• Log in with Facebook Log in with Twitter Log In with Google      Sign In    
  • Create Account
  LongeCity
              Advocacy & Research for Unlimited Lifespans

Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

should you not drink milk?

protein depression

  • Please log in to reply
37 replies to this topic

#1 ironfistx

  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 13 May 2016 - 09:25 PM


I ingest a large amount of whole milk each day. Do I need to be concerned?



#2 aconita

  • Guest
  • 1,389 posts
  • 290
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 13 May 2016 - 09:38 PM

Given the horrific health conditions of most farmed cows in US you might.

 

Pasteurization is another concern, raw milk would be much better.


  • Needs references x 2
  • Ill informed x 1

sponsored ad

  • Advert
Click HERE to rent this advertising spot for NUTRITION to support LongeCity (this will replace the google ad above).

#3 vader

  • Guest
  • 243 posts
  • -1
  • Location:Europe

Posted 14 May 2016 - 10:15 AM

There is probably nothing more poisonous you could put in your body. Even dairy-free smokers live longer than dairy consuming smokers.


  • Needs references x 7
  • Disagree x 2
  • Dangerous, Irresponsible x 1
  • like x 1
  • Agree x 1

#4 sativa

  • Guest
  • 536 posts
  • 46
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • NO

Posted 14 May 2016 - 07:54 PM

There is probably nothing more poisonous you could put in your body. Even dairy-free smokers live longer than dairy consuming smokers.

I would pretty much agree with this perspective.

Milk consumption can cause issues with body calcium levels.

Milk contains casomorphin compounds which have strong opiate properties, and a mix of many growth promoting hormones.

The casein protein can cause digestion issues, including gut lining issues.

Except for babies and breast milk, and *maybe* milk kefir (a fermented drink) I don't really see a need for humans to drink milk at all.

Commercial milk likely contains abysmal levels of antibiotics and other (probably toxic) compounds introduced by man to increase profits (growth hormones etc etc)

Edited by sativa, 14 May 2016 - 07:56 PM.

  • Disagree x 2
  • Enjoying the show x 1
  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Ill informed x 1
  • Agree x 1

#5 drew_ab

  • Guest
  • 121 posts
  • 18
  • Location:Earth

Posted 15 May 2016 - 12:10 PM

When I gave up the milk, I reduced the number of pimples I get by a staggering amount.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1

#6 ironfistx

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 15 May 2016 - 06:09 PM

I need another calorie dense meal then. It was a simple way with whole milk for me to get 1,200 more calories per day.

#7 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,375 posts
  • 357
  • Location:Heredia, Costa Rica
  • NO

Posted 19 May 2016 - 06:07 PM

I've been "internet researching" this extensively since it was suggested that milk is bad for you because of:

 

Hormones in milk (including organic milk)

Lactose

Casein proteins

 

From what I could find, and trust me there was very little in terms of reliable, trustworthy sources, there was a lot of conflicting information about the levels of hormones in organic milk that it was a complete wash as to whether they're harmless or not. Most of what I could find were on blog sites making wild claims with no references. Food Babe is one of those sources notorious for misinformation and bad advice.

 

I looked at several sources. This one claims that skim milk is mostly hormone free because milk fat is where the hormones are. This video claims the *exact opposite*. This article claimed (only referencing a Penn State professor) that milk only has a minute fraction of the number of hormones your own body produces on a daily basis, but also claims again that higher fat milk has more hormones. So the amount in milk is fairly negligible. I looked at whether IGF-1 was harmful or not. The debate is still out on whether it is good for you or bad for you as far as aging is concerned. One sensationalist article grossly misinterpreted one of their referenced studies claiming IGF-1 was linked to cancer but the study itself blatantly stated the opposite, that there was no significant link between IGF-1 containing dairy protein linked to prostate cancer. I fact checked the other references and some are a little badly misinterpreted as well. Except one in particular, later on that. This article from the Washington Post quotes the American Cancer Society in saying that the evidence is inconclusive as to whether IGF-1 is linked to cancer.  Soy milk by the way also contains IGF-1 and estrogen.

 

I also looked for any references to casein proteins and harm they may cause. There were two. One was questionable harm which only raises more questions than gives answers, the other was a poorly conducted study known as "The China Study" which linked casein proteins to certain types of cancer. This was ultimately debunked or at least there is some cause for great concern over the quality of the study. The other issue was the problem that casein proteins bind easily to most externally sourced antioxidants, blocking their beneficial effects. Click here for a bunch of links to those details.

 

As for lactose, this is where I made my decision to swap my cow's milk out for almond milk. The sensationalist article above also references this study. The enzymes more than half the population have to digest lactose convert the lactose to a substance called D-galactose. This is a substance that has been not only shown to age rats at an accelerated rate but I believe it's now being used as a means of artificially aging them for other experimental purposes. Granted it's in chronic doses that this D-galactose accelerates aging. So my plan is to limit my exposure as much as possible.  

 

While it's questionable as to whether almond milk is all that "good for you" it can't be anywhere near as bad as milk. I don't have acne so I don't have to worry about the fact that it's linked to acne problems, see the sensationalist article linked above for details and references.

 

Here's a reddit thread.

 

Almond milk is mostly water and a small amount of almonds with vitamins... mostly. There was a concern about the seaweed "Carrageenan" they used to congeal it but that ended up being debunked, but not before bad press forced manufacturers to change their formula regardless of the facts. I am trying to find references to that but the only thing I find now are more blog/sensational media articles ignoring this and continuing to promote what was said to be a poorly conducted study by Joanne K. Tobacman M.D. Regardless of your Carrageenan concerns, it's gone.

 

Almond milk tastes almost the same as normal milk to me, at least in cereal and by itself, but maybe my taste buds aren't all that refined. It's a perfect substitute in eggs and pancakes and other places calling for milk. Go with that. You won't miss milk, I thought I would.

 

Cheese on the other hand, while I'm cutting way down on cheese, most cheeses have considerably less lactose than milk, which is the main concern. Butter has the lowest amount of lactose of all. 

 

 


Edited by Nate-2004, 19 May 2016 - 06:36 PM.

  • like x 1

#8 ironfistx

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 19 May 2016 - 06:42 PM

Good research.

 

Almost milk, when I was looking at it, looked to be produced by two main brands, and only one of them had carageenan.  But it has no protein.  Particular types have sugar.  If you want to drink almond milk you have to purchase protein powder as well.  As part of my diet it is to elevate the total number of calories I get.  A half gallon of whole milk per day is 1,200 more calories.



#9 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,375 posts
  • 357
  • Location:Heredia, Costa Rica
  • NO

Posted 19 May 2016 - 06:56 PM

Casein proteins especially (as well as whey) are very good for developing muscle tissue. Just try to limit your intake of casein around the times when you eat blueberries or the like.  I take pterostilbene and resveratrol along with another sirt3 activator called honokiol along with nicotinamide riboside. I don't eat yogurt around this time period. Yogurt is a fantastic source of casein protein and probiotics and has *very* little lactose if any because the bacteria consume it all. One of the studies on D-galactose I link above shows that yogurt actually did the opposite of milk.


Edited by Nate-2004, 19 May 2016 - 06:57 PM.


#10 tunt01

  • Guest
  • 2,308 posts
  • 414
  • Location:NW

Posted 20 May 2016 - 02:54 AM

I would be concerned with the saturated fat intake from whole milk.  The saturated fat is associated with pro-inflammatory signalling (TLR) and reduced cognitive capacities.  I don't drink any milk.


  • Needs references x 2
  • Agree x 1

#11 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 20 May 2016 - 05:46 AM

The argument is ridiculous. Some people are sensitive to milk proteins and shouldn't drink it. Fair enough. But for those who aren't sensitive why should they avoid it? It's like someone with a peanut allergy telling the 99+% of the rest of the world who don't that they shouldn't eat peanuts because if its bad for them, perhaps its bad on some subclinical level to everyone else.

 

My son wont even be able to bring almonds to school because less than 1% of people are allergic to peanuts! Which belongs to the legume family anyway.

 

The advocacy of raw milk as a better option for health is simply stupid. Only a small portion of nutrients are lost in the process and in the developed 1st world countries, this loss is not a problem. Are there better things you can drink instead? Sure? But to say that pasteurised milk is so toxic and dangerous and applying it broadly to the entire human population is so far removed from the truth. I think people read too much into Mike Adams or Mercola who are fear mongering frauds who use partial truthful information with a mix of over hype and then misinformation or selective arguments to promote their agendas. I suppose you'll be saying next that vaccinations cause autism and are very dangerous in any case!

 

I have drank full cream milk for the better part of my 34 years. People have mistaken me for being 'around 18 years old' or mid 20's at the most. I often get asked for ID (assume I look 25 years old or less to ask me) so I guess I haven't aged too badly. I also love Full fat plain Greek yoghurt and Gouda cheese, both of which use pasteurised cows milk. Happy to give to my 2 year old son too who has NO problems with it

 

The sad reality is, there are people out there with serious health issues and consequences when they ingest things like gluten etc and people have turned this to a ridiculous hipster health fad which has jacked up the price (despite the fact that gluten free products don't cost the same extent to produce). Its a 'health' food now so now it has a premium price. I'm sure those with Crohn's disease thank you.

 

In short, pasteurised milk is fine if you do not have an allergy to dairy. The unnecessary stress you have over the issue is not fine and is what is doing all the damage inside you through the cortisol release. So relax!

 

Oh I have seen images which compare milk to green vegetables and that milk also contains, blood cells, pus etc. Well I eat meat too and I'm sure there is plenty of blood and other nasties in there too. People also need to know that growing up in a sterile, clean environment is actually detrimental to your health in the long run and maybe ingesting a few nasties or not washing your hands frequently will do you good. I worked with experimental mice and the only way they would develop autoimmune diseases is if everything was clean, sterile and perfect. So bring on the blood and pus in my milk if it gives my gut flora something to feed on. It is also hypothesized that the increased rates of allergies is because people have become obsessed with being clean and not introducing potential allergen foods early in life.


Edited by shifter, 20 May 2016 - 05:53 AM.

  • Good Point x 3
  • Disagree x 1
  • Agree x 1

#12 aconita

  • Guest
  • 1,389 posts
  • 290
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 20 May 2016 - 07:20 AM

Don't you recon that enzymes are very delicate structures and that pasteurization is very likely to alter those structures?

 

What about pasteurization and vitamin D?

 

Do you consider without issues the loss of lipid membrane around fat globules caused by homogenization? 

 

How do you explain that most people with milk intolerance do fine with raw milk? 

 

Do you recon gluten is good for health?


  • Good Point x 1

#13 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 20 May 2016 - 08:13 AM

I cook lots of food. And at temperatures well above the 65 degrees of pasteurisation. I would rather a few dead enzymes then a whole host of bacteria likely to make me very ill or kill me. Would you recommended raw cows milk as an alternative to pasteurised to a pregnant woman? The loss of any other nutrient from the process is negligible And in caring for these precious enzymes am I never allowed to cook any food above the magic 47 degrees?

 

The vitamin D in milk is negligible anyway. I would get just as much walking to my mailbox on a summers day. I take supplements of vitamin D anyway because I burn too easily in the sun

 

I could get pasteurised homogenised milk if I wanted to. But I don't see much of an issue. Here are some sites that articulate it better than I could. Plenty of research has been done that debunk most milk concerns.

 

www.berkeleywellness.com/healthy-eating/food/article/homogenized-milk-myths-busted

 

Can you give me any published data that people with lactose intolerance do fine with lactose laden raw milk as opposed to pasteurised milk? An article here deflates your theory. It was a small sample but nonetheless it made no difference. Do you have a link to a study which shows the opposite?

http://time.com/1748...ose-intolerance

 

And this is a respected guy in Oz that explains how much of the minerals are lost and debunking a few myths

www.abc.net.au/science/articles/2016/05/17/4461207.htm

 

 

There is a huge market share in 'alternative health' and a lot of it preys on fear to get your $$$ I take supplements and am all for looking after ourselves but you have to be realistic too. And lets face it. Each time you drink raw milk fresh or not - you are taking a risk. Each time I drink pasteurised milk that's fresh, the risk is next to zero. I wont die or get hospitalised. A pregnant woman wouldn't have to worry about listeria killing her unborn child.

 

If you can afford to go for almond milk (which is pretty ripped off given how much water and how many almonds are in it) then go for it. I agree, a healthy and delicious alternative. But the fear mongering of pasteurisation is a bit ridiculous given what we know. Take my advice, The likes of 'Dr' Mercola and Mike Adams are totally wrong and scaring you to get your money. They found a niche market and want to profit from it - from your fear.

 

 


Edited by shifter, 20 May 2016 - 08:16 AM.

  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

#14 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,375 posts
  • 357
  • Location:Heredia, Costa Rica
  • NO

Posted 20 May 2016 - 12:15 PM

1. People who are intolerant to milk are intolerant to the lactose not the milk protein.

2. None of these points address or even acknowledge the main issue I pointed to above, D-galactose.

3. After someone mentioned the pro-inflammatory effects of saturated fats I did a search to find sources.

4. Almond milk is cheaper than regular milk.

5. There's nothing wrong with profit. Everyone does it, literally. I profit off my job in my trade of time/skill/energy for the money I get.

 

 


Edited by Nate-2004, 20 May 2016 - 12:15 PM.


#15 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 21 May 2016 - 12:52 AM

Don't you recon that enzymes are very delicate structures and that pasteurization is very likely to alter those structures?

 

Enzymes are proteins, and proteins generally begin to unfold when they are heated.  But so what?  When we eat proteins, we do more than just unfold them-- We chop them into little pieces.  Our body doesn't really care if they are folded or unfolded when we swallow them.  If anything, an unfolded protein is easier to digest.


  • Good Point x 1
  • Agree x 1

#16 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 21 May 2016 - 01:46 AM

1. People who are intolerant to milk are intolerant to the lactose not the milk protein.
2. None of these points address or even acknowledge the main issue I pointed to above, D-galactose.
3. After someone mentioned the pro-inflammatory effects of saturated fats I did a search to find sources.
4. Almond milk is cheaper than regular milk.
5. There's nothing wrong with profit. Everyone does it, literally. I profit off my job in my trade of time/skill/energy for the money I get.

1. That was the point I was making. But the issue was pasteurisation. If you are intolerant to normal milk, get lactose free. If you don't like homogenisation, get one thats not homogenised. If you want organic, pasture grazed cow milk, get that. The options are endless, but there is zero things wrong with pasteurisation and eliminates a potential fatal risk in drinking raw milk.

2. If D-galactose was so bad in the amounts in the diet I'm sure the billions who have consumed milk over the generations would have noticed. There's probably more harm in eating a packet of lollies or alcohol or many other things we are exposed to even walking across a street full of traffic pollution than the D-galactose in milk. Put things in perspective.

3. Your search link only led me back to this page. Not sure what you mean. I'd be more worried about the crappy vegetable oil and transfats in much of the processed food myself.

4. I have not found almond milk cheaper than the cheapest whole milk. I can get 2L for $2. Most almond milk I've seen start from around $2 for 1L

5. Profit us ok but almond milk to cows milk is price gouging. The processes to make cows milk for the masses is long and arduous. Farmers get bugger all for it. I can make almond milk at home any time with a handful of almonds, water and a blender. Yet some charge over $4 a litre. It's not expensive because it's costly. It's expensive because this hipster trend says it's healthier so attracts a premium price because people are wiling to pay it.

My issue is not if you don't like milk or are sensitive or intolerant to it for any reason. It's the recommendation to raw milk and the fear mongering of a harmless and actually beneficial pasteurisation process.

Edited by shifter, 21 May 2016 - 01:46 AM.

  • Agree x 1

#17 ironfistx

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 21 May 2016 - 01:57 AM

1. People who are intolerant to milk are intolerant to the lactose not the milk protein.

2. None of these points address or even acknowledge the main issue I pointed to above, D-galactose.

3. After someone mentioned the pro-inflammatory effects of saturated fats I did a search to find sources.

4. Almond milk is cheaper than regular milk.

5. There's nothing wrong with profit. Everyone does it, literally. I profit off my job in my trade of time/skill/energy for the money I get.

 

4.  Where do you live?



#18 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,375 posts
  • 357
  • Location:Heredia, Costa Rica
  • NO

Posted 21 May 2016 - 01:46 PM

I have only ever drank Horizon organic, so if you're drinking cheap milk produced by hormone injected cows you may get the same price or better.

 

Screen%20Shot%202016-05-21%20at%209.40.2Screen%20Shot%202016-05-21%20at%209.40.5Screen%20Shot%202016-05-21%20at%209.44.5



#19 sativa

  • Guest
  • 536 posts
  • 46
  • Location:United Kingdom
  • NO

Posted 21 May 2016 - 02:13 PM

How can regular intake of casomorphin compounds which have strong opiate properties (aka trigger opoid receptors) be any good in the long term?

Carrageenan seems dodgy...

When we separate the research on poligeenan and undegraded carrageenan, we find that it is still linked to increased intestinal permeability (leaky gut), intestinal irritation, and colon ulcers. Limited human studies showed an increase in inflammation and cell arrest.


Don't commercial non dairy milks also contain potentially problematic vitamin D2 which can cause dysfunction in calcium metabolism.

Wouldn't it be cheaper and healthier to make your own nut milk? I was making hemp seed milk for a month or so. Nut and seed milks I've seen (in the UK) only contain 3-6% of the actual nut/seed, the rest is basically water..!

///
Semi-of off topic:

Bear with my semantic humor....

5. There's nothing wrong with profit. Everyone does it, literally. I profit off my job in my trade of time/skill/energy for the money I get.


You trade your life "time" for money to allow you to live better in your time. Depending on ones perspective, the profit aspect of this is questionable but I digress :p

Edited by sativa, 21 May 2016 - 02:17 PM.

  • Needs references x 2

#20 ironfistx

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 23 May 2016 - 03:17 AM

Casein proteins especially (as well as whey) are very good for developing muscle tissue. Just try to limit your intake of casein around the times when you eat blueberries or the like. I take pterostilbene and resveratrol along with another sirt3 activator called honokiol along with nicotinamide riboside. I don't eat yogurt around this time period. Yogurt is a fantastic source of casein protein and probiotics and has *very* little lactose if any because the bacteria consume it all. One of the studies on D-galactose I link above shows that yogurt actually did the opposite of milk.


What is the reason you shouldn't have blueberries at the same time as milk? I will put blueberries in smoothies when I make them.

#21 ironfistx

  • Topic Starter
  • Guest
  • 1,172 posts
  • 64
  • Location:Chicago

Posted 23 May 2016 - 03:21 AM

Don't commercial non dairy milks also contain potentially problematic vitamin D2 which can cause dysfunction in calcium metabolism.


Please give me more info about this.
  • Agree x 1

#22 Nate-2004

  • Guest
  • 2,375 posts
  • 357
  • Location:Heredia, Costa Rica
  • NO

Posted 23 May 2016 - 04:14 AM

 

Casein proteins especially (as well as whey) are very good for developing muscle tissue. Just try to limit your intake of casein around the times when you eat blueberries or the like. I take pterostilbene and resveratrol along with another sirt3 activator called honokiol along with nicotinamide riboside. I don't eat yogurt around this time period. Yogurt is a fantastic source of casein protein and probiotics and has *very* little lactose if any because the bacteria consume it all. One of the studies on D-galactose I link above shows that yogurt actually did the opposite of milk.


What is the reason you shouldn't have blueberries at the same time as milk? I will put blueberries in smoothies when I make them.

 

 

I posted the links above but here and here. From the article here. Casein protein binds with antioxidants, casein is in yogurt, which I believe is an ingredient in smoothies... which means the antioxidant benefit people think they get from smoothies gets essentially nullified by any yogurt they put in there. 


Edited by Nate-2004, 23 May 2016 - 04:21 AM.


#23 maxwatt

  • Guest, Moderator LeadNavigator
  • 4,949 posts
  • 1,625
  • Location:New York

Posted 23 May 2016 - 11:32 AM

I recall reading of a study showing that at least the anti-oxidants in tea, though initially bound by the casein in milk, are release further down in the intestines, and are free to work their magic.

 

As my grandmother used to say about dietary advice: hurry up and do it while it still works.  (or don't do it, in this case.)

 


  • Needs references x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#24 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 23 May 2016 - 11:56 AM

Casein gels up and slows down digestion which could be reason why antioxidants are not immediately seen in blood work as opposed to using water.
  • Needs references x 1

#25 aconita

  • Guest
  • 1,389 posts
  • 290
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 23 May 2016 - 04:04 PM

Enzymes are proteins, and proteins generally begin to unfold when they are heated.  But so what?  When we eat proteins, we do more than just unfold them-- We chop them into little pieces.  Our body doesn't really care if they are folded or unfolded when we swallow them.  If anything, an unfolded protein is easier to digest.

 

"The sequence of the amino acids specifies the structure which in turn determines the catalytic activity of the enzyme.[18] Although structure determines function, a novel enzyme's activity cannot yet be predicted from its structure alone.[19

 

Enzyme structures unfold (denature) when heated or exposed to chemical denaturants and this disruption to the structure typically causes a loss of activity.[20]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enzyme

 

Enzymes functions are a bit more complex than just provide amino acids and those functions are lost when enzymes are heated.

 

Chewing...maybe a good reason for milk ingestion is that you don't have to chew on it and its enzymes are able to be preserved intact, given ones ability to chew every single enzyme in food, which I am not so sure it is the case, of course.

 

A good reason to include raw food too in the diet, probably, I guess.

 

 

 

 



#26 niner

  • Guest
  • 16,276 posts
  • 2,000
  • Location:Philadelphia

Posted 23 May 2016 - 09:13 PM

Enzymes functions are a bit more complex than just provide amino acids and those functions are lost when enzymes are heated.

 

The digestive tract is loaded with proteases in order to digest proteins.  Those proteases snip the enzymes into little bits.    There is a lot of raw foodist blather about "live enzymes", but that's just broscience, or maybe hippy-science.  Raw food is good for you because it eliminates exogenous AGEs.  That's a good thing, but "live enzymes" just don't have anything to do with it.  I'm trying to imagine how undigested proteins could be good for us, but I'm drawing a blank.  Maybe they interact with the microbiome in some useful way?  How are the enzymes in food supposed to benefit us as large, intact, fully folded proteins?  How do they get into our system, and what do they do if they manage to get in?



#27 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 23 May 2016 - 09:32 PM

this raw food for live enzymes and demonising of pasteurised milk etc... The language used reminds me of the dihydrogen monoxide scare campaigns. It's word play. I'm not sure people were meant to take it serious but they have.



#28 aconita

  • Guest
  • 1,389 posts
  • 290
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 23 May 2016 - 09:48 PM

I suppose we don't really know but it is not a reason good enough for not considering the possibility that they actually are beneficial in some way.

 

What I know for sure is that raw milk is very different from pasteurized milk.

 

Where I live I have access to organic raw milk, standard raw milk (which due by the much stricter regulations in place here in Europe is nothing like the US main farming practice) and standard pasteurized milk, of course.

 

The difference from raw organic milk and standard raw milk can be seen, leave alone the taste.... both are not even comparable with pasteurized milk.

 

About their nutritional values and health proprieties I don't know for sure since none of those milks gives me any issues but there are many interesting arguments favoring raw against pasteurized that can't be ignored.

 

I can see no reason why not to prefer raw to pasteurized since from the invention of the fridge milk pasteurization is unnecessary anymore: it tastes much better, it looks much better and maybe (but very likely) it is healthier.

 

We already have the taliban of carbs, I don't think we really need the taliban of pasteurization too.:) 



#29 shifter

  • Guest
  • 716 posts
  • 5

Posted 23 May 2016 - 11:14 PM

But raw milk comes with risks that pasteurisation does not. They aren't small risks either. People have died and many more seriously ill in hospital. All of them completely preventable. We are talking about heating the milk to a little over 70 degrees for 4 seconds.

 

People cook food and it heats to over 70 and for a lot longer. Billions have been doing it for generations. I'm not saying scraping off the charcoal on the bbq to add as some seasoning to your meat is a good idea but the idea that food should never be heated over 47 degrees Celsius is silly

 

Would you tell a pregnant woman, old person or child reaching for the pasteurised milk in the supermarket and tell them to try the raw milk style instead? I wonder if even you believe pasteurisation could have a place or would you swap out their milk choices for yours. I'll tell you how you can introduce your much loved bacterial flora back into your raw milk. Go to a farm, mash up some cow poo with your bare hands and dip it in your milk. You can additionally stick your hands in there after you go to the toilet without washing your hands as maybe the farmers you get the raw milk for you aren't as sanitary as you believe. And/or leave your milk in the sun for a few days to let some of those lost bacterial cultures grow back. Raw milk or even pasteurised milk is a petri dish for bacterial cultures. Even pasteurised milk in a fridge goes bad after 2 weeks as the process does not kill everything. Unless your sucking the milk straight from a nicely washed cow udder, I cant see how you would trust your life to it. Even then its like why would you go to that much trouble for it. Raw milk consumption is a little like Russian roulette. Granted there are more than 6 chambers in this game but your life or health is still in a balance and for what kind of payoff? a few % points of nutrients your diet is probably already over in abundance of? Some nicely folded enzymes? Save the raw milk for babies to a human mother. Not for grown ups from a cow.

 


  • Good Point x 1
  • like x 1

#30 aconita

  • Guest
  • 1,389 posts
  • 290
  • Location:Italy
  • NO

Posted 24 May 2016 - 12:16 AM

the idea that food should never be heated over 47 degrees Celsius is silly

 

Indeed it is, I am talking about milk here, not food in general.

 

We are talking about heating the milk to a little over 70 degrees for 4 seconds

 

If it is irrelevant it doesn't prevent bacteria from be harmful (which in fact is the case, at least sometimes), if it does the job it is enough to destroy some proteins and enzymes too.

 

Even pasteurised milk in a fridge goes bad after 2 weeks as the process does not kill everything.

 

In fact it doesn't kill everything as you wish and I don't know what kind of milk are you buying but in my country pasteurized milk last 2-3 days in the fridge before getting spoiled.

 

In Europe raw milk is approved for sale by the law, do you really think it would be possible if it was nearly as dangerous as you describe?

 

Can you mention one single case of dead caused by raw milk consumption occurred in Europe since raw milk reintroduction?

 

I am aware of none.

 

Raw milk is dangerous if not kept refrigerated, which certainly was an issue when fridges where not invented yet or not in every home (or farm), a Petri dish in the fridge is not very useful, I guess.

 

I don't know where you live but where I do milking is performed by machines directly into refrigerated containers and cow udder are actually nicely washed before the procedure starts.

 

A little bit of contamination does indeed occur of which salmonella is likely the main concern but the immune system copy with that without any issue if number are kept under control, refrigeration provides just that.

 

Anyway even in case of acute salmonella the life treat is nowadays minimal, it was an issue once upon a time when the consequent diarrhea leaded to dehydration and death, especially in infants.   

 

And by the way wasn't you writing a few posts ago that:

 

"Oh I have seen images which compare milk to green vegetables and that milk also contains, blood cells, pus etc. Well I eat meat too and I'm sure there is plenty of blood and other nasties in there too. People also need to know that growing up in a sterile, clean environment is actually detrimental to your health in the long run and maybe ingesting a few nasties or not washing your hands frequently will do you good. I worked with experimental mice and the only way they would develop autoimmune diseases is if everything was clean, sterile and perfect. So bring on the blood and pus in my milk if it gives my gut flora something to feed on. It is also hypothesized that the increased rates of allergies is because people have become obsessed with being clean and not introducing potential allergen foods early in life."

 

I imagine "the few nasties that do you good" are only the ones YOU consider "safe", probably you do know a lot more than science does than...and you do even posses the gift of knowing nasties nature at a glance, which is remarkable indeed since usually they tend to be quite small in size to be seen by the naked eye...

 

Just out of curiosity, do you feel comfortable not washing your hands after touching the door handle of a public toilet?

 

Call me fussy but I am far more concerned about what might lurk on my hands after pushing a trolley around the grocery store for half an hour rather than about a few salmonellas in a glass of raw milk, but that is just me, of course. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 







Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: protein, depression

1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users