Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 37

Thread: MILK

  1. #1
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default MILK

    "MILK" Just the word itself sounds comforting! "How about a
    nice cup of hot milk?" The last time you heard that question
    it was from someone who cared for you--and you appreciated
    their effort.

    The entire matter of food and especially that of milk is
    surrounded with emotional and cultural importance. Milk was
    our very first food. If we were fortunate it was our
    mother's milk. A loving link, given and taken. It was the
    only path to survival. If not mother's milk it was cow's
    milk or soy milk "formula"--rarely it was goat, camel or
    water buffalo milk.

    Now, we are a nation of milk drinkers. Nearly all of us.
    Infants, the young, adolescents, adults and even the aged.
    We drink dozens or even several hundred gallons a year and
    add to that many pounds of "dairy products" such as cheese,
    butter, and yogurt.

    Can there be anything wrong with this? We see reassuring
    images of healthy, beautiful people on our television
    screens and hear messages that assure us that, "Milk is good
    for your body." Our dieticians insist that: "You've got to
    have milk, or where will you get your calcium?" School
    lunches always include milk and nearly every hospital meal
    will have milk added. And if that isn't enough, our
    nutritionists told us for years that dairy products make up
    an "essential food group." Industry spokesmen made sure that
    colourful charts proclaiming the necessity of milk and other
    essential nutrients were made available at no cost for
    schools. Cow's milk became "normal."

    You may be surprised to learn that most of the human beings
    that live on planet Earth today do not drink or use cow's
    milk. Further, most of them can't drink milk because it
    makes them ill.

    There are students of human nutrition who are not supportive
    of milk use for adults. Here is a quotation from the
    March/April 1991 Utne Reader:

    If you really want to play it safe, you may decide to join
    the growing number of Americans who are eliminating dairy
    products from their diets altogether. Although this sounds
    radical to those of us weaned on milk and the five basic
    food groups, it is eminently viable. Indeed, of all the
    mammals, only humans--and then only a minority, principally
    Caucasians--continue to drink milk beyond babyhood.

    Who is right? Why the confusion? Where best to get our
    answers? Can we trust milk industry spokesmen? Can you trust
    any industry spokesmen? Are nutritionists up to date or are
    they simply repeating what their professors learned years
    ago? What about the new voices urging caution?

    I believe that there are three reliable sources of
    information. The first, and probably the best, is a study of
    nature. The second is to study the history of our own
    species. Finally we need to look at the world's scientific
    literature on the subject of milk.

    Let's look at the scientific literature first. From 1988 to
    1993 there were over 2,700 articles dealing with milk
    recorded in the 'Medicine' archives. Fifteen hundred of
    theses had milk as the main focus of the article. There is
    no lack of scientific information on this subject. I
    reviewed over 500 of the 1,500 articles, discarding articles
    that dealt exclusively with animals, esoteric research and
    inconclusive studies.

    How would I summarize the articles? They were only slightly
    less than horrifying. First of all, none of the authors
    spoke of cow's milk as an excellent food, free of side
    effects and the 'perfect food' as we have been led to
    believe by the industry. The main focus of the published
    reports seems to be on intestinal colic, intestinal
    irritation, intestinal bleeding, anemia, allergic reactions
    in infants and children as well as infections such as
    salmonella. More ominous is the fear of viral infection with
    bovine leukemia virus or an AIDS-like virus as well as
    concern for childhood diabetes. Contamination of milk by
    blood and white (pus) cells as well as a variety of
    chemicals and insecticides was also discussed. Among
    children the problems were allergy, ear and tonsillar
    infections, bedwetting, asthma, intestinal bleeding, colic
    and childhood diabetes. In adults the problems seemed
    centered more around heart disease and arthritis, allergy,
    sinusitis, and the more serious questions of leukemia,
    lymphoma and cancer.

    I think that an answer can also be found in a consideration
    of what occurs in nature & what happens with free living
    mammals and what happens with human groups living in close
    to a natural state as 'hunter-gatherers'.

    Our paleolithic ancestors are another crucial and
    interesting group to study. Here we are limited to
    speculation and indirect evidences, but the bony remains
    available for our study are remarkable. There is no doubt
    whatever that these skeletal remains reflect great strength,
    muscularity (the size of the muscular insertions show this),
    and total absence of advanced osteoporosis. And if you feel
    that these people are not important for us to study,
    consider that today our genes are programming our bodies in
    almost exactly the same way as our ancestors of 50,000 to
    100,000 years ago.

  2. #2
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    WHAT IS MILK?

    Milk is a maternal lactating secretion, a short term
    nutrient for new-borns. Nothing more, nothing less.
    Invariably, the mother of any mammal will provide her milk
    for a short period of time immediately after birth. When the
    time comes for 'weaning', the young offspring is introduced
    to the proper food for that species of mammal. A familiar
    example is that of a puppy. The mother nurses the pup for
    just a few weeks and then rejects the young animal and
    teaches it to eat solid food. Nursing is provided by nature
    only for the very youngest of mammals. Of course, it is not
    possible for animals living in a natural state to continue
    with the drinking of milk after weaning.

    IS ALL MILK THE SAME?

    Then there is the matter of where we get our milk. We have
    settled on the cow because of its docile nature, its size,
    and its abundant milk supply. Somehow this choice seems
    'normal' and blessed by nature, our culture, and our
    customs. But is it natural? Is it wise to drink the milk of
    another species of mammal?

    Consider for a moment, if it was possible, to drink the milk
    of a mammal other than a cow, let's say a rat. Or perhaps
    the milk of a dog would be more to your liking. Possibly
    some horse milk or cat milk. Do you get the idea? Well, I'm
    not serious about this, except to suggest that human milk is
    for human infants, dogs' milk is for pups, cows' milk is for
    calves, cats' milk is for kittens, and so forth. Clearly,
    this is the way nature intends it. Just use your own good
    judgement on this one.

    Milk is not just milk. The milk of every species of mammal
    is unique and specifically tailored to the requirements of
    that animal. For example, cows' milk is very much richer in
    protein than human milk. Three to four times as much. It has
    five to seven times the mineral content. However, it is
    markedly deficient in essential fatty acids when compared to
    human mothers' milk. Mothers' milk has six to ten times as
    much of the essential fatty acids, especially linoleic acid.
    (Incidentally, skimmed cow's milk has no linoleic acid). It
    simply is not designed for humans.

    Food is not just food, and milk is not just milk. It is not
    only the proper amount of food but the proper qualitative
    composition that is critical for the very best in health and
    growth. Biochemists and physiologists -and rarely medical
    doctors - are gradually learning that foods contain the
    crucial elements that allow a particular species to develop
    its unique specializations.

    Clearly, our specialization is for advanced neurological
    development and delicate neuromuscular control. We do not
    have much need of massive skeletal growth or huge muscle
    groups as does a calf. Think of the difference between the
    demands make on the human hand and the demands on a cow's
    hoof. Human new-borns specifically need critical material
    for their brains, spinal cord and nerves.

    Can mother's milk increase intelligence? It seems that it
    can. In a remarkable study published in Lancet during 1992
    (Vol. 339, p. 261-4), a group of British workers randomly
    placed premature infants into two groups. One group received
    a proper formula, the other group received human breast
    milk. Both fluids were given by stomach tube. These children
    were followed up for over 10 years. In intelligence testing,
    the human milk children averaged 10 IQ points higher! Well,
    why not? Why wouldn't the correct building blocks for the
    rapidly maturing and growing brain have a positive effect?

    In the American Journal of Clinical <A TITLE="Click for more information about nutrition" STYLE="text-decoration: none; border-bottom: medium solid green;" HREF="http://search.targetwords.com/u.search?x=5977|1||||nutrition|AA1VDw">Nutrition</A> (1982) Ralph
    Holman described an infant who developed profound
    neurological disease while being nourished by intravenous
    fluids only. The fluids used contained only linoleic acid -
    just one of the essential fatty acids. When the other, alpha
    linoleic acid, was added to the intravenous fluids the
    neurological disorders cleared.

    In the same journal five years later Bjerve, Mostad and
    Thoresen, working in Norway found exactly the same problem
    in adult patients on long term gastric tube feeding.

    In 1930 Dr. G.O. Burr in Minnesota working with rats found
    that linoleic acid deficiencies created a deficiency
    syndrome. Why is this mentioned? In the early 1960s
    pediatricians found skin lesions in children fed formulas
    without the same linoleic acid. Remembering the research,
    the addition of the acid to the formula cured the problem.
    Essential fatty acids are just that and cows&#039; milk is
    markedly deficient in these when compared to human milk.

    WELL, AT LEAST COW&#039;S MILK IS PURE

    Or is it? Fifty years ago an average cow produced 2,000
    pounds of milk per year. Today the top producers give 50,000
    pounds! How was this accomplished? Drugs, antibiotics,
    hormones, forced feeding plans and specialized breeding;
    that&#039;s how.

    The latest high-tech onslaught on the poor cow is bovine
    growth hormone or BGH. This genetically engineered drug is
    supposed to stimulate milk production but, according to
    Monsanto, the hormone&#039;s manufacturer, does not affect the
    milk or meat. There are three other manufacturers: Upjohn,
    Eli Lilly, and American Cyanamid Company. Obviously, there
    have been no long-term studies on the hormone&#039;s effect on
    the humans drinking the milk. Other countries have banned
    BGH because of safety concerns. One of the problems with
    adding molecules to a milk cows&#039; body is that the molecules
    usually come out in the milk. I don&#039;t know how you feel, but
    I don&#039;t want to experiment with the ingestion of a growth
    hormone. A related problem is that it causes a marked
    increase (50 to 70 per cent) in mastitis. This, then,
    requires antibiotic therapy, and the residues of the
    antibiotics appear in the milk. It seems that the public is
    uneasy about this product and in one survey 43 per cent felt
    that growth hormone treated milk represented a health risk.
    A vice president for public policy at Monsanto was opposed
    to labelling for that reason, and because the labelling
    would create an &#039;artificial distinction&#039;. The country is
    awash with milk as it is, we produce more milk than we can
    consume. Let&#039;s not create storage costs and further taxpayer
    burdens, because the law requires the USDA to buy any
    surplus of butter, cheese, or non-fat dry milk at a support
    price set by Congress! In fiscal 1991, the USDA spent $757
    million on surplus butter, and one billion dollars a year on
    average for price supports during the 1980s (Consumer
    Reports, May 1992: 330-32).

    Any lactating mammal excretes toxins through her milk. This
    includes antibiotics, pesticides, chemicals and hormones.
    Also, all cows&#039; milk contains blood! The inspectors are
    simply asked to keep it under certain limits. You may be
    horrified to learn that the USDA allows milk to contain from
    one to one and a half million white blood cells per
    millilitre. (That&#039;s only 1/30 of an ounce). If you don&#039;t
    already know this, I&#039;m sorry to tell you that another way to
    describe white cells where they don&#039;t belong would be to
    call them pus cells. To get to the point, is milk pure or is
    it a chemical, biological, and bacterial cocktail? Finally,
    will the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) protect you? The
    United States General Accounting Office (GAO) tells us that
    the FDA and the individual States are failing to protect the
    public from drug residues in milk. Authorities test for only
    4 of the 82 drugs in dairy cows.

    As you can imagine, the Milk Industry Foundation&#039;s spokesman
    claims it&#039;s perfectly safe. Jerome Kozak says, "I still
    think that milk is the safest product we have."

    Other, perhaps less biased observers, have found the
    following: 38% of milk samples in 10 cities were
    contaminated with sulfa drugs or other antibiotics. (This
    from the Centre for Science in the Public Interest and The
    Wall Street Journal, Dec. 29, 1989).. A similar study in
    Washington, DC found a 20 percent contamination rate
    (Nutrition Action Healthletter, April 1990).

    What&#039;s going on here? When the FDA tested milk, they found
    few problems. However, they used very lax standards. When
    they used the same criteria, the FDA data showed 51 percent
    of the milk samples showed drug traces.

    Let&#039;s focus in on this because itÂ’s critical to our
    understanding of the apparent discrepancies. The FDA uses a
    disk-assay method that can detect only 2 of the 30 or so
    drugs found in milk. Also, the test detects only at the
    relatively high level. A more powerful test called the
    &#039;Charm II test&#039; can detect drugs down to 5 parts per
    billion.

    One nasty subject must be discussed. It seems that cows are
    forever getting infections around the udder that require
    ointments and antibiotics. An article from France tells us
    that when a cow receives penicillin, that penicillin appears
    in the milk for from 4 to 7 milkings. Another study from the
    University of Nevada, Reno tells of cells in &#039;mastic milk&#039;,
    milk from cows with infected udders. An elaborate analysis
    of the cell fragments, employing cell cultures, flow
    cytometric analysis , and a great deal of high tech stuff.
    Do you know what the conclusion was? If the cow has
    mastitis, there is pus in the milk. Sorry, itÂ’s in the
    study, all concealed with language such as "macrophages
    containing many vacuoles and phagocytosed particles," etc.


  3. #3
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    IT GETS WORSE

    Well, at least human mothers&#039; milk is pure! Sorry. A huge
    study showed that human breast milk in over 14,000 women had
    contamination by pesticides! Further, it seems that the
    sources of the pesticides are meat and--you guessed it--
    dairy products. Well, why not? These pesticides are
    concentrated in fat and that&#039;s what&#039;s in these products. (Of
    interest, a subgroup of lactating vegetarian mothers had
    only half the levels of contamination).

    A recent report showed an increased concentration of
    pesticides in the breast tissue of women with breast cancer
    when compared to the tissue of women with fibrocystic
    disease. Other articles in the standard medical literature
    describe problems. Just scan these titles:

    1.Cow&#039;s Milk as a Cause of Infantile Colic Breast-Fed
    Infants. Lancet 2 (197: 437 2.Dietary Protein-Induced
    Colitis in Breast- Fed Infants, J. Pediatr. I01 (1982): 906
    3.The Question of the Elimination of Foreign Protein in
    Women&#039;s Milk, J. Immunology 19 (1930): 15

    There are many others. There are dozens of studies
    describing the prompt appearance of cows&#039; milk allergy in
    children being exclusively breast-fed! The cows&#039; milk
    allergens simply appear in the mother&#039;s milk and are
    transmitted to the infant.

    A committee on nutrition of the American Academy of
    Pediatrics reported on the use of whole cows&#039; milk in
    infancy (Pediatrics 1983: 72-253). They were unable to
    provide any cogent reason why bovine milk should be used
    before the first birthday yet continued to recommend its
    use! Doctor Frank Oski from the Upstate Medical Centre
    Department of Pediatrics, commenting on the recommendation,
    cited the problems of acute gastrointestinal blood loss in
    infants, the lack of iron, recurrent abdominal pain, milk-
    borne infections and contaminants, and said:

    Why give it at all - then or ever? In the face of
    uncertainty about many of the potential dangers of whole
    bovine milk, it would seem prudent to recommend that whole
    milk not be started until the answers are available. Isn&#039;t
    it time for these uncontrolled experiments on human
    nutrition to come to an end?

    In the same issue of Pediatrics he further commented:

    It is my thesis that whole milk should not be fed to the
    infant in the first year of life because of its association
    with iron deficiency anemia (milk is so deficient in iron
    that an infant would have to drink an impossible 31 quarts a
    day to get the RDA of 15 mg), acute gastrointiestinal
    bleeding, and various manifestations of food allergy.

    I suggest that unmodified whole bovine milk should not be
    consumed after infancy because of the problems of lactose
    intolerance, its contribution to the genesis of
    atherosclerosis, and its possible link to other diseases.

    In late 1992 Dr. Benjamin Spock, possibly the best known
    pediatrician in history, shocked the country when he
    articulated the same thoughts and specified avoidance for
    the first two years of life. Here is his quotation:

    I want to pass on the word to parents that cows&#039; milk from
    the carton has definite faults for some babies. Human milk
    is the right one for babies. A study comparing the incidence
    of allergy and colic in the breast-fed infants of omnivorous
    and vegan mothers would be important. I haven&#039;t found such a
    study; it would be both important and inexpensive. And it
    will probably never be done. There is simply no academic or
    economic profit involved.

    OTHER PROBLEMS

    Let&#039;s just mention the problems of bacterial contamination.
    Salmonella, E. coli, and staphylococcal infections can be
    traced to milk. In the old days tuberculosis was a major
    problem and some folks want to go back to those times by
    insisting on raw milk on the basis that it&#039;s "natural." This
    is insanity! A study from UCLA showed that over a third of
    all cases of salmonella infection in California, 1980-1983
    were traced to raw milk. That&#039;ll be a way to revive good old
    brucellosis again and I would fear leukemia, too. (More
    about that later). In England, and Wales where raw milk is
    still consumed there have been outbreaks of milk-borne
    diseases. The Journal of the American Medical Association
    (251: 483, 1984) reported a multi-state series of infections
    caused by Yersinia enterocolitica in pasteurised whole milk.
    This is despite safety precautions.

    All parents dread juvenile diabetes for their children. A
    Canadian study reported in the American Journal of Clinical
    Nutrition, Mar. 1990, describes a "...significant positive
    correlation between consumption of unfermented milk protein
    and incidence of insulin dependent diabetes mellitus in data
    from various countries. Conversely a possible negative
    relationship is observed between breast-feeding at age 3
    months and diabetes risk.".

    Another study from Finland found that diabetic children had
    higher levels of serum antibodies to cowsÂ’ milk (Diabetes
    Research 7(3): 137-140 March 198. Here is a quotation from
    this study:

    We infer that either the pattern of cows&#039; milk consumption
    is altered in children who will have insulin dependent
    diabetes mellitus or, their immunological reactivity to
    proteins in cows&#039; milk is enhanced, or the permeability of
    their intestines to cows&#039; milk protein is higher than
    normal.

    The April 18, 1992 British Medical Journal has a fascinating
    study contrasting the difference in incidence of juvenile
    insulin dependent diabetes in Pakistani children who have
    migrated to England. The incidence is roughly 10 times
    greater in the English group compared to children remaining
    in Pakistan! What caused this highly significant increase?
    The authors said that "the diet was unchanged in Great
    Britain." Do you believe that? Do you think that the
    availability of milk, sugar and fat is the same in Pakistan
    as it is in England? That a grocery store in England has the
    same products as food sources in Pakistan? I don&#039;t believe
    that for a minute. Remember, we&#039;re not talking here about
    adult onset, type II diabetes which all workers agree is
    strongly linked to diet as well as to a genetic
    predisposition. This study is a major blow to the "it&#039;s all
    in your genes" crowd. Type I diabetes was always considered
    to be genetic or possibly viral, but now this? So resistant
    are we to consider diet as causation that the authors of the
    last article concluded that the cooler climate in England
    altered viruses and caused the very real increase in
    diabetes! The first two authors had the same reluctance top
    admit the obvious. The milk just may have had something to
    do with the disease.

    The latest in this remarkable list of reports, a New England
    Journal of Medicine article (July 30, 1992), also reported
    in the Los Angeles Times. This study comes from the Hospital
    for Sick Children in Toronto and from Finnish researchers.
    In Finland there is "...the world&#039;s highest rate of dairy
    product consumption and the world&#039;s highest rate of insulin
    dependent diabetes. The disease strikes about 40 children
    out of every 1,000 there contrasted with six to eight per
    1,000 in the United States.... Antibodies produced against
    the milk protein during the first year of life, the
    researchers speculate, also attack and destroy the pancreas
    in a so-called auto-immune reaction, producing diabetes in
    people whose genetic makeup leaves them vulnerable." "...142
    Finnish children with newly diagnosed diabetes. They found
    that every one had at least eight times as many antibodies
    against the milk protein as did healthy children, clear
    evidence that the children had a raging auto immune
    disorder." The team has now expanded the study to 400
    children and is starting a trial where 3,000 children will
    receive no dairy products during the first nine months of
    life. "The study may take 10 years, but we&#039;ll get a
    definitive answer one way or the other," according to one of
    the researchers. I would caution them to be certain that the
    breast feeding mothers use on cows&#039; milk in their diets or
    the results will be confounded by the transmission of the
    cows&#039; milk protein in the mother&#039;s breast milk.... Now what
    was the reaction from the diabetes association? This is very
    interesting! Dr. F. Xavier Pi-Sunyer, the president of the
    association says: "It does not mean that children should
    stop drinking milk or that parents of diabetics should
    withdraw dairy products. These are rich sources of good
    protein." (Emphasis added) My God, it&#039;s the "good protein"
    that causes the problem! Do you suspect that the dairy
    industry may have helped the American Diabetes Association
    in the past?

  4. #4
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    LEUKEMIA? LYMPHOMA? THIS MAY BE THE WORST--BRACE YOURSELF!

    I hate to tell you this, but the bovine leukemia virus is
    found in more than three of five dairy cows in the United
    States! This involves about 80% of dairy herds.
    Unfortunately, when the milk is pooled, a very large
    percentage of all milk produced is contaminated (90 to 95
    per cent). Of course the virus is killed in pasteurisation--
    if the pasteurisation was done correctly. What if the milk
    is raw? In a study of randomly collected raw milk samples
    the bovine leukemia virus was recovered from two-thirds. I
    sincerely hope that the raw milk dairy herds are carefully
    monitored when compared to the regular herds. (Science 1981;
    213:1014).

    This is a world-wide problem. One lengthy study from Germany
    deplored the problem and admitted the impossibility of
    keeping the virus from infected cows&#039; milk from the rest of
    the milk. Several European countries, including Germany and
    Switzerland, have attempted to "cull" the infected cows from
    their herds. Certainly the United States must be the leader
    in the fight against leukemic dairy cows, right? Wrong! We
    are the worst in the world with the former exception of
    Venezuela according to Virgil Hulse MD, a milk specialist
    who also has a B.S. in Dairy Manufacturing as well as a
    Master&#039;s degree in Public Health.

    As mentioned, the leukemia virus is rendered inactive by
    pasteurisation. Of course. However, there can be Chernobyl
    like accidents. One of these occurred in the Chicago area in
    April, 1985. At a modern, large, milk processing plant an
    accidental "cross connection" between raw and pasteurized
    milk occurred. A violent salmonella outbreak followed,
    killing 4 and making an estimated 150,000 ill. Now the
    question I would pose to the dairy industry people is this:
    "How can you assure the people who drank this milk that they
    were not exposed to the ingestion of raw, unkilled, bully
    active bovine leukemia viruses?" Further, it would be
    fascinating to know if a "cluster" of leukemia cases
    blossoms in that area in 1 to 3 decades. There are reports
    of "leukemia clusters" elsewhere, one of them mentioned in
    the June 10, 1990 San Francisco Chronicle involving Northern
    California.

    What happens to other species of mammals when they are
    exposed to the bovine leukemia virus? It&#039;s a fair question
    and the answer is not reassuring. Virtually all animals
    exposed to the virus develop leukemia. This includes sheep,
    goats, and even primates such as rhesus monkeys and
    chimpanzees. The route of transmission includes ingestion
    (both intravenous and intramuscular) and cells present in
    milk. There are obviously no instances of transfer attempts
    to human beings, but we know that the virus can infect human
    cells in vitro. There is evidence of human antibody
    formation to the bovine leukemia virus; this is disturbing.
    How did the bovine leukemia virus particles gain access to
    humans and become antigens? Was it as small, denatured
    particles?

    If the bovine leukemia viruses causes human leukemia, we
    could expect the dairy states with known leukemic herds to
    have a higher incidence of human leukemia. Is this so?
    Unfortunately, it seems to be the case! Iowa, Nebraska,
    South Dakota, Minnesota and Wisconsin have statistically
    higher incidence of leukemia than the national average. In
    Russia and in Sweden, areas with uncontrolled bovine
    leukemia virus have been linked with increases in human
    leukemia. I am also told that veterinarians have higher
    rates of leukemia than the general public. Dairy farmers
    have significantly elevated leukemia rates. Recent research
    shows lymphocytes from milk fed to neonatal mammals gains
    access to bodily tissues by passing directly through the
    intestinal wall.

    An optimistic note from the University of Illinois, Ubana
    from the Department of Animal Sciences shows the importance
    of one&#039;s perspective. Since they are concerned with the
    economics of milk and not primarily the health aspects, they
    noted that the production of milk was greater in the cows
    with the bovine leukemia virus. However when the leukemia
    produced a persistent and significant lymphocytosis
    (increased white blood cell count), the production fell off.
    They suggested "a need to re-evaluate the economic impact of
    bovine leukemia virus infection on the dairy industry". Does
    this mean that leukemia is good for profits only if we can
    keep it under control? You can get the details on this
    business concern from Proc. Nat. Acad. Sciences, U.S. Feb.
    1989. I added emphasis and am insulted that a university
    department feels that this is an economic and not a human
    health issue. Do not expect help from the Department of
    Agriculture or the universities. The money stakes and the
    political pressures are too great. You&#039;re on you own.

    What does this all mean? We know that virus is capable of
    producing leukemia in other animals. Is it proven that it
    can contribute to human leukemia (or lymphoma, a related
    cancer)? Several articles tackle this one:

    1.Epidemiologic Relationships of the Bovine Population and
    Human Leukemia in Iowa. Am Journal of Epidemiology 112
    (1980):80 2.Milk of Dairy Cows Frequently Contains a
    Leukemogenic Virus. Science 213 (1981): 1014 3.Beware of the
    Cow. (Editorial) Lancet 2 (1974):30 4.Is Bovine Milk A
    Health Hazard?. Pediatrics; Suppl. Feeding the Normal
    Infant. 75:182-186; 1985

    In Norway, 1422 individuals were followed for 11 and a half
    years. Those drinking 2 or more glasses of milk per day had
    3.5 times the incidence of cancer of the lymphatic organs.
    British Med. Journal 61:456-9, March 1990.

    One of the more thoughtful articles on this subject is from
    Allan S. Cunningham of Cooperstown, New York. Writing in the
    Lancet, November 27, 1976 (page 1184), his article is
    entitled, "Lymphomas and Animal-Protein Consumption". Many
    people think of milk as “liquid meat” and Dr. Cunningham
    agrees with this. He tracked the beef and dairy consumption
    in terms of grams per day for a one year period, 1955-1956.,
    in 15 countries . New Zealand, United States and Canada were
    highest in that order. The lowest was Japan followed by
    Yugoslavia and France. The difference between the highest
    and lowest was quite pronounced: 43.8 grams/day for New
    Zealanders versus 1.5 for Japan. Nearly a 30-fold
    difference! (Parenthetically, the last 36 years have seen a
    startling increase in the amount of beef and milk used in
    Japan and their disease patterns are reflecting this,
    confirming the lack of &#039;genetic protection&#039; seen in
    migration studies. Formerly the increase in frequency of
    lymphomas in Japanese people was only in those who moved to
    the USA)!

    An interesting bit of trivia is to note the memorial built
    at the Gyokusenji Temple in Shimoda, Japan. This marked the
    spot where the first cow was killed in Japan for human
    consumption! The chains around this memorial were a gift
    from the US Navy. Where do you suppose the Japanese got the
    idea to eat beef? The year? 1930.

    Cunningham found a highly significant positive correlation
    between deaths from lymphomas and beef and dairy ingestion
    in the 15 countries analysed. A few quotations from his
    article follow:

    The average intake of protein in many countries is far in
    excess of the recommended requirements. Excessive
    consumption of animal protein may be one co-factor in the
    causation of lymphomas by acting in the following manner.
    Ingestion of certain proteins results in the adsorption of
    antigenic fragments through the gastrointestinal mucous
    membrane.

    This results in chronic stimulation of lymphoid tissue to
    which these fragments gain access "Chronic immunological
    stimulation causes lymphomas in laboratory animals and is
    believed to cause lymphoid cancers in men." The
    gastrointestinal mucous membrane is only a partial barrier
    to the absorption of food antigens, and circulating
    antibodies to food protein is commonplace especially potent
    lymphoid stimulants. Ingestion of cows&#039; milk can produce
    generalized lymphadenopathy, hepatosplenomegaly, and
    profound adenoid hypertrophy. It has been conservatively
    estimated that more than 100 distinct antigens are released
    by the normal digestion of cows&#039; milk which evoke production
    of all antibody classes [This may explain why pasteurized,
    killed viruses are still antigenic and can still cause
    disease.

    Here&#039;s more. A large prospective study from Norway was
    reported in the British Journal of Cancer 61 (3):456-9,
    March 1990. (Almost 16,000 individuals were followed for 11
    and a half years). For most cancers there was no association
    between the tumour and milk ingestion. However, in lymphoma,
    there was a strong positive association. If one drank two
    glasses or more daily (or the equivalent in dairy products),
    the odds were 3.4 times greater than in persons drinking
    less than one glass of developing a lymphoma.

    There are two other cow-related diseases that you should be
    aware of. At this time they are not known to be spread by
    the use of dairy products and are not known to involve man.
    The first is bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE), and the
    second is the bovine immunodeficiency virus (BIV). The first
    of these diseases, we hope, is confined to England and
    causes cavities in the animal&#039;s brain. Sheep have long been
    known to suffer from a disease called scrapie. It seems to
    have been started by the feeding of contaminated sheep
    parts, especially brains, to the British cows. Now, use your
    good sense. Do cows seem like carnivores? Should they eat
    meat? This profit-motivated practice backfired and bovine
    spongiform encephalopathy, or Mad Cow Disease, swept
    Britain. The disease literally causes dementia in the
    unfortunate animal and is 100 per cent incurable. To date,
    over 100,000 cows have been incinerated in England in
    keeping with British law. Four hundred to 500 cows are
    reported as infected each month. The British public is
    concerned and has dropped its beef consumption by 25 per
    cent, while some 2,000 schools have stopped serving beef to
    children. Several farmers have developed a fatal disease
    syndrome that resembles both BSE and CJD (Creutzfeldt-Jakob-
    Disease). But the British Veterinary Association says that
    transmission of BSE to humans is "remote."

    The USDA agrees that the British epidemic was due to the
    feeding of cattle with bonemeal or animal protein produced
    at rendering plants from the carcasses of scrapie-infected
    sheep. The have prohibited the importation of live cattle
    and zoo ruminants from Great Britain and claim that the
    disease does not exist in the United States. However, there
    may be a problem. "Downer cows" are animals who arrive at
    auction yards or slaughter houses dead, trampled, lacerated,
    dehydrated, or too ill from viral or bacterial diseases to
    walk. Thus they are "down." If they cannot respond to
    electrical shocks by walking, they are dragged by chains to
    dumpsters and transported to rendering plants where, if they
    are not already dead, they are killed. Even a "humane" death
    is usually denied them. They are then turned into protein
    food for animals as well as other preparations. Minks that
    have been fed this protein have developed a fatal
    encephalopathy that has some resemblance to BSE. Entire
    colonies of minks have been lost in this manner,
    particularly in Wisconsin. It is feared that the infective
    agent is a prion or slow virus possible obtained from the
    ill "downer cows."

    The British Medical Journal in an editorial whimsically
    entitled "How Now Mad Cow?" (BMJ vol. 304, 11 Apr. 1992:929-
    30) describes cases of BSE in species not previously known
    to be affected, such as cats. They admit that produce
    contaminated with bovine spongiform encephalopathy entered
    the human food chain in England between 1986 and 1989. They
    say. "The result of this experiment is awaited." As the
    incubation period can be up to three decades, wait we must.

    The immunodeficency virus is seen in cattle in the United
    States and is more worrisome. Its structure is closely
    related to that of the human AIDS virus. At this time we do
    not know if exposure to the raw BIV proteins can cause the
    sera of humans to become positive for HIV. The extent of the
    virus among American herds is said to be "widespread". (The
    USDA refuses to inspect the meat and milk to see if
    antibodies to this retrovirus is present). It also has no
    plans to quarantine the infected animals. As in the case of
    humans with AIDS, there is no cure for BIV in cows. Each day
    we consume beef and diary products from cows infected with
    these viruses and no scientific assurance exists that the
    products are safe. Eating raw beef (as in steak Tartare)
    strikes me as being very risky, especially after the Seattle
    E. coli deaths of 1993.

    A report in the Canadian Journal of Veterinary Research,
    October 1992, Vol. 56 pp.353-359 and another from the
    Russian literature, tell of a horrifying development. They
    report the first detection in human serum of the antibody to
    a bovine immunodeficiency virus protein. In addition to this
    disturbing report, is another from Russia telling us of the
    presence of virus proteins related to the bovine leukemia
    virus in 5 of 89 women with breast disease (Acta Virologica
    Feb. 1990 34(1): 19-26). The implications of these
    developments are unknown at present. However, it is safe to
    assume that these animal viruses are unlikely to "stay" in
    the animal kingdom.


  5. #5
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    LOW FAT

    One additional topic: the matter of "low fat" milk. A common
    and sincere question is: "Well, low fat milk is OK, isn&#039;t
    it?"

    The answer to this question is that low fat milk isn&#039;t low
    fat. The term "low fat" is a marketing term used to gull the
    public. Low fat milk contains from 24 to 33% fat as
    calories! The 2% figure is also misleading. This refers to
    weight. They don&#039;t tell you that, by weight, the milk is 87%
    water!

    "Well, then, kill-joy surely you must approve of non-fat
    milk!" I hear this quite a bit. (Another constant concern
    is: "What do you put on your cereal?") True, there is little
    or no fat, but now you have a relative overburden of protein
    and lactose. It there is something that we do not need more
    of it is another simple sugar-lactose, composed of galactose
    and glucose. Millions of Americans are lactose intolerant to
    boot, as noted. As for protein, as stated earlier, we live
    in a society that routinely ingests far more protein than we
    need. It is a burden for our bodies, especially the kidneys,
    and a prominent cause of osteoporosis. Concerning the dry
    cereal issue, I would suggest soy milk, rice milk or almond
    milk as a healthy substitute. If you&#039;re still concerned
    about calcium, "Westsoy" is formulated to have the same
    calcium concentration as milk.

    SUMMARY

    To my thinking, there is only one valid reason to drink milk
    or use milk products. That is just because we simply want
    to. Because we like it and because it has become a part of
    our culture. Because we have become accustomed to its taste
    and texture. Because we like the way it slides down our
    throat. Because our parents did the very best they could for
    us and provided milk in our earliest training and
    conditioning. They taught us to like it. And then probably
    the very best reason is ice cream! I&#039;ve heard it described
    "to die for".

    I had one patient who did exactly that. He had no obvious
    vices. He didn&#039;t smoke or drink, he didnÂ’t eat meat, his
    diet and lifestyle was nearly a perfectly health promoting
    one; but he had a passion. You guessed it, he loved rich ice
    cream. A pint of the richest would be a lean day&#039;s ration
    for him. On many occasions he would eat an entire quart -
    and yes there were some cookies and other pastries. Good ice
    cream deserves this after all. He seemed to be in good
    health despite some expected "middle age spread" when he had
    a devastating stroke which left him paralyzed, miserable and
    helpless, and he had additional strokes and d ied several
    years later never having left a hospital or rehabilitation
    unit. Was he old? I don&#039;t think so. He was in his 50s.

    So don&#039;t drink milk for health. I am convinced on the weight
    of the scientific evidence that it does not "do a body
    good." Inclusion of milk will only reduce your diet&#039;s
    nutritional value and safety.

    Most of the people on this planet live very healthfully
    without cows&#039; milk. You can too.

    It will be difficult to change; we&#039;ve been conditioned since
    childhood to think of milk as "nature&#039;s most perfect food."
    I&#039;ll guarantee you that it will be safe, improve your health
    and it won&#039;t cost anything. What can you lose?

    (Article courtesty of Dr. Kradjian and http://www.afpafitness.com/articles/MILKDOC.HTM)


  6. #6
    God/dess cinammonkisses's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Some Fat guys Lap!
    Posts
    9,647
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 90 Times in 67 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Do you really have that much time to sit and post all that crap. Do you like have a notebook full of researched information that you just post up in here to sound all knowledgeable? Or is this just one big copy/paste thing that you do? Keep it to a minimum please Good grief.







    Some Douchebag: "[Pimp C] 12:43 am: its true we got to stick together the black people on SW CK you is teh condoleeza of SW"


  7. #7
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Yes it was a copy and paste, the author&#039;s name was at the bottom of the article.

    Talk about copying and pasitng ?


    My Milkshake Brings All The Boys To The YARD...

    That is a copy and paste too....

    At least I credited the author...



  8. #8
    God/dess cinammonkisses's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2002
    Location
    Some Fat guys Lap!
    Posts
    9,647
    Thanks
    11
    Thanked 90 Times in 67 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Quote Originally Posted by RYAN link=board=5;threadid=5467;start=msg58867#msg58867 date=1072399685
    Yes it was a copy and paste, the author&#039;s name was at the bottom of the article.

    Talk about copying and pasitng ?


    My Milkshake Brings All The Boys To The YARD...

    That is a copy and paste too....

    At least I credited the author...


    OK so then really, what was the point? Good grief Why not just paste the link instead of typing all that stuff?

    And secondly, all I typed was one set of lyrics! Not a whole verse, just a line. Why bring that up anyway. So that you&#039;re happy, I will post next to my quote who wrote, "milkshake brings all the boys to the yard"

    I guess your&#039; pretty passionate about your posts huh? Cause as soon as I posted, I got smited..hmm who would&#039;a thunk it.. :







    Some Douchebag: "[Pimp C] 12:43 am: its true we got to stick together the black people on SW CK you is teh condoleeza of SW"


  9. #9
    Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    63
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Ryan, perfect timing on your post cuz Ive been thinking of NewYears resolutions and have decieded to try to give up dairy..basically because I hear dairy causes cellulite and water retention...is this true?can u tell me about that?also, can u suggest a milk substitute for coffee/tea,butter,cheese, anything else common in the kitchen?I have a husband and guests that I need to please.what should I look for while shopping for dairy free stuff?and what is the deal with gluten?THANX!!

  10. #10
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    RYAN, you know you are risking the wrath of Bridgette-a.k.a. MoocowWebMistress.

  11. #11
    Featured Member cash's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2003
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    983
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post

    Default Re:MILK

    i dont know at first i use to love milk when i was younger but as i got older i grew to hate it now just the mere thought of it makes me sick.....
    us: us: us: devil in disguise....

  12. #12
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    to dawndancer:

    Well, cheese ia almost always extremely high in sodium, which does cause water retention...

    And, cheese is almost pure fat, and high in chlosterol and saturated fat so I could see it playing a role in the cellulite department.

    Let me warn you - giving up dairy is not easy, it was the hardest thing for me to give up. But giving up dairy will give you much better skin, WAY less mucus, much better bowel movements, better digestion, no acne, and a host of other benefits. Musicians are known not to drink milk because it makes their voices better due to less mucus formation. Dairy is also too high in protien and causes calcium to bve leached out of the body. They say drinking milk is good for osteoprosis but how come our country drinks the most milk im the world BUT also has the HIGHEST rate of osteoperosis??????
    Maybe bacause the high content of protien in the milk is actually CAUSING the osteoperosis ! DUH ! It is common knowledge in the scientific community that excess protien intake causes the body to leach calcium out of the bones to flush out the excess protien, so, anyone that may be heading towards osteoperosis MUST AVOID ALL DAIRY to be haalthy. You can get extremely adequate amounts of calcium from green leafy vegetables. Cows milk is to feed a baby calf, not an adult human....

    I personally am very strongly against the use of soy as I have done much research on it and it is NOT a health food. True it has become very trendy lately and has become known as a health food, buy it&#039;s not. I will post a link on some soy information...

    Best luck on giving up dairy, it is a battle, but you will reap MANY positive rewards. Let me know if you need any help....

    RYAN

    http://www.mercola.com/article/soy/avoid_soy.htm

  13. #13
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    RYAN,
    And using the same logic, fruit is to feed the seeds of the reproducing plant, not people.

  14. #14
    Featured Member MeganS's Avatar
    Joined
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Wisconsin
    Posts
    872
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 4 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    God forbid, here I go agreeing with RYAN, but I just purchased, "Eat, Drink, and be Healthy, The Harvard Medical School Guide to Eating Healthy; by Walter C. Willet, MD".

    I was actually taken aback about their views on calcium. All babies are born with the ability to digest milk, but most children gradually lose this ability because their bodies stop making lactase. Actually only a quarter of the world&#039;s adults can fully digest milk. Shocked me! Too much dairy can be linked to prostate and ovarian cancer.

    But in my opinion, it all comes down to healthy moderation. Excess of anything can be a bad thing. I will still continue eating dairy and meats, even occasional processed foods, but in moderation. I&#039;ve greatly upped the quantities of fruits, veggies, and nuts in my diet, and I feel good about that.

    Ryan, I understand you want to get this info out, but it gets so tiresome to read all that! Try to keep it to a minimum, highlighting only the most important parts. And if someone disagrees, don&#039;t go jumping down their throat, calling them stupid, ignorant, and uneducated. You have to understand your way is not the only way. Happy New Year. Pass the egg nog.
    "A dress makes no sense unless it inspires men to want to take it off you."
    Francoise Sagan

  15. #15
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Quote Originally Posted by montythegeek link=board=5;threadid=5467;start=msg58964#msg58964 date=1072455345
    RYAN,
    And using the same logic, fruit is to feed the seeds of the reproducing plant, not people.
    LOL, the fruit is designed to be eaten. The seeds are supposed to be passed through the intestines and deposited in the soil, allowing a new tree to grow, continuing the cycle of life.

    The seed contains everything it needs to flourish, all it needs is heat and water to grow. The seed DOES NOT use any part of the fruit at anytime as a sourcs of nutrients.

    Fruit is our biologically designed food, it provides every mineral, trace mineral, proper water content, proper fiber content, all vitamens, all 22 amino acids, and all phytochemicals needed by the human body.

    Milk takes health, fruit gives health. Milk is designed for cows, friut is designed for humans.

    We AID in the reproduction of friut. It&#039;s bright colors and good taste were designed to attract us to them. We are supposed to eat the fruit and spread the seed, allowing the fruit continue life.

    Eating a friut continues life for the friut, and we are an integral part in spreading the seed. The fruit need us and we need the fruit. A symbiotic balance in nature.

    The cow DOES NOT need us, and we DO NOT need the cow. We are taking it&#039;s milk that was designed to feed it&#039;s young.

    I personally don&#039;t see how you can compare the two, but what do I know ?

  16. #16
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Mar 2003
    Location
    boynton beach
    Posts
    641
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Megan, I am happy to see you interested in your health...

    Our health is the most valuable thing we possess. One of the few things we have almost total control over, and the thing we most enjoy throughout our lives. Let&#039;s all have a happy, healthy new year.

    A quote I like:


    Money is the most envied but the least enjoyed
    Health is the most enjoyed but the least envied

    Have a happy new year, GOD BLESS !




  17. #17
    Pamela
    Guest

    Default Re:MILK

    I have to say that me NOT being a milk drinker i now feel better. I could not at first make the connection between my headaches and stuffed up feeling after eating a bowl of cereal. But then i had a few milkshakes, same thing, mashed potatoes, same thing. Thought i was nuts. Someone said to me i may nto be handling milk. I read about cows milk and stopped all foods that you must put milk in as well.

    My gosh that&#039;s it! I felt so better, i lost the stuffed up head feeling, was thinking more clear, AND my doctor said why are you drinking milk? He&#039;s a D.O. (one of the doctors i see.)

    The crap is meant for COWS, not people. So many don&#039;t know they have a problem with milk, why do you think there is lactaid and such on the market? So these people can enjoy their milk.

    It makes me sick, and i hate the stuff now.

    Another thought, i have had several people give kittens milk at the shelter i did work with, only to wonder why the kittens would vomit after drinking the milk. (which is comon practice.) These kittens where weened, did not need milk, only water. Yuk, i can&#039;t see giving a kitten or cat milk either, and any good vet will tell you to stop.

    I was never given cows milk as a child my mother says, she breast fed, and i went to formula that contained NO milk. I started cows milk at school, not at home. We had no milk she said. She also can&#039;t handle milk, so did not buy it.

    Just what i went through with the gross stuff. Yuk, it&#039;s for the youngsters who are made to drink it, cows. You can get any other vitamin or nutrition from another food source with out drinking milk.

    Pamela

  18. #18
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    First, Who did this designing? They are not especially good engineers. The last time I read a text on the evolution of life on earth(based on the fossil record), these plants producing fruit preceeded animals on earth by several millions of years.
    While the production of fruit and the ability of seeds to survive the acids in the digestive tracks of birds does facilitate the spread of seeds to new areas, it is hardly an efficient process for the tree to waste about half of its energy producing fruit when all it would have to do is mimic the dandelion which can spread to fertile territory handily? And whoever this designer is why did they design milk and meat to taste so good to so many of us?

    I would suggest that the next time you eat an apple, that you tell the seeds you either throw in the trash pile, the compost heap, or flush down the toilet how lucky it was you ate it. I am sure the watermelon seeds and zuchini seeds will be very greatful you are helping them.

    With all this "designing" going on the next question is "Are you some whacked out creationist from hell?" (note: this is a rhetorical ? not name calling. As an aside, I like RYAN and enjoy these exchanges.)

  19. #19
    God/dess montythegeek's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    2,103
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 9 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    ...withdrawn to keep the topic on thread.

  20. #20
    Banned
    Joined
    May 2003
    Location
    CA.
    Posts
    929
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Hey Ryan! First of all welcome back. I&#039;m glad you&#039;ve gotten over that "this site is for women only or men who want to become women" syndrome.
    Anyway I agree with a lot of your article, that that I was able to take in. There are people who can&#039;t drink and there are drawbacks to milk. However I think the benefit outweigh them greatly otherwise the health board would not make it one of the food groups.
    i certainly agree mothers&#039; milk is better than cows but that&#039;s if you can get women to agree to market it.

  21. #21
    Featured Member Fawn's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Posts
    1,650
    Thanks
    48
    Thanked 24 Times in 16 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    This stuff makes sense to me. my mother tells me that when I was little I was always sick. She also said she thought it might have been from the milk, but that as a child I refused to eat any thing without it. I still eat breakfast with it every day. Could you maybe post some good breakfasts that don&#039;t need it, and are quick (like 5 min.) to make. What about chocolate milk. I don&#039;t know where I heard it, but I&#039;ve heard it is easier to digest than regular milk. feel free to pm me with some recipes.
    Thanks,
    Fawn
    " Remember during each test there is some girl in Australia jealous of you who wants to do what you're doing."- Lilithmorrigan

    " If you're young and sexy, why not spend a few years
    Shopping and Fucking? Life is short, but youth is shorter. Ride the wheels off, I say." - FeministStripper

  22. #22
    God/dess Malibu's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2003
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    2,117
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 10 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    So the bottom line is that dairy (espec. milk) is bad for you???

    Aren&#039;t women supposed to drink lots of milk because they are at most risk from osteoporosis espec. nearing the menopause?

    I&#039;m confused
    You are the envy
    of all parallel lines that
    dream of curves and convergence
    - Sara Bailey: Sieve of Words

  23. #23
    Jay Zeno
    Guest

    Default Re:MILK

    Something tells me that if I wanted to find a food-philosophy treatise that cited scientific underpinnnings for the benefits of dairy, I could do so.

    So here&#039;s the deal. I enjoy dairy, red meat, white meat, eggs, pork, fish, raw vegetables, cooked vegetables, fruit, sweetened foods, unsweetened foods, bread, pasta, processed cereals, processed foods, unprocessed foods, soft drinks, coffee, tea, fruit juices, alcohol, and so on.

    You&#039;d think that after hearing that, I&#039;d be incredibly overweight, but I&#039;m just merely somewhat overweight - and the reason for that is my sedentary job and my failure to exercise enough to compensate for it.

    My skin is OK, I&#039;ve never broken a bone through all kinds of harsh impacts (decades of athletics and motorcycling), my gastrointestinal functioning is regular, I don&#039;t get colds or flus, I sleep well, I&#039;ve got good muscle mass, my sex life is normal (whatever that means), and my energy level is fine.

    I get quoted all kinds of scientific data. Here&#039;s my scientific process: If I eat what I consider to be a balanced diet, exercise properly, don&#039;t drink too much, and don&#039;t smoke, I&#039;ll be pretty healthy.

    So far, my hypothesis is holding up. I&#039;ve never smoked. If I don&#039;t eat balanced, or don&#039;t exercise, or drink too much, I slip some. If I do take care of all those things, I&#039;m energetic and feeling pretty darn good. I can even indulge myself from time to time and still do fine.

    The body is a wondrous thing. We can have things affect us that we could never anticipate, and we can process things to secretion that would amaze us. Thousands, millions, of interrelated processes that vary by individual, among millions of individuals. There&#039;s no wonder diet or magic "health bullet" that provides the answer for all of us.

  24. #24
    Featured Member Lilith's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    1,309
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 14 Times in 11 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    To anyone whyo claims that "hunter-gatherer" early humans had this whole hnutrition thing down perfectly, I submit to you a few facts often overlooked (I wonder why...)

    The average lifespan was approximately forty years of age; we currently almost double that. In addition, early humans were incredibly tiny. Anthropologists have been able to track quite scientifically over the centuries how better nutrition translated into taller humans.

    Other factors aside, I don&#039;t know that I want to mimic the life habits of a man who reached barely five feet from malnutrition and died before he had gray hair.

    On another line of thought, I would far better appreciate Ryan&#039;s little paroxysm&#039;s of copy-and-paste if he would cite reliable sources. Your first copy and paste talks about several hundred writings with the AMA. Which ones? Care to allow the Lesser Milk-Drinking Heathens to read those same articles and digest (ha!) that information for themselves?
    He who fights with monsters might take care lest he thereby become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you. ~ Friedrich Nietzsche

  25. #25
    Member SusanV's Avatar
    Joined
    Dec 2003
    Location
    San Diego
    Posts
    59
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re:MILK

    Quote Originally Posted by RYAN link=board=5;threadid=5467;start=msg58960#msg58960 date=1072453723
    They say drinking milk is good for osteoprosis but how come our country drinks the most milk im the world BUT also has the HIGHEST rate of osteoperosis??????
    Maybe bacause the high content of protien in the milk is actually CAUSING the osteoperosis !
    You&#039;re right that drinking milk can cause osteoperosis. But it&#039;s not because of the protein content. It&#039;s because of the net acidic load to the kidneys, which causes calcium to be excreted in the urine. (Dairy products are quite acidic.)
    I hate signatures, but I love irony.

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. PSOS and milk
    By pink_bunny in forum Body Business
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-31-2011, 12:27 AM
  2. Project: Milk Can
    By lil_miss_kabuki in forum Body Business
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 06-10-2008, 07:47 PM
  3. Muscle milk...
    By LuckiCharm in forum Body Business
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 05-02-2007, 08:38 PM
  4. Tiger's Milk
    By LilSweetVixen in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 02-10-2007, 08:31 PM
  5. The Other Milk
    By lethalsoul in forum The Lounge
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 04-05-2005, 02:58 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •