[quote]Miserere wrote:
TopSirloin wrote:
by simply switching from dairy to non-dairy milk we will make a dramatic and long-lasting improvement to our health," said Dr. Amy Lanou.
Would this “non-dairy milk” be Soya milk?
We’re fucked either way, then.
Oh my God! I’m going to die!!![/quote]
I don’t agree with this - either it’s got to be raw/minimally pasteurized and high fat/none at all.
FYI: I am NOT a PETA proponent (hense the topsirloin alias!) and I disagree with much of what Dr. Lanou says.
I only agree with vegetarians when it comes to how animals are treated prior to and/or at slaughter. Other than that, from what I have seen, most are frail and unhealthy because of their lack of critical nutrients found only in animal foods.
TS
Unfortunately, this is your belief and has not been proven to anyone via any type of scientific means.
We don’t even have a starting point for claiming that milk is unhealthy!
Christ on a stick! How can you call milk highly processed compared to most other food products on the store shelves. Other than removal of fat and pasteurization, what other processing is really going on?
You can’t just make up wild claims, without any references or studies, just because you have an axe to grind, and expect to be taken seriously.
Take your anti-milk voodoo and come back when you have some real information.
[quote]michael2507 wrote:
Could she be wrong?[/quote]
How could something so wrong…feel so right?
[quote]TopSirloin wrote:
For example, it was thought that prostate cancer was caused by harmful fats in the diet, but it turns out that calcium in milk is the culprit because it feeds nanobacteria, and this in turn causes calcification and cancer in the prostate."
Research shows that harmful calcification, caused by nanobacteria in the body, is at the root of many diseases such as arthritis, kidney stones, heart disease and stroke.
These microscopic organisms, which are present in virtually everybody, get fed calcium and phosphorus from the bloodstream and then secrete calcium phosphate to cause harmful calcification.
The book explains how dairy milk is the main food source for nanobacteria, thus causing many serious diseases.
[/quote]
There has been a 4 year argument on whether nanobacteria or nanobes even exist. And if they exist, if they have the machinery to replicate, particles that small ususally do not.
Yet your “researchers” have not only “proved” they exist, but have miraculously “studied” their effects.
I don’t blame the veggie propaganda. Read her article, she clearly believes that eating meat and milk promotes cruelty to animals. I respect though disagree with her beliefs. I also understand her use of propaganda with a theory that can not be proved or disproved, classic pseudoscience, as a means to her end. She is using propaganda intelligently. I just can not stop laughing that people then blindly go along with it.
If your PETA, then fine. If your not, gotta laugh.
[quote]michael2507 wrote:
Could she be wrong?[/quote]
Now that was the best post of the thread.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
Professor X wrote:
MCGOO wrote:
Of all the mammals, only humans–and then only a minority, principally
Caucasians–continue to drink milk beyond babyhood.
Bullshit. What about cats?
Only white cats. Black cats can’t handle milk. That is why it is bad luck if a black cat crosses your path. You might step is his dairy induced diarrhea.
Racist…or Cat-ist…one of the two.
[/quote]
My kids cat is white with black markings. Or black with white markings. Whichever way makes me not a racist.
[quote]TopSirloin wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
MCGOO wrote:
Of all the mammals, only humans–and then only a minority, principally
Caucasians–continue to drink milk beyond babyhood.
Humans are certainly unique among mammals for many many reasons.
We wear clothes. Perhaps taking them off will prevent hot chicks from getting osteoporosis.
Europeans have been domesticating cattle for something like 8000 years.
Perhaps this is why people of European descent drink and tolerate milk better than people who don’t have the same gentic background.
I believe twinkies and soda are a bit more of a problem.
This may be true, but don’t forget those cattle were raised on grass most likely and their milk was NOT pasteurized/homogenized! Remember, it’s usually the processing that ruins most foods (save for soy); the organic whole source is usually tolerable.
TS[/quote]
The processing also kills pathogens and keeps people from getting sick. It is a trade off.
We could stop pasteurizing milk, kill off some people with the pathogens and end up with a population that is more resistant to the pathogens. It may be better for the survivors, but it would be rough on the others.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
My kids cat is white with black markings. Or black with white markings. Whichever way makes me not a racist.[/quote]
Oooh, an equal opportunity cat owner. We sure are full of ourselves…aren’t we?
Fine, I dub thee…the Al Sharpton of felines.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
My kids cat is white with black markings. Or black with white markings. Whichever way makes me not a racist.
Oooh, an equal opportunity cat owner. We sure are full of ourselves…aren’t we?
Fine, I dub thee…the Al Sharpton of felines.[/quote]
I am just a granola munching liberal at heart.
okay…i’m 15 and drink 2L of milk a day, wtf is this supposed to mean? lol…Good for me, bad for me? Cut down to less?
To me it gives me protein and stuff so I donno
dl-
I heard it will make you go blind.
Wait. That was something else.
[quote]TopSirloin wrote:
I’m not going to personally trade smart-ass, non-productive comments with any one person. I’m merely pointing out a resource that might shed some light on this topic with which there is so much uncertainty (and it might just have tons of documentation [/quote]
then provide peer reviewed resources rahter than the propaganda of vegans
Not that it has to do with milk, but a friend told me a story yesterday that made me laugh out loud. She was talking to her dad on the phone about a good friend of hers (who’s in my office) and she mentioned he was a vegetarian. Her dad cut in with an innocent question: “Is he otherwise normal?” Ha ha ha!
This girl is from South Africa, where dietary fickleness is not generally an option. I like her dad 
[quote]Miserere wrote:
This girl is from South Africa, where dietary fickleness is not generally an option. I like her dad :-)[/quote]
I simply love comments like this. We are not exactly dying of hunger yet, and most people have more than enough choices.
North of the border (Zimbabwe), now thats a different story. But if you listen to Robert Mugabe, thats your fault, being the vile British imperialist you are…
Note: Quite a few of my posts have been taken as attacks etc. This is a joke. I do not agree with Mugabe, and I am sure you are a very decent British imperialist
Time to break out the board and line up the pieces again TS?
[quote]TopSiloin Wrote:
Funny - it just so happens that shortly after LL posted that “milk-debated-flare-up” I came across this book that actually links osteoporosis (and many other deadly diseases) to milk consumption![/quote]
Not a good way to start, books aren’t even peer-reviewed literature. I haven’t seen this book, but it’s easily concievable that the only people that saw it before it hit shelves were the author, the editor and/or the publisher. Not very stringent data-wise.
Also, let me ask this question is Russell Eaton a Dr., a researcher, or a writer?
[quote]It had been thought for many years that calcium in milk makes bones stronger, but new research shows osteoporosis is caused by a lack of bone-making cells rather than a lack of calcium, said Russell Eaton, author of the Milk Imperative.
Dairy milk is singled out as the culprit because more than any other food it depletes the finite reserve of bone-making cells in the body.
Although milk makes bones stronger in the short term, in the long term it erodes bone-making cells, increasing the risk of osteoporosis.[/quote]
This is somewhat self-contradictory, older people with osteoporosis who don’t drink milk would seem to benefit in this scenario as the short term benefits would offset the long-term consequences in someone who doesn’t have a “long-term”. Also, if milk is so lethal to these cells, why are we not plagued with brittle-boned short kids of both genders? Why only the elderly and predominantly sedentary women?
What exactly is the per capita intake of milk in Austria or Holland? I really don’t think the author knows (I ask because Bone Mineral Density and Osteoporosis, a decidedly anti-milk site, contains a different list).
[quote]For example in a 12-year Harvard study of 78,000 women, those who drank milk three times a day actually broke more bones than women who rarely drank milk.
Similarly, a 1994 study in Sydney, Australia, showed that higher dairy product consumption increased fracture risk: those with the highest dairy consumption had double the risk of hip fracture compared to those with the lowest consumption.[/quote]
Any mention of osteoporosis?
If milk=osteoporosis+heart disease, to use the same argument as above, why does milk consumption, osteoporosis, and heart disease vary widely from population to population?
Quasi-fictional organisms aside, the M.O. of this disease is well known and treatment is quite effective, calcium may have an effect, but it is most certainly not the cause.
[quote]TopSirloin wrote:
You can always take an extreme view and say that ANYTHING can kill you. Let’s be fricken reasonable human beings here - it should go without saying that we are talking about ON AVERAGE, or IN GENERAL that highly processed milk is not a healthy food, OVER-ALL. Now, if at dinner tonight, your choice is either picking through the garbage oustide of a restaurant or scraping a buck together and buying 12 oz of 2% milk… I think the 2% might just be just a tad better for you! Let’s keep it rational, please![/quote]
Let’s talk IN GENERAL and ON AVERAGE:
http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/ency/article/002472.htm
AVERAGE AMERICAN DIET
* breakfast
o 1 egg scrambled in 1 teaspoon of butter
o 2 slices of white toast
o 1 teaspoon of butter
o 1/2 cup of apple juice
* snack
o 1 cake donut
* lunch
o 1 ham and cheese sandwich (2 ounces of meat, 1 ounce of cheese)
o white bread
o 1 teaspoon of mayonnaise
o 1-ounce bag potato chips
o 12-ounce soft drink
o 2 chocolate chip cookies
* snack
o 8 wheat thins
* dinner
o 3 ounces of broiled sirloin
o 1 medium baked potato
o 1 tablespoon of sour cream
o 1 teaspoon of butter
o 1/2 cup of peas, 1/2 teaspoon of butter
Totals: 2,000 Calories, 84 grams fat, 34 grams saturated fat, 425 milligrams cholesterol. The diet is 38% total fat, 15% saturated fat.
Now, of the people I know, this is an optimistic view (usu. more cola, less breakfast, and fries w/ketchup over the baked potato and I can’t believe the average American consumes no pizza). Assuming this is accurate, where to start? Okay, it’s unfair, there’s no milk, add in 16 oz. of milk, now where to start? The milk? The donut? The cookies? The three teaspoons of butter and teaspoon of mayonnaise AND tablespoon of sour cream? Also, the recommended alternative on the same page:
LOW FAT DIET
* breakfast
o 1 cup of toasted oat ring cereal
o 1 cup of skim milk
o 1 slice of whole-wheat bread
o 1 teaspoon of margarine
o 1 banana
* snack
o 1 cinnamon raisin bagel, 1/2 ounce light cream cheese
* lunch
o turkey sandwich (3 ounces of turkey)
o rye bread
o lettuce
o 1 orange
o 3 fig newtons
o 1 cup skim milk
* snack
o non fat yogurt with fruit
* dinner
o 3 ounces of broiled chicken breast
o 1 medium baked potato
o 1 tablespoon of nonfat yogurt
o 1 teaspoon of margarine
o 1/2 cup of broccoli
o 1 dinner roll
o 1 cup skim milk
Totals: 2,000 Calories, 38 grams fat, 9.5 grams saturated fat, 91 milligrams cholesterol. The diet is 17% fat, 4% saturated fat.
Still, where to start? The dinner roll? The three fig newtons (I wonder what that endorsement cost)? The cinnamon raisin bagel? The two teaspoons of margarine AND .5 oz. of cream cheese? The 16 oz. of skim milk?
Now, given the gamut of people who actually DO pick through the garbage to eat, the average American, and all the way up to your ideal diet, where does the elimination of milk from the diet stand? Keep in mind, what your proposing, the cessation of distribution and consumption of industrial milk would, most likely require an act of law.
How about some more averages:
The top 10 in-store product categories (in terms of consumer sales and exclusive of gasoline):
Cumulatively, the top ten categories accounted for more than 87 percent of all in-store sales. Of the top 10, cigarettes, beer, other tobacco, salty snacks and edible grocery all gained in terms of percent of overall sales. Once again, where to start? FUCKING “other tobacco” outranks milk and your telling me we need to ban milk?!?!? The idea that “other tobacco” even exists, much less outsells milk anywhere shows me pretty clearly where Americas averages are.
[quote]Pootie Tang wrote:
This explains why countries with the highest rates of milk consumption, such as Ireland, Austria, and Holland, also have the highest incidence of osteoporosis.
These places are cloudy and rainy most of the year. Vitamin D needs sunlight in order to be effective.
[/quote]
Actually, Vitamin D is effective with or without sunlight. What you’re referring to is the body’s ability to produce its own Vit D.
There is nothing wrong with milk. This discussion isn’t doing anything but confusing the newbies.