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

Photo
- - - - -

Is cow milk bad for us?

milk

  • Please log in to reply
58 replies to this topic

#31 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,599 posts
  • 668

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:08 PM

After the intake of cow milk, serum estrone (E1) and progesterone concentrations significantly increased, and serum luteinizing hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and testosterone significantly decreased in men. Urine concentrations of E1, estradiol, estriol and pregnanediol significantly increased in all adults and children. In four out of five women, ovulation occurred during the milk intake, and the timing of ovulation was similar among the three menstrual cycles.

CONCLUSIONS:

The present data on men and children indicate that estrogens in milk were absorbed, and gonadotropin secretion was suppressed, followed by a decrease in testosterone secretion. Sexual maturation of prepubertal children could be affected by the ordinary intake of cow milk.


There's several problems with this study that would indicate bias.

First, they don't give any hard numbers or data to support their conclusion of "significantly".

And second, they don't indicate how long the transient effect lasted.

And third, The percentage of milk from pregnant cows is small and thoroughly diluted in the 10,000 gallon tankers and through processing. None of us are drinking pure pregnant cow milk.

This study was obviously designed to support the preconceived conclusion with no supporting data presented...that milk is bad.

You always like to play the bias card of studies done by the agricultural community but then you are always quick to post studies obviously done by the anti-dairy and pro-vegan crowd.

Humans have been consuming significant amounts of dairy for thousands of years and have continued to do so in all parts of the world. Dairy is not to blame for relatively recent adverse health trends in very modern history (today).
  • like x 1
  • dislike x 1
  • Well Written x 1
  • Informative x 1

#32 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:17 PM

Believe what you want Hebbeh. Here is a link to the entire study if anyone is interested: http://birdflubook.c...10_PI_52_33.pdf

Edited by misterE, 28 April 2013 - 04:20 PM.


sponsored ad

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

#33 daouda

  • Guest
  • 469 posts
  • 109
  • Location:France

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:19 PM

MisterE, I already linked twice to that study in this thread before you even started to quote it.

Hebbeh, I'm with you (MisterE is obviously extremely biased towards vegan propaganda and that study isnt to be taken as the final words on the subject, milk is definitely not "bad" nor dairy to be blamed for modern rising morbidities ), but Ill say it again, the evidence seems good enough to factor the (small content of) estrogen milk in all the xenoestrogen and potential endocrine disruptors we are increasingly exposed to in modern societies.. Xeno-hormones are different from other environmental toxins in that you really do not need a big dose to elicit a significant "global" effect on the body.
This wont stop me for consuming milk and dairy on a daily basis but Im convinced that several liters per day (which I used to drink in my younger years) is probably not such a good thing.

Edited by daouda, 28 April 2013 - 04:24 PM.

  • like x 2
  • Agree x 1

#34 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:23 PM

milk is definitely not "bad" nor dairy to be blamed for modern rising morbidities

What about the evidence showing milk consumption promotes breast and prostate-cancer. Or the link between milk and type-1 diabetes and atherosclerosis? Would you like me to post those studies?

#35 daouda

  • Guest
  • 469 posts
  • 109
  • Location:France

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:29 PM

You can find studies linking many if not most foods to some type of morbidity, putting the blame on dairy for every modern negative health trends is a bit ridiculous when it has been consumed forever and is still the central part of the diet of not-unhealthy populations (massai, fulani etc). That being said, Im sure and convinced already that limiting dairy intake is definitely a wise thing for longevity and "immediate" health, so take it easy MisterE

I think the main culprits behind increasing modern health ailments are definitely to be found in industrial grain products (particularly white flour), sugar, industrial vegetable oil and other processed food.

Edited by daouda, 28 April 2013 - 04:33 PM.

  • like x 2

#36 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:49 PM


Altern Med Rev. 1998 Aug;3(4):281-94.
Milk and other dietary influences on coronary heart disease.
Grant WB.
Abstract
While dietary links to ischemic heart disease (IHD) and coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality have been studied for many years, the correlation has not clearly been resolved, especially for older populations. In this paper, a multi-country statistical approach involving 32 countries is used to find dietary links to IHD and CHD for various age groups aged 35+. For IHD, milk carbohydrates were found to have the highest statistical association for males aged 35+ and females aged 65+, while for females aged 35-64, sugar was found to have the highest association. In the case of CHD, non-fat milk was found to have the highest association for males aged 45+ and females aged 75+, while for females 65-74, milk carbohydrates and sugar had the highest associations, and for females aged 45-64, sugar had the highest association. A number of mechanisms have been proposed in the literature that might explain the milk carbohydrate or non-fat milk association. One of the most prominent theories is that animal proteins contribute to homocysteine (Hcy) production; however, milk more than meat lacks adequate B vitamins to convert Hcy to useful products. Lactose and calcium in conjunction with Hcy from consumption of non-fat milk may also contribute to calcification of the arteries.




Med Hypotheses. 1986 Jul;20(3):317-38.
Milk and arteriosclerosis.
Rank P.
Abstract
Milk consumption is related to arteriosclerosis. Recent landmark studies confirm a previously suspected close correlation between milk intake and arteriosclerotic heart disease. Support is therefore provided for a recently proposed novel hypothesis that arteriosclerosis is a chronic infectious disease caused by blue-green bacteria and that milk is a carrier vehicle for these contaminant organisms. A revisionist view of diet and milk in the causation of arteriosclerosis is developed. Previous hypotheses relating milk consumption to arteriosclerosis and advances in pasteurization techniques are discussed and integrated with this infection theory.


Diabetologia. 1998 Jan;41(1):72-8.
Significance of cow's milk protein antibodies as risk factor for childhood IDDM: interactions with dietary cow's milk intake and HLA-DQB1 genotype. Childhood Diabetes in Finland Study Group.
Saukkonen T, Virtanen SM, Karppinen M
Abstract
Dietary factors are suspected to play an aetiological role in the development of insulin-dependent diabetes mellitus (IDDM). We analysed cow's milk formula, betalactoglobulin, and bovine serum albumin antibodies by an enzyme-linked immunoassay in unselected children with newly diagnosed IDDM and in their non-diabetic siblings and inquired about infant feeding practices by questionnaire. Among 410 diabetic sibling pairs matched for age and sex, by logistic regression analysis - including overall duration of breast-feeding, age at introduction of dairy products, recent consumption of cow's milk and HLA-DQB1 genotype ("high/moderate" vs "low/decreased" risk of IDDM) - bovine serum albumin IgG antibody levels (OR 2.12, 95% CI 1.25-3.57) and genetic risk (OR 3.81, 95% CI 2.43-5.17) were positively associated with IDDM; cow's milk formula IgM antibodies were inversely associated with the risk of IDDM (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.29-0.87). Of the diabetic sibling pairs, 42 were identical for HLA-DQB1 alleles associated with IDDM risk or protection (DQB1*0201, *0301, *0302 and *0602/03). In these 42 pairs, children with IDDM had higher median levels of bovine serum albumin IgG, of betalactoglobulin IgG, and of cow's milk formula IgG and IgA antibodies than the non-diabetic siblings (p < 0.05). In conclusion, children with IDDM have higher levels of cow's milk protein antibodies than their HLA-DQB1-matched sibling controls, and these high levels of antibodies are independent risk markers for IDDM.



Proc Nutr Soc. 2000 Nov;59(4):573-9.
Cow's milk and immune-mediated diabetes.
Wasmuth HE, Kolb H.
Abstract
Cow's milk-based infant formulas and cow's milk consumption in childhood have been suggested to promote the development of type 1 diabetes mellitus and other immune-mediated or neurological diseases. Epidemiological studies in man have led to the hypothesis that introduction of cow's milk-based infant formula within the first 3 months of life is associated with increased risk of type 1 diabetes mellitus. Furthermore, in animal models of type 1 diabetes mellitus, cow's milk proteins have been proven to be 'diabetogenic'. However, the issue seems far from being resolved. Several epidemiological studies and, more importantly, the first prospective trials did not show an association between early exposure to cow's milk and type 1 diabetes mellitus. In animal models, cow's milk proteins are modestly and variably diabetogenic, wheat or soybean proteins in the diet cause higher rates of autoimmune diabetes. In both man and rodents there is increasing evidence that the gut-associated immune system plays a major role in disease development, probably because of disturbed oral tolerance mechanisms. Oral tolerance depends on immunological homeostasis and normal maturation of the gut. These factors are influenced by growth factors and cytokines from breast milk, normal bacterial colonization, infections and diet. All these factors have been proposed as risk factors for type 1 diabetes mellitus. Hence, cow's milk proteins may provide mimicry epitopes relevant in autoimmunity, as well as destabilizing oral tolerance mechanisms by biologically active peptides. The concept of dietary regulation of autoimmunity does not apply only to cow's milk protein, but also to other dietary proteins.




Med Hypotheses. 2005;65(6):1028-37.
The possible role of female sex hormones in milk from pregnant cows in the development of breast, ovarian and corpus uteri cancers.
Ganmaa D, Sato A.
Abstract
The continued increase in incidence of some hormone-related cancers worldwide is of great concern. Although estrogen-like substances in the environment were blamed for this increase, the possible role of endogenous estrogens from food has not been widely discussed. We are particularly concerned about cows' milk, which contains a considerable quantity of estrogens. When we name cows' milk as one of the important routes of human exposure to estrogens, the general response of Western people is that "man has been drinking cows' milk for around 2000 years without apparent harm." However, the milk that we are now consuming is quite different from that consumed 100 years ago. Unlike their pasture-fed counterparts of 100 years ago, modern dairy cows are usually pregnant and continue to lactate during the latter half of pregnancy, when the concentration of estrogens in blood, and hence in milk, increases. The correlation of incidence and mortality rates with environmental variables in worldwide countries provides useful clues to the etiology of cancer. In this study, we correlated incidence rates for breast, ovarian, and corpus uteri cancers (1993-97 from Cancer Incidence in Five Continents) with food intake (1961-97 from FAOSTAT) in 40 countries. Meat was most closely correlated with the breast cancer incidence (r=0.827), followed by milk (0.817) and cheese (0.751). Stepwise multiple-regression analysis (SMRA) identified meat as the factor contributing most greatly to the incidence of breast cancer ([R]=0.862). Milk was most closely correlated with the incidence of ovarian cancer (r=0.779), followed by animal fats (0.717) and cheese (0.697). SMRA revealed that milk plus cheese make the greatest contribution to the incidence of ovarian cancer ([R]=0.767). Milk was most closely correlated with corpus uteri cancer (r=0.814), followed by cheese (0.787). SMRA revealed that milk plus cheese make the most significant contribution to the incidence of corpus uteri cancer ([R]=0.861). In conclusion, increased consumption of animal-derived food may have adverse effects on the development of hormone-dependent cancers. Among dietary risk factors, we are most concerned with milk and dairy products, because the milk we drink today is produced from pregnant cows, in which estrogen and progesterone levels are markedly elevated.



Int J Cancer. 2002 Mar 10;98(2):262-7.
Incidence and mortality of testicular and prostatic cancers in relation to world dietary practices.
Ganmaa D, Li XM, Wang J.
Abstract
The incidence and mortality rates of testicular and prostatic cancers in 42 countries were correlated with the dietary practices in these countries using the cancer rates (1988-92) provided by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) and the food supply data (1961-90) provided by the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO). Among the food items we examined, cheese was most closely correlated with the incidence of testicular cancer at ages 20-39, followed by animal fats and milk. The correlation coefficient ® was highest (r = 0.804) when calculated for cheese consumed during the period 1961-65 (maternal or prepubertal consumption). Stepwise-multiple-regression analysis revealed that milk + cheese (1961-65) made a significant contribution to the incidence of testicular cancer (standardized regression coefficient [R] = 0.654). Concerning prostatic cancer, milk (1961-90) was most closely correlated (r = 0.711) with its incidence, followed by meat and coffee. Stepwise-multiple-regression analysis identified milk + cheese as a factor contributing to the incidence of prostatic cancer (R = 0.525). The food that was most closely correlated with the mortality rate of prostatic cancer was milk (r = 0.766), followed by coffee, cheese and animal fats. Stepwise-multiple-regression analysis revealed that milk + cheese was a factor contributing to mortality from prostatic cancer (R = 0.580). The results of our study suggest a role of milk and dairy products in the development and growth of testicular and prostatic cancers. The close correlation between cheese and testicular cancer and between milk and prostatic cancer suggests that further mechanistic studies should be undertaken concerning the development of male genital organ cancers.







I think the main culprits behind increasing modern health ailments are definitely to be found in industrial grain products (particularly white flour), sugar, industrial vegetable oil and other processed food.


What about the huge amount of meat and cheese westerners eat on a daily basis? Americans eat over 200 pounds of meat per year and nearly 35 pounds of cheese!
  • like x 1

#37 daouda

  • Guest
  • 469 posts
  • 109
  • Location:France

Posted 28 April 2013 - 04:56 PM

Congrats, 6 biased studies against milk
There is some real world fact for you :

http://www.livescien...-poor-diet.html
http://phys.org/news193313923.html
http://wholehealthso...osclerosis.html (read this one closely, the conclusion is not what you may think)

About the "cheese" consumed by americans, Im sorry, this processed industrial crap would never be called "cheese" here, and our raw milk artesanal aged cheeses have a hard time making it to your country because of hygene regulations
Also the tons of meat consumed by americans in modern times mainly come from industriially raised, hormones-loaded, grain-fed cattle

Edited by daouda, 28 April 2013 - 05:00 PM.

  • like x 5
  • dislike x 2
  • Agree x 1

#38 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:03 PM

Congrats, 6 biased studies against milk

What makes you think they are biased? These are just epidemiological observations and follow-ups.
  • Well Written x 1
  • like x 1

#39 nupi

  • Guest
  • 1,532 posts
  • 107
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:04 PM

Why not soy-milk or almond-milk?


He's worried about estrogens and you suggest soy-milk? Talk about biased...
  • Good Point x 3

#40 nupi

  • Guest
  • 1,532 posts
  • 107
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:09 PM

About the "cheese" consumed by americans, Im sorry, this processed industrial crap would never be called "cheese" here


I call them blocks of plastic but that's just me (you actually can get French and Swiss cheese in the US, it's just hard to get me to pay 30-40 USD per kg)... Oh and I refuse to eat any US meat outside the US.

Edited by nupi, 28 April 2013 - 05:11 PM.


#41 daouda

  • Guest
  • 469 posts
  • 109
  • Location:France

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:09 PM

Congrats, 6 biased studies against milk

What makes you think they are biased? These are just epidemiological observations and follow-ups.

I like to keep an open mind about studies no matter the publication, but the people at "alt med rev" and "medical hypotheses" seem to have an agenda more often that not.
And, thing is, YOU obviously (and openly, looking at your avatar) have an agenda and a very strong "vegan" bias, so I will receive all of your arguments with some skepticism.
But I totally am receptive to any argument. That last study reminds me that I have chronic prostatitis and my grandfather had prostate cancer, and like most french he loved coffe and dairy, esp cheese.

Edited by daouda, 28 April 2013 - 05:13 PM.

  • like x 1

#42 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:22 PM

Why not soy-milk or almond-milk?


He's worried about estrogens and you suggest soy-milk? Talk about biased...

Phytoestrogens are beneficial.
  • Needs references x 2
  • like x 2
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#43 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 05:28 PM

I like to keep an open mind about studies no matter the publication, but the people at "alt med rev" and "medical hypotheses" seem to have an agenda more often that not.





Medical hypothesis is a very important journal because it allows researchers to “connect the dots” by relying on previous peer-reviewed published studies. It allows them to suggest something that is supported by the data.





And, thing is, YOU obviously (and openly, looking at your avatar) have an agenda and a very strong "vegan" bias, so I will receive all of your arguments with some skepticism.





Fair enough. My "vegan bias" comes from my belief that the scientific-literature clearly supports a plant-based diet.

Edited by misterE, 28 April 2013 - 05:29 PM.

  • like x 1

#44 nupi

  • Guest
  • 1,532 posts
  • 107
  • Location:Switzerland

Posted 28 April 2013 - 06:24 PM

Phytoestrogens are beneficial.


You must be the first person ever I read stating this...
  • dislike x 1
  • Disagree x 1

#45 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,599 posts
  • 668

Posted 28 April 2013 - 06:41 PM

That last study reminds me that I have chronic prostatitis and my grandfather had prostate cancer, and like most french he loved coffe and dairy, esp cheese.


I believe that the biggest determinant in most health conditions is genetics and science is demonstrating this more and more. Genetics based medicine is the future.

My n=1 .........

I'm 56 and in extraordinary health...better than most half my age....but I am blessed with some good genes (most of my deceased relatives lived into their upper 80's to upper 90's and both parents are alive and kicking at 87)...and I take care of myself by exercising and staying fit, eating healthy (my version), and maintaining a lean and healthy weight.

That said, my diet revolves around dairy. I eat over 2 pounds (one and half 24oz tubs) of cottage cheese and most of a 32oz tub of yogurt every day....and have most of my life. I also drink a whey shake after exercise almost every day and have for the last 20 years. I also eat a couple eggs every day. I grew up this way having been raised on a generational family ranch. We raised beef cattle but always had a couple milk cows for personal dairy consumption and I grew up literally drinking gallons of milk (although my favorite was homemade ice cream!).

And I firmly believe dairy consumption contributes to my good health. I have always been very active doing a variety of activities but I have continued to be involved in weight lifting and biking all my life and milk proteins have certainly helped me maintain this level of strenuous activity.

At 56, I find that a large percentage of kids simply can't keep up these days....but it's not because of their drinking milk! And I seldom go to the doctor because I simply never get sick but they now do health screenings at work as part of the health insurance program and all my health markers come back as "ideal" and are better than almost all the people that I have seen half my age. All in spite of liberal daily dairy consumption.

Living in Colorado, summer and the hiking season is upon us and I have taken an interest in recent years of climbing 14,000 foot mountains (there are 53 in Colorado) and most kids simply don't have the strength and stamina to do this. Milk proteins are what allows me to train, recuperate, and continue to do this in spite of my age.

None of us can foresee the future but the fact that most of my relatives (in my opinion) didn't live a particularly healthy lifestyle (although they all worked very hard at what they did and often worked into their 80's) and still lived into their 90's, I wouldn't be surprised if I lived to a 100 in spite of eating 3 or 4 pounds of dairy products every day of my life.

Of course, I could get run over by a beer truck tomorrow........

#46 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 07:13 PM

Phytoestrogens are beneficial.


You must be the first person ever I read stating this...


J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1998 Jul;83(7):2223-35.

Potential health benefits of dietary phytoestrogens: a review of the clinical, epidemiological, and mechanistic evidence.

Tham DM, Gardner CD, Haskell WL.

Abstract

Phytoestrogens represent a family of plant compounds that have been shown to have both estrogenic and antiestrogenic properties. A variety of these plant compounds and their mammalian metabolic products have been identified in various human body fluids and fall under two main categories: isoflavones and lignans. A wide range of commonly consumed foods contain appreciable amounts of these different phytoestrogens. For example, soy and flax products are particularly good sources of isoflavones and lignans, respectively. Accumulating evidence from molecular and cellular biology experiments, animal studies, and, to a limited extent, human clinical trials suggests that phytoestrogens may potentially confer health benefits related to cardiovascular diseases, cancer, osteoporosis, and menopausal symptoms. These potential health benefits are consistent with the epidemiological evidence that rates of heart disease, various cancers, osteoporotic fractures, and menopausal symptoms are more favorable among populations that consume plant-based diets, particularly among cultures with diets that are traditionally high in soy products. The evidence reviewed here will facilitate the identification of what is known in this area, the gaps that exist, and the future research that holds the most potential and promise.
  • Informative x 1

#47 daouda

  • Guest
  • 469 posts
  • 109
  • Location:France

Posted 28 April 2013 - 07:23 PM

WHat I have read about phytoestrogens is they have widely different properties, some may be beneficial (they can have SERM-like properties) and others detrimental.

#48 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,599 posts
  • 668

Posted 28 April 2013 - 07:41 PM

Soy phytoestrogens are marketed and sold as "natural" hormone replacements for menopausal women. I have a good friend who has confided that a soy phytoestrogen supplement has cured her menopausal hot flashes and that she learned about it from her sisters who it also worked for.

It doesn't take much googling to find tons of studies indicating that soy is a hormonal disrupter.

As a man, I certainly don't want to ingest any soy phytoestrogens (which means no soy products) and am much more fearful of soy estrogens than any supposed dairy estrogens. After all, I have never heard of a women using dairy products to cure her menopausal hot flashes....but soy is a well known and documented female hormonal substitute.

edit: And as a powerful and well documented hormonal phyoestrogen, I would never give soy products to kids. And anyone suggesting giving soy milk to kids is reckless at the least. And if you question that, I can dig of tons of studies demonstrating the hormonal disruption of soy on kids. In fact, it is probably the recent popularity of soy based products (pitched by the vegan crowd) that have done more damage to kids than any amount of dairy consumption. And it's interesting that the vegans pitch soy than blame dairy for the problems.

Edited by Hebbeh, 28 April 2013 - 07:49 PM.

  • like x 2

#49 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 28 April 2013 - 08:05 PM



Phytoestrogens are estrogen balancing. They have both mild estrogenic effects (if estrogen is low) and anti-estrogenic effects (if levels are too high). These phytoestrogens are about 10,000 times weaker in potency than estrone and estradiol; mammalian-estrogens found in cow-milk or made by peripheral conversion of androgens into estrogens in the adipose-tissue [1]. Phytoestrogens bind to the estrogen-receptors and either induce mild estrogenic signaling or phytoestrogens can either compete with mammalian-estrogens (which are much more potent) for receptor binding affinity, thus lowering the overall estrogenic-stimulation. Phytoestrogens alter estrogen metabolism to favor healthy estrogen-metabolites instead of carcinogenic/inflammatory metabolites like 16alpha-hydroxyestradiol. Phytoestrogens inhibit the aromatase-enzyme also, which is responsible for converting androgens (like testosterone) into estrogens (like estrone).








[1] Eur J Endocrinol. 1999 Jun;140(6):477-85. Exposure to exogenous estrogens in food: possible impact on human development and health. Andersson AM, Skakkebaek NE.
  • like x 3
  • Informative x 1

#50 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,599 posts
  • 668

Posted 28 April 2013 - 11:42 PM

Why Babies Should Not be Fed Soy Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image Written by Gail Elbek Wednesday, 10 February 2010 18:56
Testimony to the CERHR Soy Infant Formula Panel

Thank you for the opportunity to testify about this very serious subject today. Allow me to summarize the testimony I have submitted to the panel (posted at http://cerhr.niehs.n...bek11-28-09.pdf).
ESTROGENIC EFFECTS

Several published studies, confirmed by CFSAN (Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition) director Dr. Mike Shelby, have concluded that soy is an active estrogenic endocrine disruptor. Proper functioning of the endocrine system, especially during developmental time-frames must not be jeopardized. Overwhelming numbers of published studies conclude soy repeatedly jeopardizes developmental health.
The National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) reports that soy phyto-estrogens demonstrate estrogenic effects equal to or lower than doses of DES estrogen; in 2002, NIEHS researcher Retha Newbold expressed concern when her colleagues demonstrated that soy genistein “triggers reproductive abnormalities. . . including uterine adenocarcinoma, a rare form of cancer.” And what is toxic to the reproductive tract is toxic to multiple hormone systems throughout the body and brain. Also like DES estrogen, the maternal consumption of soy products transfers estrogenic hormone disruptors to her fetus and again to her child while breast feeding. Several hundred studies overwhelmingly conclude soy phyto-toxic causation of an assortment of severe, painful and often irreversible neurological and physiological disorders, and these diseases are more often caused during developmental exposures. Soy-based formula as 100 percent of an infant’s dietary intake contains active estrogenic and anti-nutrient endocrine disruptors.
Alarmingly, milk formulas are increasingly contaminated with soy, and therefore “lactose intolerance” may more likely be a result of intolerance to soy phyto-toxins.
Soy is proven to mimic or antagonize estradiol, a most potent and dangerous endogenous estrogen. Soy phyto-estrogens also abnormally manipulate ER-alpha and ER-beta hormone systems, further disrupting extensive endocrine systems throughout the entire body and brain.
Largely during developmental exposures, soy endocrine disruptors disrupt the reproductive system and are toxic to multiple hormone systems. Along with all estrogenic chemicals, soy is established as extensively damaging to the reproductive system of both females and males. Soy is reported as an accumulative endocrine disruptor capable of multiplying endocrine disruptor adverse effects. And these effects are transgenerational, passing damaging endocrine disruptor effects from generation to generation. The FDA Poisonous Plant Database includes “Soy bean, genistein and daidzein [soy estrogens]” on its list of poisonous plants. Developmental exposures to soy estrogenic endocrine disruptors fail to meet several FDA codes and regulations.
SOY AND THE BRAIN

The fact that soy can feminize males and masculinize females is evidence of soy targeting the brain.
Overwhelming evidence proves that soy disrupts several neurotransmitter systems such as vasopressin, oxytocin, serotonin, dopamine, glutamate, choline and GABA, causing multiple direct and cascading damaging brain effects. Disrupted neurotransmitter systems are reported to cause autism, mental retardation, cerebral palsy, seizures, stuttering, ADHD and multiple other neurological disorders.
TRYPSIN INHIBITORS

Several important essential enzymes such as tyrosine and trypsin, which are critical during development, are dangerously inhibited by soy, resulting in an assortment of physiological and neurological adverse health effects.
The FDA Federal Register 1999 reports that trypsin inhibitors cause deleterious effects on the pancreas, with potential to cause hyperplasia and formation of nodules. Soy contains very high levels of trypsin inhibitor.
SOY AND THE THYROID

Many studies indicate that soy can cause hypothyroidism, which then contributes to an assortment of adverse effects, especially to the vulnerable fetus, infants and children. Soy inhibits thyroid peroxidase and disrupts thyroid hormones T4 and T3, causing abnormal thyroid development and function. Soy disruptions of thyroid hormones are also related to the cause of immune deficiency disease and damage to Purkinje brain cells. This damage is related to the cause of autism.
SOY AND THE THYMUS

Soy is reported to cause significant damage to the thymus, again leading to damaging effects to the immune system and cerebral cortex of the brain.
SOY AND CANCER

Soy also inhibits topoisomerase II (Topo II), another essential enzyme, causing DNA distortion and breakage, resulting in chromosomal alterations. Leukemia is reported in detail as caused by Topo II inhibitors.
In 2004, the US Department of Environmental Molecular Medicine reported soy causation of oxidative DNA damage, which can lead to tumor initiation and cell proliferation. Soy is reported as capable of causing leukemia, testicular, breast, uterine, bladder, stomach, colon, intestinal, pancreatic and kidney cancers as well as lymphomas.
Oncologists often suggest the elimination of soy products during cancer treatment due to soy’s estrogenic ability to promote cancers or to interfere with chemotherapy.
ANTI-NUTRIENTS

Soy is loaded with anti-nutrients: the FDA Federal Register 1999 reports, “GRAS status of soy did not include a thorough evaluation of the safety of potentially harmful components, e.g. lysinoalanine, nitrites and nitrosamines, trypsin inhibitors, phytates and isoflavones.” This list includes several, but not all of soy phyto-toxins that are well known to damage multiple systems throughout the body and brain, especially during development.
Soy phytates inhibit the assimilation of multiple essential minerals necessary for proper brain and body development. In addition, processed soy products contain an assortment of heavy metals also known to cause neurologically and physiologically damaging effects.
There are no established FDA acceptable levels of multiple soy phyto-toxins during developmental exposures.
Alarmingly, soy phyto-estrogens and anti-nutrients can largely fluctuate plant-to-plant, thus product-to-product, so that no one knows how much of these soy phyto-toxins they are swallowing or placing in the mouths of their children.
Dog and cat food manufacturers are proud to label their healthiest pet foods with “Does Not Contain Soy,” while at the same time the American marketplace increasingly promotes soy products during pregnancy, to infants and to children, while sorely misleading the public with claims that these products are “nutritional.”
OTHER INGREDIENTS

Soy infant formulas also contain an outrageous amount of corn syrup and sugar, also known to be developmentally debilitating. High levels of corn syrup and sugar lead to pancreatic damage, which interrupts insulin production, leading to infant and childhood diabetes type 1 and type 2. High levels of sweeteners also damage the thyroid and thymus glands.
ADVERSE EFFECTS

Medwatch Adverse Health reporting system exposes numerous severe and potentially fatal diseases reported by parents who had fed their infants soy formula and are now confronted with the resulting severe and irreversible adverse health problems.
My neighbor Carol’s daughter is autistic, Vicki’s adult daughter is infertile, Kath’s adult son is infertile, Stephanie’s infant son has type 1 diabetes, Jean’s teenage son has extreme allergies, Janet’s son has immune disorders, Pam’s son has severe asthma. All of these children have one thing in common: they were all fed soy-based formula as infants. Two of the moms had also consumed soy-based diets during pregnancy.
RECOMMENDATIONS

In conclusion, trusting American parents deserve the right to know that soy is loaded with harmful phyto-toxins which scientific studies have shown to be highly capable of reversing the health of their children into a diseased and handicapped state.
In accordance with the Food Safety and Modernization Act of 2009, I request that the Expert Panel enforce warning labels on soy products during pregnancy; withdraw soy-based formulas from the marketplace, or at the least enforce soy formulation prescriptions with mandatory physician follow-up as required in some European nations; stop the soy-added contamination of milk formulas and the daily increase of marketed soy-containing food products that target infants and children; and enforce a careful and precise physician reporting system of infants currently exposed to soy formulas, as well as the children and adults who have been exposed to soy formulas and are now experiencing severe and potentially life-threatening physiological, reproductive, and neurological adverse health effects.
Thank you for your time and dedication to ensure the best health of the fetus, infants, and all children.
SIDEBAR
TESTIMONY ON SOY INFANT FORMULA
On December 16, 2009, the National Toxicology Program (NTP) Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction (CERHR) panel on soy infant formula (a division of the National Institutes of Health) heard public testimony on soy infant formula. Only two individuals presented information on the dangers of soy formula, Gail Elbek, a private citizen who had traveled all the way from Santa Barbara to give testimony (summarized above), and Sally Fallon Morell from the Weston A. Price Foundation. The other speakers were all from the industry or were taking part in government-funded research, including Thomas Badger, PhD, and Martin Ronis, PhD, of the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Haley Stevens, PhD, of the International Formula Council, David Bechtel, PhD, CANTOX U.S., Inc. (a consulting firm dedicated to “facilitating timely regulatory approvals”), and Larry Williams, MD, Abbott Nutrition (maker of soy infant formula). Without blushing, these “experts” assured the committee that soy infant formula was safe and did not have estrogenic effects. Stevens of the International Formula Council insisted that there was “no new evidence” that would warrant a re-evaluation of soy formula and complained about “alarmist” literature that was scaring parents away from this “safe and healthy choice.”
The good news is that many parents have been scared away. Over the last ten years, the proportion of formula-fed babies has declined from 22.5 percent to 12 percent. As Fallon Morell pointed out in her testimony, the tragic consequences of soy infant formula are falling most heavily on minority mothers participating in programs like Women, Infants and Children (WIC), where soy formula is routinely given to black, Hispanic, Asian and Native American mothers presumed to be “lactose intolerant.”
The final vote of the committee was one vote for “no concern,” twelve votes for “minimal concern” and one vote for “some concern.” Requests for warning labels on soy infant formula were completely ignored. The Weston A. Price Foundation has issued a press release on the hearing, posted at http://www.westonapr...y-Pressure.html.

Tofu was first used in monasteries in China about 2,000 years ago, in part to promote sexual abstinence, since the phytoestrogens in soy can lower testosterone levels (so maybe there really is something to the saying that "real men don't eat tofu").


Soy product consumption has been linked to a long list of diseases and hormone dysfunctions in children including thyroid disease, mineral malabsorption, diabetes, and abnormal sexual development.


Seeking healthful foods, Americans are eating more soy than ever. But recent research with animals shows that consuming large amounts could have harmful effects on female fertility and reproductive development.


According to reporter Lindsey Konkel from "Scientific American," "There's strong evidence from animal studies that the isoflavone genistein alters reproduction and embryonic development."
Read more: http://www.livestron.../#ixzz2RnsfU3q6






. Conclusions

Phytoestrogens are intriguing because, although they behave similarly to numerous synthetic compounds in laboratory models of endocrine disruption, society embraces these compounds at the same time it rejects, often with vigor, use of synthetic endocrine disruptors in household products. Thus, phytoestrogens both expand our view of environmental endocrine disruptors and propound that the source of the compound in question can influence the direction and interpretation of research and available data. While the potentially beneficial effects of phytoestrogen consumption have been eagerly pursued, and frequently overstated, the potentially adverse effects of these compounds are likely underappreciated. The opposite situation exists for synthetic endocrine disruptors, most of which have lower binding affinities for classical ERs than any of the phytoestrogens but can sometime produce similar biological effects. Animal data reveal that the isoflavones have a wide range of molecular, cellular and behavioral effects at doses and plasma concentrations attainable in humans. In vivoisoflavone responses have been reported for a wider range of tissues and processes than the endpoints generally used to evaluate most synthetic EDCs [293], yet only minimal concern has been raised about their increasing use. Infants fed soy formula have the highest exposure to any nonpharmacological source of estrogen-like compounds, yet we know virtually nothing about how the use of these phytoestrogen-rich formulas might impact their future reproductive health.



Google and read the truth about your beloved soy....
http://www.google.co...iw=1366&bih=643
  • like x 1
  • Enjoying the show x 1

#51 aribadabar

  • Guest
  • 824 posts
  • 258
  • Location:Canada
  • NO

Posted 26 September 2014 - 11:00 PM

 

I believe that the biggest determinant in most health conditions is genetics and science is demonstrating this more and more. Genetics based medicine is the future.

My n=1 .........

I'm 56 and in extraordinary health...better than most half my age....but I am blessed with some good genes (most of my deceased relatives lived into their upper 80's to upper 90's and both parents are alive and kicking at 87)...and I take care of myself by exercising and staying fit, eating healthy (my version), and maintaining a lean and healthy weight.

That said, my diet revolves around dairy. I eat over 2 pounds (one and half 24oz tubs) of cottage cheese and most of a 32oz tub of yogurt every day....and have most of my life. I also drink a whey shake after exercise almost every day and have for the last 20 years. I also eat a couple eggs every day. I grew up this way having been raised on a generational family ranch. We raised beef cattle but always had a couple milk cows for personal dairy consumption and I grew up literally drinking gallons of milk (although my favorite was homemade ice cream!).

And I firmly believe dairy consumption contributes to my good health. I have always been very active doing a variety of activities but I have continued to be involved in weight lifting and biking all my life and milk proteins have certainly helped me maintain this level of strenuous activity.

At 56, I find that a large percentage of kids simply can't keep up these days....but it's not because of their drinking milk! And I seldom go to the doctor because I simply never get sick but they now do health screenings at work as part of the health insurance program and all my health markers come back as "ideal" and are better than almost all the people that I have seen half my age. All in spite of liberal daily dairy consumption.

Living in Colorado, summer and the hiking season is upon us and I have taken an interest in recent years of climbing 14,000 foot mountains (there are 53 in Colorado) and most kids simply don't have the strength and stamina to do this. Milk proteins are what allows me to train, recuperate, and continue to do this in spite of my age.

None of us can foresee the future but the fact that most of my relatives (in my opinion) didn't live a particularly healthy lifestyle (although they all worked very hard at what they did and often worked into their 80's) and still lived into their 90's, I wouldn't be surprised if I lived to a 100 in spite of eating 3 or 4 pounds of dairy products every day of my life.

Of course, I could get run over by a beer truck tomorrow........

 

Fascinating account. Are you aware of any contraindications to similar diet for certain genotypes or it is good for all non-allergic-to-dairy persons?



#52 Hebbeh

  • Guest
  • 1,599 posts
  • 668

Posted 26 September 2014 - 11:35 PM

Fascinating account. Are you aware of any contraindications to similar diet for certain genotypes or it is good for all non-allergic-to-dairy persons?

 

 

 

No, although I have sequenced my genome through 23andme, and know I'm ApoE 3 for instance, and am aware of more and more research pointing to the role individual genetics plays in each of our individual reactions and end point results to our individual lifestyle (including nutrition or lack of), I've never researched any known genes that may be involved in reaction to dairy consumption.  But for me, I have always enjoyed dairy and continue to thrive on it....finding it a convenient, tasty, and healthy super food to support an active lifestyle.  And I make that comment based on both my 57 years of experience and observing the fact that nature developed this super food to nurture and support the critical early development of all mammals.  A simple search will turn up studies showing the superior health outcome (in a variety of health markers including immunological and cognitive) of human babies raised on breast milk versus the common soy based formulas.  And although cow's milk and human breast milk are not identical, the comparison stands.  And although I consume cow dairy like most, due to availability, I prefer goat dairy for nutritional purposes and do have some sources...it's just not as convenient unfortunately.


  • like x 1

#53 Captain Obvious

  • Guest
  • 82 posts
  • 28
  • Location:Finland
  • NO

Posted 08 February 2015 - 06:49 PM

This was such an enlightening and informative thread! :)


  • Agree x 1

#54 Young Paul

  • Guest
  • 56 posts
  • 13
  • Location:spain
  • NO

Posted 05 September 2018 - 07:24 PM


1) Laron-syndrome dwarfism. Defect in HGH receptor means they are "immune" to growth signals and so do not develop cancer.
2) Midgets. Often survive into extreme old-age.

 

so obviously if we avoid milk we drastically reduce our height (dwarfs and midgets) your theory makes sense because the lack of calcium would abort bone growth, also the lack of IGF-1 and hgh.
If I lost 3" in height I would lose my job, so I'll drink at least one glass/day.


  • Pointless, Timewasting x 1
  • Ill informed x 1

#55 Jesus is King

  • Guest
  • 866 posts
  • -6
  • Location:UK

Posted 20 March 2019 - 12:03 PM

I found out I was lactose intolerant around 10 years ago. Thankfully Lactose-Free milk is now readily available in all the supermarkets here in the UK. I'm not talking about dairy alternatives like soy or almond, I'm talking about cows milk with the lactase enzyme added to remove all the lactose.

 

Now being lactose intolerant wasn't the biggest problem back then when I found out, as I believed all that anti-milk propaganda in my younger years, so I had been avoiding milk as a health goal in general anyway.

 

However since Lactose Free milk has been available. And since I've now had plenty of experiences drinking it with no problem. I actually find milk one of the best foods you can have. Honestly, while I am prone to indigestion with meals, I don't get any digestive or other health issues with lactose-free milk.

 

It definitely acts like a light nutritious meal for me.

 

 


  • Enjoying the show x 1

#56 WiseN666

  • Guest
  • 12 posts
  • -2
  • Location:Earth
  • NO

Posted 09 April 2019 - 04:00 PM

Whenever i eat any milk products i always get a very bad ACNE outbreak. Specially on cheek, forehead, scalp that i even scratch it until it bleeds. I heard it's not so much the milk itself, but the hormones that are put on the cow. Moreover, i think Casein in Milk causes Cancer, no? 

 

Milk was just made to nourish babies, i don't think any adult should drink it, except maybe all those derivates, Soy/Almond/Rice, etc...


  • Ill informed x 2

#57 misterE

  • Guest
  • 1,034 posts
  • -81
  • Location:Texas
  • NO

Posted 12 April 2019 - 08:08 AM

I've kinda changed my view on dairy lately...



#58 Filler

  • Guest
  • 8 posts
  • 1
  • Location:Neverland
  • NO

Posted 12 April 2019 - 09:34 AM

^ go on...
  • Agree x 1

#59 kurdishfella

  • Guest
  • 1,644 posts
  • -51
  • Location:USA
  • NO

Posted 26 October 2020 - 10:48 PM

Can anyone answer me why milk makes me feel better? It's the only food/drink I've found that does when I drink a lot if it. It lasts a few hours though only. But I feel a painkilling feeling all over my body. For me milk is good.


Edited by kurdishfella, 26 October 2020 - 10:48 PM.






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: milk

2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users