institute for Responsible Technology is online at ResponsibleTechnology.org. The complete Wikileaks document is available here: tinyurl.com/wikiGMO.

GMOs in Food
Here is a summary of crops, foods and food ingredients have been genetically modified as of May, 2010:
CURRENTLY COMMERCIALIZED GM CROPS IN THE U.S.:
(Number in parentheses represents the estimated percentage that is genetically modified.)
Soy (91%); cotton (71%); canola (88%); corn (85%); sugar beets (90%); Hawaiian papaya (more than 50%); alfalfa, zucchini and yellow squash (small amount); tobacco (Quest® brand)

OTHER SOURCES OF GMOS:
• Dairy products from cows injected with the GM hormone rBGH
• Food additives, enzymes, flavorings and processing agents, including the  sweetener aspartame (NutraSweet®) and rennet used to make hard cheeses
• Meat, eggs and dairy products from animals that have eaten GM feed
• Honey and bee pollen that may have
GM sources of pollen
• Contamination or pollination caused by GM seeds or pollen

INGREDIENTS THAT MAY BE GENETICALLY MODIFIED:
Vegetable oil, vegetable fat and margarines (made with soy, corn, cottonseed and/or canola)

INGREDIENTS DERIVED FROM SOYBEANS:
Soy flour, soy protein, soy isolates, soy isoflavones, soy lecithin, vegetable proteins, textured vegetable protein (TVP), tofu, tamari, tempeh and soy protein supplements

INGREDIENTS DERIVED FROM CORN:
Corn flour, corn gluten, corn masa, corn starch, corn syrup, cornmeal and high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS)
—from ResponsibleTechnology.org

“101 Ways to Get Subluxated”

#27 – Dropping 420 lbs on your head at the Olympics. Can you imagine gold medalist weight lifter Matthias Steiner's next Chiropractic visit…'hey doc, my neck’s sore and I’ve been getting these bad headaches. Think it could be my pillow?” 

The father of Chiropractic, D.D. Palmer recognized 3 ‘T’s as being the major cause of nerve interference (aka Subluxation): Trauma, Toxins and Thoughts. The first 'T' is pretty obvious, but many patients overlook the last two. TOXINS come in the form of pesticides, artificial additives in our food, cigarette smoke and the most common of all, pharmaceuticals (yes, drugs are foreign to the body and put added stress on your nerve system). ConstantTHOUGHTS of fear, worry and depression can also weaken your sensitive nerve system and make it harder to heal.

Many patients believe it’s only physical things like car accidents, bad pillows and the occasional ‘400 lbs barbell on the head’ that can cause nerve interference, when in reality it’s the daily bombardment of hidden food toxins and stressful thoughts that commonly do the most damage.

If your hand was taped in one position for years, and someone cut the tape off and tried to move it, what do you think would happen? Your hand would snap back to the position it was stuck in for all that time. But with repetition - normal movement and alignment can be restored. The same goes for your spine. When vertebrae are misaligned and stuck chronically over time (subluxated), supporting muscles and ligaments tend to 'hold' them in that position. The first time a Chiropractor tries to adjust it, just like the taped hand, the vertebrae may shift back to the old position it was stuck in. That's why 'one and done' rarely works in Chiropractic. It takes repetition to change. Frequency and repetition are necessary components of any successful Chiropractic care plan. The more consistent you are with your adjustments, the better the results. For Chiropractors, the definition of sanity is doing the right thing over and over again until health is restored.

… do you have to eat it for the rest of your Life?  The answer is obviously no, unless your parents still have an iron grip on your diet.  No one can force you to do something that's good for your health and your Life if you don't want to. If you don't want to renew that gym membership, go to yoga classes or reduce your stress with meditation, that's up to you.  Don't feel like watching your sugar intake or taking your vitamins, the choice is yours to reap the benefits or face the consequences.  And the same goes for your Chiropractic care.  That rumor that says 'once you start Chiropractic care, you have to keep going for the rest of your life' is a big fallacy.  Although it's true, many clients who start Chiropractic CHOOSE to continue with maintenance care because they appreciate the truckload of Life benefits that goes with having a strong spine and clear Nerve System… no one is forcing them to do so.  They do it because it simply makes sense - just like eating their broccoli.

“Repetition Restores…”

If your hand was taped in one position for years, and someone cut the tape off and tried to move it, what do you think would happen?  Your hand would snap back to the position it was stuck in for all that time.  But with repetition - normal movement and alignment can be restored.  The same goes for your spine. When vertebrae are misaligned and stuck chronically over time (subluxated), supporting muscles and ligaments tend to 'hold' them in that position.  The first time a Chiropractor tries to adjust it, just like the taped hand, the vertebrae may shift back to the old position it was stuck in.  That's why 'one and done' rarely works in Chiropractic.  It takes repetition to change. Frequency and repetition are necessary components of any successful Chiropractic care plan.   The more consistent you are with your adjustments, the better the results.  For Chiropractors, the definition of sanity is doing theright thing over and over again until health is restored.

“Real Doctor in the Rearview…”

The specialists say you have allergies, asthma, sleep apnea, depression, chronic fatigue, GERD and fibromyalgia. They say you'll be on a dozen different medications for the rest of your life. But what does the doctor looking back at you in the mirror say? The doctor in the mirror says you have an innate wisdom inside, capable of RE-CREATING a healthier version you.  A 'you' without allergies, asthma, sleep apnea, depression, chronic fatigue, GERD or fibromyalgia. That doctor is just waiting for you to remove the roadblock. Health is your birthright. Health is your natural state. Health is what you experience when you have a clear nerve system.  Don't be imprisoned by the whitecoat's diagnosis, it's merely a temporary state.  Find a Chiropractor who works with the doctor inside you and you'll leave sickness and dis-ease behind in the dust.

“Smell Something Burning?”

A family physician tells his patient "there are 3 stages of pain. The first stage, the pain is bad enough to catch your attention. The second stage it takes hold of you, and at the third stage it finally compels you to do something about it."  The patient asks his doctor, "when it gets to stage three what should I do?"  Without a blink, the doctor turns to him and says "take some Motrin…" (True and sad story)

The worst part is the patient actually thought it was good advice.  When he relays the story to his Chiropractor, the Chiropractor responds "if your smoke detector went off in your home, the 1st time it would probably catch your attention…  the 2nd time it would most likely take hold of you.  But if it went off a 3rd time and you were finally compelled to do something, would you take the batteries out so you wouldn't have to hear it anymore?  "Of course not," the patient replied "that would be stupid…" The patient got the point.

The moral of the story… Symptoms are your body's attempt to save itself.  Masking your symptoms (whether it be pain, nausea, diarrhea or fever) with drugs doesn't fix the problem, it can actually make the situation worse.  It's smarter to get to the CAUSE of the problem and deal with it the RIGHT way.  That's why they call Chiropractors DC's  because they are Doctors of finding the Cause!