[問卦] 坐月子有啥科學根據?消失
福原愛生完不做月子
又掀起一波論戰
到底做月子有啥科學根據?
老是有人說 老了有差
結果數據也提不出來
人到老身體變因這麼多
如何證明是當初有沒有做月子有差?
唯一可以科學證明的只有不讓台女坐月子
以後吵架就會每次都被翻出來講
所以坐月子到底有啥科學根據
光日本女生比較長壽就直接打臉老了有差這句話了不是?
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 114.42.112.142
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Gossiping/M.1507893286.A.F32.html
→
10/13 19:16, , 1F
10/13 19:16, 1F
→
10/13 19:16, , 2F
10/13 19:16, 2F
結果你有科學根據嗎
噓
10/13 19:16, , 3F
10/13 19:16, 3F
推
10/13 19:16, , 4F
10/13 19:16, 4F
那科學根據呢
推
10/13 19:16, , 5F
10/13 19:16, 5F
→
10/13 19:17, , 6F
10/13 19:17, 6F
→
10/13 19:17, , 7F
10/13 19:17, 7F
推
10/13 19:18, , 8F
10/13 19:18, 8F
推
10/13 19:18, , 9F
10/13 19:18, 9F
→
10/13 19:19, , 10F
10/13 19:19, 10F
推
10/13 19:19, , 11F
10/13 19:19, 11F
→
10/13 19:19, , 12F
10/13 19:19, 12F
→
10/13 19:20, , 13F
10/13 19:20, 13F
→
10/13 19:20, , 14F
10/13 19:20, 14F
只會東扯西扯沒一個能用科學根據說服人
※ 編輯: nagisaK (114.42.112.142), 10/13/2017 19:22:00
推
10/13 19:21, , 15F
10/13 19:21, 15F
→
10/13 19:22, , 16F
10/13 19:22, 16F
推
10/13 19:23, , 17F
10/13 19:23, 17F
→
10/13 19:23, , 18F
10/13 19:23, 18F
→
10/13 19:23, , 19F
10/13 19:23, 19F
→
10/13 19:26, , 20F
10/13 19:26, 20F
推
10/13 19:27, , 21F
10/13 19:27, 21F
→
10/13 19:27, , 22F
10/13 19:27, 22F
→
10/13 19:27, , 23F
10/13 19:27, 23F
噓
10/13 19:27, , 24F
10/13 19:27, 24F
你連屎跟飯的營養成分都分不清?
→
10/13 19:27, , 25F
10/13 19:27, 25F
→
10/13 19:27, , 26F
10/13 19:27, 26F
肚子餓沒科學根據我也是笑了
當消化科跟新陳代謝科醫生是神棍?
推
10/13 19:28, , 27F
10/13 19:28, 27F
→
10/13 19:28, , 28F
10/13 19:28, 28F
→
10/13 19:28, , 29F
10/13 19:28, 29F
→
10/13 19:28, , 30F
10/13 19:28, 30F
※ 編輯: nagisaK (114.42.112.142), 10/13/2017 19:30:18
→
10/13 19:30, , 31F
10/13 19:30, 31F
→
10/13 19:30, , 32F
10/13 19:30, 32F
對啊
有的人連為什麼是吃飯而不是吃屎都不知道
※ 編輯: nagisaK (114.42.112.142), 10/13/2017 19:31:30
噓
10/13 19:31, , 33F
10/13 19:31, 33F
→
10/13 19:31, , 34F
10/13 19:31, 34F
→
10/13 19:31, , 35F
10/13 19:31, 35F
休息幾天還好啊
但台灣月子做成這樣當廢人一個月有比日本長壽?
結果還是沒人拿的出科學根據
推
10/13 19:31, , 36F
10/13 19:31, 36F
推
10/13 19:33, , 37F
10/13 19:33, 37F
※ 編輯: nagisaK (114.42.112.142), 10/13/2017 19:36:46
推
10/13 19:35, , 38F
10/13 19:35, 38F
推
10/13 19:37, , 39F
10/13 19:37, 39F
推
10/13 19:38, , 40F
10/13 19:38, 40F
→
10/13 19:38, , 41F
10/13 19:38, 41F
→
10/13 19:38, , 42F
10/13 19:38, 42F
→
10/13 19:39, , 43F
10/13 19:39, 43F
推
10/13 19:40, , 44F
10/13 19:40, 44F
→
10/13 19:40, , 45F
10/13 19:40, 45F
推
10/13 19:43, , 46F
10/13 19:43, 46F
推
10/13 19:44, , 47F
10/13 19:44, 47F
推
10/13 19:44, , 48F
10/13 19:44, 48F
推
10/13 19:45, , 49F
10/13 19:45, 49F
推
10/13 19:46, , 50F
10/13 19:46, 50F
→
10/13 19:46, , 51F
10/13 19:46, 51F
推
10/13 19:49, , 52F
10/13 19:49, 52F
推
10/13 19:50, , 53F
10/13 19:50, 53F
→
10/13 19:52, , 54F
10/13 19:52, 54F
→
10/13 19:54, , 55F
10/13 19:54, 55F
→
10/13 19:55, , 56F
10/13 19:55, 56F
→
10/13 19:55, , 57F
10/13 19:55, 57F
→
10/13 20:08, , 58F
10/13 20:08, 58F
推
10/13 20:09, , 59F
10/13 20:09, 59F
推
10/13 20:14, , 60F
10/13 20:14, 60F
噓
10/13 20:15, , 61F
10/13 20:15, 61F
推
10/13 20:18, , 62F
10/13 20:18, 62F
推
10/13 20:42, , 63F
10/13 20:42, 63F
噓
10/13 20:49, , 64F
10/13 20:49, 64F
→
10/13 20:49, , 65F
10/13 20:49, 65F
→
10/13 20:49, , 66F
10/13 20:49, 66F
問科學根據也是憤憤不平?
你有科學證據就拿出來台男心服口服贊同坐月子啊
噓
10/13 20:53, , 67F
10/13 20:53, 67F
→
10/13 21:14, , 68F
10/13 21:14, 68F
※ 編輯: nagisaK (114.42.112.142), 10/13/2017 21:48:19
推
10/13 22:05, , 69F
10/13 22:05, 69F
推
10/13 23:38, , 70F
10/13 23:38, 70F
→
10/13 23:39, , 71F
10/13 23:39, 71F
→
10/13 23:39, , 72F
10/13 23:39, 72F
討論串 (同標題文章)