Anonymous #4 4w

I don’t know about y’all but I’m sick of billionaires putting potentially hazardous shit in our food/ environment just to save a couple bucks. Like the VP of Campbell soup having a convo leaked and saying that it’s “peasant food” and “nobody want to eat bioengineered chicken grown in a lab”.

-5

Anonymous #4 4w

Fuck you Fox News for caring about womens health🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬🤬

-5

Anonymous #4 4w

Your immediate reaction is to call people in this thread dishonest? Here’s the quote. “But the problem is teens and young adults from ages 15 to 19, the fertility rate is down 7 percent, and it’s down 70 percent over the last two decades, meaning we’re telling people that are young not to have babies, to wait until they’re in a more stable life situation, until they’re more financially secure.” Tell me how that’s actually just “random stats” when it starts with “But the problem is”.

21

Anonymous OP 4w

70% in two decades was the most drastic shift out of any age group. Additionally the new casting started off by saying women age 15-44, before going into more specifically the age group that has experienced the most notable shift.

-4

Anonymous #4 4w

“but the problem is” ??

13

Anonymous #4 4w

Once again, how is that a problem

3

Anonymous #4 4w

Where’s the issue?

8

Anonymous #6 4w

Look at what happening to Japan, that’s the problem. Also it’s a massive problem if women are experiencing lower fertility, due to environmental factors and hormone disrupters present in our food. Once again fuck your fox new for caring about women’s health. Y’all are so dense bruh🤦‍♀️

-2

Anonymous #4 4w

That’s not the reason women are having fewer kids. Not here, not in Japan.

1

Anonymous #4 4w

For the 15-19 age group, the fertility decreasing is not a problem. That is sometimes explained by an increased focus on education and career planning and increased use of contraceptives. It’s usually correlated with higher HS graduation rates, better employment opportunities, and lower risk of negative childbirth outcomes (preterm birth, complications, etc), just to name a few. From economic, social, and public health standpoints, this rate decreasing is a good sign

1

Anonymous #3 4w

that’s not what the news casting was about at all🤦‍♀️. It was about women’s physical health bruh. Im sick of billionaires poisoning our food and our environment to save a couple bucks, aren’t you? We need to bring awareness to this shit and get more people radicalized to standing up to it. These people don’t give a damn if they put toxic shit in their products. Like the CEO of McDonald’s pretending to eat his new burger.

-1

Anonymous #3 4w

Like I can’t eat a fucking ham sandwich without thinking about how almost all meat is now considered carcinogenic.

-1

Anonymous #4 4w

What exactly is the conclusion I’m supposed to draw here then? If it was just about environmental factors harming fertility (which is definitely an issue), why bring up the fertility rate in women 15-19 and the fact his wife’s OBGYN said she, at 36 years old, was his youngest patient?

5

Anonymous #4 4w

That’s not what they were talking about though

1