dropping milk

[Farzin]

Can someone link a credible source that states milk is bad for you other than that 5 minute made shitty website casey posted.

A REAL credible source please.

I have never heard there being anything wrong with milk.

 

[Casey]

Can someone link a credible source that states milk is bad for you other than that 5 minute made shitty website casey posted.

A REAL credible source please.

I have never heard there being anything wrong with milk.

If you looked at that site for more than 5 minutes, you would realize it was a REPRODUCTION of a very credible article written by one of the worlds leading dieticians.

That site had simply copied the original text, but since you clearly have an issue there, here is the exact same text appearing on many different sites. Perhaps the design of one of these sites will better suit your taste (although if you like milk, clearly your taste isn't very credible either )

Dr. Kradjian addresses cow's milk

ClearStream: The Milk Letter: A Message to My Patients

Health 101 - Article - The Milk Letter

And in case you have learning or reading difficulties and are unable to understand large paragraphs of writing, i'll put together some key parts for you. If you can't even be bothered to read these (less than a third of the entire article) then at least read the summary at the bottom.

If you can't even be bothered to read the summary, you can go fuck yourself.

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.

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.

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's how.

Any lactating mammal excretes toxins through her milk. This includes antibiotics, pesticides, chemicals and hormones. Also, all cows' 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 milliliter. (That's only 1/30 of an ounce). If you don't already know this, I'm sorry to tell you that another way to describe white cells where they don'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 four of the 82 drugs in dairy cows.

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 four to seven milkings. Another study from the University of Nevada, Reno tells of cells in 'mastic milk', 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, it's in the study, all concealed with language such as "macrophages containing many vacuoles and phagocytosed particles," etc.

Let'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'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'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 pasteurized whole milk. This is despite safety precautions.

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 pasteurization - if the pasteurization 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).

As mentioned, the leukemia virus is rendered inactive by pasteurization. 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 four 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 one to three 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'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.

SUMMARY:

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've heard it described "to die for".

I had one patient who did exactly that. He had no obvious vices. He didn't smoke or drink, he didn'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'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 died several years later never having left a hospital or rehabilitation unit. Was he old? I don't think so. He was in his 50s.

So don'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's nutritional value and safety.

Most of the people on this planet live very healthfully without cows' milk. You can too.

It will be difficult to change; we've been conditioned since childhood to think of milk as "nature's most perfect food." I'll guarantee you that it will be safe, improve your health and it won't cost anything. What can you lose?

 

[roaches]

I had one patient who did exactly that. He had no obvious vices. He didn't smoke or drink, he didn'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'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 died several years later never having left a hospital or rehabilitation unit. Was he old? I don't think so. He was in his 50s.

So don't drink milk for health.

How irresponsible, using the story of some fatass who ate a tub of ice cream a day to convince people milk is evil.

It's weird how so many people seem to have no idea how to eat or live anymore. Damn this industrialized society!

 

[juicebox3]

If Danica Patrick continues to give herself cum-mustaches in her milk ads, I don't care, I'll keep drinking it. Milk, of course.

 

[Sebastian]

I never heard about milk being (that) bad for our body/health outside of this forum before. Never.

That automatically doesnt mean its wrong though. But it would be quite astonishing to me if it were true. Especially to the extent you guys mention.

 

[Glockmatic]

There are also examples of people who drink milk all their life and are perfectly healthy. Tomoji Tanabe drinks milk everyday and guess what? HE'S 113 YEARS OLD.

 

[Casey]

There are also examples of people who drink milk all their life and are perfectly healthy. Tomoji Tanabe drinks milk everyday and guess what? HE'S 113 YEARS OLD.

Actually soy milk is a staple in Japan and has been for a long ass time, whereas cows milk is not.

It has not been ever said that Tomoji Tanabe drinks cows milk and it is statistically much more likely that he is drinking soy milk, given that, at the time he developed his general habits of eating and drinking, soy milk was readily and cheaply available in Japan whereas cows milk was not.

"milk" in Japan generally refers to soymilk. of course, that would get lost in translation, as we Westerners automatically assume that "milk" refers to cows milk.

 

[Farzin]

It seems the problem lies with over consumption. Well guess what if you eat to much of anything it'll kill you, even water.

Milk, Doing Your Body Good?

Milk plays an important role in many diets today. Many of us grew up eating cheese pizza, yogurt, milk and cookies, and cheesecake. We have grown so comfortable consuming milk and eating milk products that many do not give a second thought to the possible positive and negative effects of milk. Overall, milk does do a body good.

The negative side effects of milk are due mainly to the over-consumption of milk products beyond the recommended daily allowance of 3 8-oz glasses of milk. Consumers must be aware of both the pros and cons of drinking milk. Being knowledgeable consumers will empower us to decide how much we should rely on milk for our nutritional needs and empower us to be more proactive in creating a well-balanced and nutritious meal

 

[Jokerman]

It seems the problem lies with over consumption.

That's just a milk-industry tactic, and dairy user's wishful thinking, now that the toxic nature of their product is starting to get out.

Commercial milk is a toxin on many levels. And there's no such thing as a nontoxic amount of a toxin.

 

[Glockmatic]

Actually soy milk is a staple in Japan and has been for a long ass time, whereas cows milk is not.

It has not been ever said that Tomoji Tanabe drinks cows milk and it is statistically much more likely that he is drinking soy milk, given that, at the time he developed his general habits of eating and drinking, soy milk was readily and cheaply available in Japan whereas cows milk was not.

"milk" in Japan generally refers to soymilk. of course, that would get lost in translation, as we Westerners automatically assume that "milk" refers to cows milk.

There is a clear difference in the word "milk" and "soy milk" in Japanese as well as other asian languages, some (including japanese) don't have the word "milk" in it. Milk has been in Japan for awhile now, at least 100 years. The main dairy corporation of japan has been around since the early 1900s.

Also soy milk wasn't widespread until the 20th century.

 

[Farzin]

But a lot of the problem also lies within the shit they give the cow such as all these hormones to make the cow produce more milk. Organic and natural milk which doesn't have those harmful chemicals in it is not bad at all.

But then again what isn't pumped full of hormones these days?

 

[Jokerman]

By the way, the average cow produces 40 glasses of milk a day. I'd just like to know how it makes the glass.

 

[Stred]

It isn't bullshit. It's fact.

So what do you consume that's worse? If you mention any alcohol or drugs you have clearly missed the entire point.

Red Bull, coke and pretty much every fast food I can get my hands on.

 

[Casey]

That's just a milk-industry tactic, and dairy user's wishful thinking, now that the toxic nature of their product is starting to get out.

Commercial milk is a toxin on many levels. And there's no such thing as a nontoxic amount of a toxin.

Quoted for truthness!

 

[Flipmo]

By the way, the average cow produces 40 glasses of milk a day. I'd just like to know how it makes the glass.

It eats sand and shits it out, obviously.

 

[S. Fourteen]

there's casey again spreading his green propaganda. milk = bigger female booty. so drink piss!

i picture casey sitting with Tom Cruise and popping vitamin pills and talking about how they want to lick Prince's waxed asshole.

Soy milk is bad for your eyelashes, so drink piss and die. Remind me to send you a box of whale meat next christmas.

(I'm putting the life back in the passion)

 

[Bobby Sands]

Interesting article from Men's Health:

“Milk is a deadly poison," according to the Dairy Education Board. In fact, if you peruse this special interest group's Web site, notmilk.com, you'll find dozens of articles about the purported evils of this popular beverage. One claim, for example, is that milk from cows contains cancer-causing hormones and dairy industry dollars have kept that fact bottled up. All of which may leave you second-guessing your next sip.However, as a nutritionist, I've found that most people thrive on milk, whether their goal is to lose fat or build muscle. So to be sure it's safe, I've investigated all the anti-milk claims, sifting through the research while also turning a critical eye to pro-milk propaganda. After all, the only agenda I have is my clients' health. The result: all your milk questions, answered.

Is milk really a fat-burning food?
Maybe. In a 6-month study, University of Tennessee researchers found that overweight people who downed three servings a day of calcium-rich dairy lost more belly fat than those who followed a similar diet minus two or more of the dairy servings. In addition, the researchers discovered that calcium supplements didn't work as well as milk. Why? They believe that while calcium may increase the rate at which your body burns fat, other active compounds in dairy (such as milk proteins) provide an additional fat-burning effect. Of course, the key to success is following a weight-loss diet to begin with. After all, downing your dairy with a box of doughnuts is no way to torch your gut.


Does it build muscle?
Absolutely. In fact, milk is one of the best muscle foods on the planet. You see, the protein in milk is about 80 percent whey and 20 percent casein. Both are high-quality proteins, but whey is known as a "fast protein" because it's quickly broken down into amino acids and absorbed into the bloodstream. That makes it a very good protein to consume after your workout. Casein, on the other hand, is digested more slowly. So it's ideal for providing your body with a steady supply of smaller amounts of protein for a longer period of time — like between meals or while you sleep. Since milk provides both, one big glass gives your body an ideal combination of muscle-building proteins.

Cows are given hormones. Doesn't that make their milk unhealthy?
Not unless you're injecting the milk. Here's the full story: In 1993 the FDA approved the use of recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) in cattle. This practice resulted in greater milk production at less cost to the dairy farmer, a savings that has been passed on to you at your local supermarket. But it has also sparked much controversy, because rBGH boosts milk's concentration of insulin-like growth factor (IGF), a hormone that's been linked to cancer.
Unlike steroid hormones, which can be taken orally, rBGH and IGF must be injected to have any effect. That's because the process of digestion destroys these "protein" hormones. So drinking milk from hormone-treated cows doesn't transfer the active form of these chemicals to your body. However, there is one ethical downside to consider: It's not good for the cows. Canadian researchers discovered that cows given hormones are more likely to contract an udder infection called mastitis.

What about antibiotics?
No one really knows. Some scientists argue that milk from cows given antibiotics leads to antibiotic resistance in humans, making these types of drugs less effective when you take them for an infection. But this finding has never been proved.
If you're uneasy, you can purchase antibiotic-free (and typically hormone-free, as well) milk from specialty grocers, such as Trader Joe's or Whole Foods, or select USDA-certified organic milk, which is available at most supermarkets.


Skim or whole?
It depends on your taste. While you've probably always been told to drink reduced-fat milk, the majority of scientific studies show that drinking whole milk actually improves cholesterol levels, just not as much as drinking skim does. One recent exception: Danish researchers found that men who consumed a diet rich in whole milk experienced a slight increase in LDL cholesterol (six points). However, it's worth noting that these men drank six 8-ounce glasses a day, an unusually high amount. Even so, their triglycerides — another marker of heart-disease risk — decreased by 22 percent. The bottom line: Drinking two to three glasses of milk a day, whether it's skim, 2 percent, or whole, lowers the likelihood of both heart attack and stroke — a finding confirmed by British scientists.
If you're dieting, the lower-fat option is an easy way to save a few calories. When it comes to building muscle, though, whole milk may be your best choice: Scientists at the University of Texas medical branch in Galveston found that drinking whole milk after lifting weights boosted muscle protein synthesis — an indicator of muscle growth — 2.8 times more than drinking skim did.

 

[masta247]

Since I was a little kid my diet consisted mainly of dairy products, meat and sweet fruit juices.
When I grew older as a teenager I loved fast foods and coke (I had about 2-3litres of it/day). It was like this for years and whenever I visited doctor for examinations I had perfect results and never had any health issues caused by it. Now my diet is a bit more balanced since I started to enjoy various kinds of dishes including fruits and I can even survive with drinking water. Since that time I began to grew fatter (but to be fair I blame stress for this). I don't really care if my previous diet affects my future health. Right now I think that it was worth it. Tasty food is one of the nicer pleasures in life.

 

[S O F I]

i picture casey sitting with Tom Cruise and popping vitamin pills and talking about how they want to lick Prince's waxed asshole.

lmao!

 

[Jokerman]

Tasty food is one of the nicer pleasures in life.

I agree, but, see, once you eliminate over-sweet and over-salty, chemical-fake fast foods from your diet, your taste buds adjust and you start to find out what real food tastes like and realize what you thought was tasty, was very limited. That was my experience.