In the latest news letter from Dr. Douglass he also states that he too does not like milk and says it should not be drank. But in his case he is referring to pasteurized milk. He asserts if you are going to drink milk is should be raw milk.
Quote:
Raw milk contains good bacteria called probiotics, which are able to destroy any harmful pathogens that may be present. But when milk goes through the pasteurization process, these protective probiotics are destroyed. That alone makes pasteurized milk more susceptible then raw milk to carrying dangerous bacteria.
He farther states:
Quote:
Dairy (pasteurized or not) causes less then 1% of food borne illnesses. Want to take a stab at what causes the highest percentage? Produce. According to CSPI report (that�s the Center for Science in the Public Interest), produce accounted for 38% of food borne illnesses between 1990 and 2004. The next two in line were poultry, at 20%, and beef at 16%.
While it maybe a mooot point what about soy milk, it we are told is a great alternative?
Quote:
Researchers agree that calcium-fortified soy "milk" does not constitute a calcium source comparable to cow's milk. And adequate calcium is not the entire story in osteoporosis prevention: You also need magnesium, zinc, and iron to even come close to anything resembling prevention. So throwing in calcium salt will not solve the problem, since the soy milk is also deficient, compared to real milk, in magnesium, zinc, and iron.
And your best source of these essential nutrients? The natural, unpasteurized, unhomogenized milk of the cow.
And of course we also have skim milk which is basically just colored sugar water. I recall reading somewhere that farmers before taking their hogs to slaughter feed them skim milk because it helps fatten them up. So isn�t it udderly amazing that it sold to people who are dieting as a means to loose weight?
In the latest news letter from Dr. Douglass he also states that he too does not like milk and says it should not be drank.
I understand that he feels the same way about water.
Quote:
Full-fat dairy may protect prostates from cancer
10/10/2007 - An increased intake of full fat dairy products may reduce the risk of prostate cancer, says a new study from Hawaii.
The study, by researchers from the University of Hawaii, also reports that the benefits were not related to calcium or vitamin D, opening up possibilities that the bioactive ingredients are a specific type of fat in the milk. https://www.nutraingredients.com/news...dggtmjqqywwfsl
Before I read the full article at the link you gave, I was about to say, "What about the protein?" Well the article answered my question:
Quote:
However, when the researchers considered intakes of specific dairy products they noted a significant 12 per cent reduction in total prostate cancer risk by increased whole milk consumption. On the other hand, low-/nonfat milk was related to 16 per cent increased risk.
So it's obviously something in the fat, because low-/nonfat milk (skim milk) would still have the same milk proteins.
Maybe they should do a more specific study just using cream or butter. Other than coconut oil, another rich source of medium and short chain fatty acids, including lauric acid, is butter.
However, I really don't go for the idea of "finding the active ingredient" in a food. The active ingredient could just be the whole food, all ingredients acting synergistically, and not just one thing in it.
Before I read the full article at the link you gave, I was about to say, "What about the protein?" Well the article answered my question:
Quote:
However, when the researchers considered intakes of specific dairy products they noted a significant 12 per cent reduction in total prostate cancer risk by increased whole milk consumption. On the other hand, low-/nonfat milk was related to 16 per cent increased risk.
Quote:
So it's obviously something in the fat, because low-/nonfat milk (skim milk) would still have the same milk proteins.
Maybe they should do a more specific study just using cream or butter. Other than coconut oil, another rich source of medium and short chain fatty acids, including lauric acid, is butter.
However, I really don't go for the idea of "finding the active ingredient" in a food. The active ingredient could just be the whole food, all ingredients acting synergistically, and not just one thing in it.
Gerry
When milk fat is increased, the risk of cancer goes up. That is what caused scientists to believe it was something in the fat. They were mistaken, its not the fat, its the protein that is the culprit. When the fat goes up, the protein goes up right along with it. The fat becomes an issue only when increased beyond 30 grams per day, and higher.
__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)
However, when the researchers considered intakes of specific dairy products they noted a significant 12 per cent reduction in total prostate cancer risk by increased whole milk consumption. On the other hand, low-/nonfat milk was related to 16 per cent increased risk.
When milk fat is increased, the risk of cancer goes up. That is what caused scientists to believe it was something in the fat.
The risk of cancer goes up? Didn't the study show that it went down? Those taking whole milk (i.e., with the fat) showed a 12 per cent reduction, while those in non-fat showed a 16 per cent increased risk. So why do you say that milk fat increased risk?
Just an observation. But seeing as how man has been drinking milk for hundreds if not thousands of years why is it that all of a sudden it is now being considered unhealthy? If it is really as bad as claimed one would think that this would have been found out long ago and as a result virtually no one would be drinking it today.
Could there is an ulterior motive for claiming that it is no good?
Its true humans have been drinking milk for a very long time, however, its only been a relatively short time since cows have been vaccinated, given growth hormones, and antibiotics. They used to eat grass, rich in chlorophyll, instead of the low grade chemical infested soy and cheap grains they are fed nowadays. Add to that the overcrowding, pasteurization, and mixing all the milk together in one large vat, allowing one sick cow to infect the entire lot...
It was only recently that animal parts are no longer fed to cows, which by the way, are natural vegetarians. However, they can be fed chicken poop, which is just as bad.
You may get your milk from a small dairy, that does not pasteurize, however, most people get their dairy from large supermarkets. That means all of the above.
*Nearly every article or scientific study shows a link between many different cancers to dairy. You could argue that raw milk is healthy, and I agree somewhat, but I wouldn't recommend dairy on a daily basis. The more you injest, the more the chance for disease, plain and simple.
(* Iggy, check your own spelling. Don't comment on mine...I was tired when I wrote that).
__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)
Its true humans have been drinking milk for a very long time, however, its only been a relatively short time since cows have been vaccinated, given growth hormones, and antibiotics. They used to eat grass, rich in chlorophyll, instead of the low grade chemical infested soy and cheap grains they are fed nowadays. Add to that the overcrowding, pasteurization, and mixing all the milk together in one large vat, allowing one sick cow to infect the entire lot...
pinballdoctor,
Commercially processed foods are not good for animals or humans.
Soy based foods are not good for animals or humans either.
Real unprocessed milk that comes from grass-fed cows is available and it is a super food.
You could live a long healthy life consuming nothing but real milk.
Milk and 100% bed rest was the best treatment for chronic diseases before BigPharma took over.
Your arguments against milk are not going to be valid until you limit them to commercially processed milk.
Your arguments for Soy as a health food will never be valid.
Your arguments for a vegan diet will never be valid.
The fats and fat-soluble vitamins are either missing or are coming from inferior sources.
Your fish oil will eventually give you black or blue bags under your eyes.
Your commercially grown lettuce was probably grown in a vat of water with just enough chemicals mixed in to make it grow. Taste good? Maybe, Healthy, No way!
Neal, you stick to your diet and I will stick to mine. Just remember the "deal" we made on "the other" health forum. Just to refresh your memory, the deal is for us to go sky-diving on my 100th birthday. That is in 46 years. The only problem is if you drink milk, raw or pasteurized, and refuse vitamins/supplements, I truly doubt that you will be alive to complete our deal. That means I have to sky-dive by myself.
__________________
Let Food Be Your Medicine And Medicine Be Your Food.(Hippocrates)
Re: MILK!
Linear Mode
