+- The Breast Enhancement Archive (https://forum.bearchive.co)
+-- Forum: Discussions (https://forum.bearchive.co/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: General Discussion (https://forum.bearchive.co/forum-8.html)
+--- Thread: Something In The Water? (/thread-431.html)
Something In The Water? - JustSomeone - 03-27-2014
![[Image: Capture.PNG?m=1395973081]](http://gallery.bearchive.co/var/resizes/Misc-Images/Capture.PNG?m=1395973081)
I was browsing through the gallery, and had a crazy thought. While looking at this screen, I realized that Wendy Whoppers fake boobs (from the early 90s) are just as large (almost) as Leanne Crowe's real (maybe) boobs.
What will real boobs look like 10 or 20 years from now? Are we basically predicting the future, when we were morphing?
RE: Something In The Water? - Djoser - 03-28-2014
No. Unless the ingestion of fat and modified food increased as much.
Significant morphological and hereditary changes in populations don't work that fast, unles we reproduced like bacteria
. However the changes in diet can be quite significant in a single generation time.
RE: Something In The Water? - JustSomeone - 03-28-2014
(03-28-2014, 02:05 AM)Djoser Wrote: No. Unless the ingestion of fat and modified food increased as much.So I should send the thank you note to McDonalds?
Significant morphological and hereditary changes in populations don't work that fast, unles we reproduced like bacteria
RE: Something In The Water? - bosomblaster - 03-28-2014
I thought I read somewhere that breast sizes have actually decreased somewhat over recent times because of stretches of history when women stopped nursing their babies when baby formula became available.
RE: Something In The Water? - JustSomeone - 03-28-2014
(03-28-2014, 11:24 AM)bosomblaster Wrote: I thought I read somewhere that breast sizes have actually decreased somewhat over recent times because of stretches of history when women stopped nursing their babies when baby formula became available.I'm not just a boob guy. But, I'm also an advocate of nursing. It's just depressing to see things like formula taking over what nature intended. Although, I know that formula has its place. I'm just lamenting out loud.
RE: Something In The Water? - Bonecracker - 03-28-2014
Nothing is as good for an infant as mother's milk. Nothing. No formula in the world is as perfect a food because a mother's milk is specifically tailored to the children she bears - although a wet nurse is a good close second. PLUS, there is the bonding and nurturing aspects of nursing also. PLUS it is really good for a woman's body - helps relieve stress, anxiety and depression and also helps her lose the post-partum baby fat in a hurry.
RE: Something In The Water? - Rickypym - 03-29-2014
You do raise a good point, JS.
It's amazing how huge some of the naturals are now, Miosotis and Abbi Secraa, just to name two.
Those two women's naturals are bigger than a lot of the super-boobers of the mid 1990s.
I've always wondered if the entrance of huge natties on the scene, on fairly fit, non-BBW bodies, such as Milena Velba, in 2004-2005, was what turned off or scared away some of the huge augmented ladies from touring as feature dancers or from the "life" of being a big tit queen.
To me, much of the mystique and thrill of the super boobs of the early to mid 1990s was the idea that those girls were actually creating a body (with modern technology) that did not or could not exist in nature. They were like walking fantasies or wet dreams come to life. But later, a lot of super-big natties started coming out of the closet, and that may have ruffled the feathers of some of the diva peacocks. (Perhaps because those augmented girls knew, that for many men, all things being the same, many dudes prefer natties)
By the way, I am not trying to start a debate on natural versus fake, I believe both has their place and one is not necessarily better than the other. Naturals are great, but I also love Chelsea Charms, not least of all because she CHOSE to look that way and having monster tits obviously excites her and turns her on.
RE: Something In The Water? - Djoser - 03-31-2014
Well, people in general has always preferred naturals, that's why in the 90's every big boobed stripper denied they were fake (although they obviously were). There's certain aversion for fakes. Now that's why most guys will believe that fakies are naturals (like denise Milani or Jordan Carver).
Also more than fakes or naturals, the girl's attitude towards them is what counts the most in my book: way too many big natural owners hate theit assets and that gets me inexorably turned off. On the other hand those with big fakes wantes to look that way and that voluntary decision is super hot, in my book.