From a diet perspective, definitely.
1 Like
Scientists have recently shown that If a yoga teacher would buy it it’s not anabolic. Use that information how you will but I’ll be sticking with the whole milk
2 Likes
I will likely catch some heat for this, but RAW MILK IS KING! Best of luck finding it, but if you can find a local farmer. Co-op that sells it, its best to reset your gut microbiome and get healthy so long as you can tolerate it.
1 Like
You likely won’t. And depending on the state, it’s not that hard to find.
3 Likes
John Meadows was big into raw milk.
3 Likes
No, it is not, all studies done have shown that raw milk has very little “gut health” promoting probiotics. Fermented milk products on the other hand are cultured with beneficial bacteria.
Imagine Florida and Jersey being on the same page with this. It’s been estimated that Jersey is potentially losing 100 million dollars a year by banning raw milk for human consumption. Good thing the raw milk for pets is essentially the same as what’s fit for humans.
I have never been any specific regarding this. I enjoy all kinds of milk. Though the full fat milk is more nutritious, but I don’t mind having the normal milk as well and also the low fat one.
To clarify: full fat milk is abnormal milk?
3 Likes
I don’t think there is a single item in our entire food chain that fractioning and mass production hasnt completely fucked up.
3 Likes
Lol, right?
But that did make me ponder a bit.
If you think about it, we’re the only mammals that drink milk after being weaned. And even then only about 50% of the worlds population digest it well. So normal milk would be straight from the tit until you’re 8 -12 months old. That being said, im glad my ancestors are northern Europeans and i drink the shit out of whole cows milk.
2 Likes
Yeah, there isn’t. Fresh water fish in pristine lakes, maybe. And some decent cheeses could qualify.
Some birds like to steal titty milk, like seagulls for instance.
Me too. But I find it really interesting how our current biology works out. The Masi are about as far from Northern European as you can get, and they have the lactase persistant genes.
3 Likes
I’m not a shill for “big milk” but you guys know how old pasteurization is right? It’s 1880s technology and the first generation that only knew pasteurized milk was 2 and a half inches taller than the generation before them. A large part of that growth is credited to reduced disease in people, which is why we pasteurize milk. If your body is constantly fighting off infection it doesn’t grow. If you been around farms much you know this is the same reason we pump chickens full of antibiotics, it literally makes them bigger.
Again, no horse in this race, I don’t particularly worry what you guys are doing, I just think it’s an odd position to support on a forum where literally everyone is trying to get bigger
Wasn’t this around the same time that dairy producers were engaged in unscrupulous practices, like selling “swill milk”? I imagine simply ceasing that went a LONG way toward improving the public’s response to milk. It’d be interesting to have been able to compare raw NON-POISON milk and pasteurized milk in that regard.
1 Like
No dude, that was the US in the 1860s? Pasteurization only really got widespread in Europe in the early 1900s which is when people there got really tall, despite the poverty induced by two world wars.
As a general principle there is no limit where growth isn’t improved by reducing exposure to infection. It’s not ethical to pump a human full of doxycycline for 30 years to see what happens but we’ve absolutely done this to every other animal under the sun.
Ah, my bad: I thought you were referring to the US with that statement.
I love the US, but when it comes to seeing what a ton of dairy does to a person we have to look to Northern Europe, which coincidentally has the tallest countries on the planet
This actually gets to an interesting point. My understanding is that raw milk contains the enzyme lactase, which aids in the breaking down of lactose, which can permit those with a lactose intolerance to consume raw milk compared to pasteurized milk, which breaks down the enzyme in the pasteurizing process.
Northern Europeans tend to have the genetic trait that allows them to process lactose, while many other ethnicities lack the trait.
In the instance of the Northern Europeans, I can see the argument that there is no detriment to pasteurizing milk, and now they could consume it in even greater quantities without risk of infection/disease. But in attempting to allow others to enjoy the benefits of dairy in general, this may be an argument for the superiority of raw milk vs pasteurized.
1 Like
If this is true it’s a valid thing to examine when evaluating the tradeoff.
I’d pay good money to help fund that study, if only to watch 100 lactose intolerant people drink a glass of raw milk then run a mile.
Jokes aside though, I’d imagine the lactase tablets would be the safer route? Or are people reporting the raw milk is very easily processed for the lactose intolerant?