Milk - for non babies

Ask and answer questions, discuss research and applications

Moderators: Ironman, Jungledoc, darshana, stuward

Stefan 93
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:18 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Stefan 93 » Sat Nov 05, 2011 2:24 pm

I know you are right, when I saw who are those people, some vegetarians and animal rights organizations, I knew that it isn't true, but I hoped somebody wouldn't notice that...

I'll try to find something else. I was ruined by college and I couldn't search for this things.
I guess it isn't good, at least, for people which have more than maybe 15-20 years because of that lactose or something.
I apologize to everyone I've enraged. I'll try to correct myself.

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sat Nov 05, 2011 6:57 pm

Stephan,

Is common sense your 4th or 5th language?

The last you were on this kind of roll, you were busting Erick's balls

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by stuward » Sat Nov 05, 2011 7:15 pm

The problem with the "milk is bad" argument is that it is a food that a lot of people are able to consume it with no problem, therefore it's demonstrably false right off the bat. Kenny is absolutely right about Campbell being a dubious expert, but many reputable paleo proponents exclude milk until it's been proven safe. If you're concerned about it, or if you health issues you can't explain, try an elimination diet for about a month or so. Then reintroduce it.
Stu Ward
_________________
Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~Hippocrates
Strength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley
_________________
Thanks TimD

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Jungledoc » Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:31 pm

Anyone for whom milk is bad knows it without reading an article. Anyone who is not bothered by milk should drink it with worrying about some hidden harm. Therefor, what's the point? If milk doesn't bother you, then drink it. If milk bothers you, then don't drink it. Is there some deeper level of complexity that I'm missing?
Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by stuward » Sat Nov 05, 2011 8:59 pm

It's clear cut for most people but some people can tolerate milk a little bit and they may have symptoms that they don't associate with milk. Most people can tolerate butter and cheese. People like Art Devaney exclude even those, although I'm not sure why. It may be due to casein allergies but that's a lot less common. I suppose those people could be experiencing exema, GI distressm, asthma and immune disorders and not make the connection to casein.

In my opinion, the fact that a food can cause allergies in some people is not enough reason to recommend that everyone avoid it. If that was the case, everyone would be avoiding eggs, seafood, most vegetables and meat. Gluten and lactose are the most common intolerances so these should be eliminated first when looking for offending substances but once ruled out, they can be safely added back in. My big concern with grains, legumes and milk is that they are high calorie and low nutrients relative to vegetables and meat and they get way too much exposure from conventional nutritionists, however, fermented grains, legumes and dairy is another story.
Stu Ward
_________________
Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~Hippocrates
Strength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley
_________________
Thanks TimD

Stefan 93
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:18 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Stefan 93 » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:39 pm

Hey guys, I found what I was looking for! Please read this article. I think this guy says the real truth about milk. I totally support this.
Here is something interesting from that article:
Here's another little tidbit for you. Dr. Roger Williams, a renown University of Texas biochemist, took a group of cats in a controlled test. He fed one group of cats certified raw milk and the other group pasteurized and homogenized milk. The group that drank the raw milk flourished and was healthy while the group that drank the pasteurized homogenized milk got sick and had the runs.
So there is the proof of the pudding. This was all cows' milk. Of course, goats' milk is a little bit better for your child if its digestive system is bad because its fat molecules are smaller which makes it more easily digestible. But if a child has a good digestive system then he will take to cow's milk.
The real problem here is pasteurization! It is the same problem like with bread of our days, they ruin everything with processes that create tons of this products.

We can (sadly, we must) live with this garbage. They are the real reason why we have all those cancers, allergies, blood and heart problems and why younger generations of men have less and less spermatozoid count...

Image Oscar, I can go like this for days for some things.
I forgot about those balls Image
I apologize to everyone I've enraged. I'll try to correct myself.

Oscar_Actuary
Veteren Member
Veteren Member
Posts: 2406
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 1:12 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Oscar_Actuary » Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:50 pm

Stefan 93 wrote:Oscar, I can go like this for days for some things.
Cool. At least you are using your time wisely. I'm going to go drink some milk

User avatar
Dub
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1142
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:40 pm
Location: Lapland, Finland

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Dub » Sun Nov 13, 2011 5:52 am

The real problem here is pasteurization! It is the same problem like with bread of our days, they ruin everything with processes that create tons of this products.
Yeah, it would help you if you knew anything that you just didn't read two minutes ago. Do you know why we do pasteurizate milk?
The problem with unpasteurizated milk is that it's a whole lot more hazardous. The porpouse of pasteurizing milk is to destroy all the dangerous microbes and bacteria from the product by heating it. Maybe it's not that bad for a healthy young man, but for a pregnant woman or some younglin getting tuberculosis or the colibacteria. It still saves us from a lot of harm, even though there are also arguments against pasteurizing. And I can live with that. I like milk, and will continue to drink it.

Here's a good article against raw milk. A point of view also.
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/12/healt ... index.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Physical Preparedness Coach
Co-Owner of UniFit Oy.

User avatar
stuward
moderator
moderator
Posts: 6616
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 5:44 pm
Location: Halifax, NS

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by stuward » Sun Nov 13, 2011 7:23 am

Dub, from your numbers, only 2 people died from raw milk over 10 years and less than 20/year hospitalized. There are millions of people in the US drinking raw milk. This makes raw milk relatively safe. What pasteurization does is allow large scale confined animal operations to exist because the milk produced in those facilities is not fit for consumption otherwise.

I sent Health Canada an e-mail several months ago asking why I can't buy raw milk legally in Canada and still have not received a reply. They were quick getting back to me on a question about a supplement.
Stu Ward
_________________
Let thy food be thy medicine, and thy medicine be thy food.~Hippocrates
Strength is the adaptation that leads to all other adaptations that you really care about - Charles Staley
_________________
Thanks TimD

User avatar
Dub
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1142
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:40 pm
Location: Lapland, Finland

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Dub » Sun Nov 13, 2011 8:55 am

Yeah, that's why I mentioned as a point of view also and accept that there are arguments as valid on both sides. I still believe I'm safer with pasteurized milk. I'd rather know that harmful bacteria or microbes will not most likely come from my milk, than drink raw milk and gain some bit more unknown benefits. Plus, the milk lasts longer in my fridge, and I don't have to waste it. From a student point of view.

Plus, here in Finland raw milk is kind of a rarity to find from normal grocery stores.

Oh yeah, I have these same kind of negative vibes against pure organic food also.
Physical Preparedness Coach
Co-Owner of UniFit Oy.

Stefan 93
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:18 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Stefan 93 » Mon Nov 14, 2011 7:36 am

Those are all articles that are paid from milk industry. If calves don't die from drinking that milk (and they don't) there isn't any problem for us. And there are ways to transport that milk without infecting it. There are certificates for raw milk.
Please, stop talking about dying. There is death everywhere around us and you think that milk will kill you?!

Stu, you can't expect anything from Health Canada. I saw what they did with research about eco light bulbs and our health problems from them.
I apologize to everyone I've enraged. I'll try to correct myself.

User avatar
Dub
Advanced Member
Advanced Member
Posts: 1142
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 1:40 pm
Location: Lapland, Finland

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Dub » Mon Nov 14, 2011 1:03 pm

These are my last cents. Nothing more. I don't think raw milk kills you, I know pasteurizing has also downsides, and I don't say you have to drink milk. I drink pasteurized milk because I personally think it's good for me, and more healthy. Also I get plenty of nutrients from the milk, and I'm sure that it wont actually corrupt my bones.
Stefan 93 wrote:Those are all articles that are paid from milk industry.
I was so furious when I read this I wanted to punch your face in. Seriously. But now I've calm down and have understood the internet. Pulling some "Huge corporate conspiracy theory" is just something I can only laugh to. Seriously. You're paranoid.
And there are ways to transport that milk without infecting it.
Well, this shows you don't know squat what you're talking about besides the huge anti-milk articles. Nobody said we pasteurize milk because of transportation. The problem is that raw milk comes from the cow to your table. The same problem with organic food. There are thousands of hygienical risks or lets just say complications revolving around the issue. Maybe in the past it wasn't so bad, but we have sterilated our foods and drinks for so long the bacteria and microbes that comes from the dirt or feces around the unprocessed milk can really do us harm. No, pasteruizing milk didn't cause this, don't pull that argument. You see, pasteurizing is just a simplest possible treatment, where you boil the milk very hot for a few seconds. The heat kills most of the microbes and bacteria(The bad and also the good ones) from the milk, what makes milk last longer and make it nearly microbe-free. It's nothing more. Atleast in here there is also additional Vitamin D and kalsium (And some milk with additional protein, but that's too expensive for me), in which I can't find no harm. None. Why would important, bone strenghtening additions be bad for you?
Please, stop talking about dying. There is death everywhere around us and you think that milk will kill you?!
Yeah, for one, I NEVER said anything about dying. I just linked some anti-raw milk article to show you that the coin has both sides on the internet, not just one side and a whole lot of conspiracies. Not once did I mention that raw milk is deadly, or even close to deadly. What I did mention is that it's more likely to cause diseases and can result to bacterial infections if $h1t happens(literally).
Physical Preparedness Coach
Co-Owner of UniFit Oy.

Stefan 93
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 217
Joined: Mon Feb 21, 2011 4:18 pm

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Stefan 93 » Mon Nov 21, 2011 12:49 pm

Dude, we have yet to see something that is better after going through some processes in industry. I'm not reading conspiracy theories, you are reading them about raw milk.
Of course if you put that cow in some swamp that milk will get microbes. But if you keep them somewhere where it is clean you won't need pasteurization.

Please dude, don't get angry because some dude on Internet wrote something that you think isn't good. You'll die soon.

And to close this thread:
Image
I apologize to everyone I've enraged. I'll try to correct myself.

commodiusvicus
Novice
Novice
Posts: 93
Joined: Tue Nov 08, 2011 5:41 am

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by commodiusvicus » Tue Nov 22, 2011 6:06 am

I think consumers ought to have the freedom to contract E. coli and Listeria so that they can obtain some nebulous health benefits for which there is no evidence. I also think seatbelts cause cancer. I have no evidence to support that claim.

User avatar
Jungledoc
moderator
moderator
Posts: 7578
Joined: Thu Feb 07, 2008 7:11 am
Location: Kudjip, Papua New Guinea

Re: Milk - for non babies

Post by Jungledoc » Tue Nov 22, 2011 9:00 am

I like you, new person.
Our greatest fear should not be of failure, but of succeeding at things in life that don't really matter.--Francis Chan

Post Reply