Should Humans Drink Milk?

Vicomte · January 31, 2012, 4:06am

[quote]MODOK wrote:

Firstly, if you are truly “in training to be a scientist”, I do pray that its a long course of study. You have a long way to go in areas like spelling words correctly that you should have had nailed down before you matriculated into an undergraduate program.

[/quote]

Now you done it, Modok.

This man has a DISABILITY.

For shame.

Vicomte · January 31, 2012, 4:07am

But, while we’re on the topic, I would like to poke fun at a dyslexic calling people out on their reading comprehension skills.

That was funny.

BulletproofTiger · January 31, 2012, 5:33am

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]TORO wrote:
Because it is raw and has not been treated by large scale distributors or genetically altered by GMO’s; will it perish sooner than pasturized milk?[/quote]

Raw milk will sour, then clabber before it outright spoils. Pasteurized milk actually becomes undrinkable sooner. The natural lactobacilli keeps the raw milk from being over-run by the invasive bacteria through competitive inhibition for a long period, in the process producing lactic acid as a metabolic by-product, leading to the souring. This actually makes the milk more nutritious, as the lower pH makes nutrient absorption a little more efficient once it is consumed.[/quote]
^Good info

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 12:03pm

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Though, in one of the books I own on nutrition, the author tries to make the case that raw milk gets unfairly singled out.

Setting aside safety, raw milk destroys pasteurized milk’s in terms of health/nutrition.[/quote]

Your post have been interesting thanks for getting this back on track but why do u believe that raw milk is better? The nutritional profile only slightly altered and the enzyme and probiotic argument seems to have little scientific backing.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 12:04pm

[quote]Kakarat wrote:
Raw milk is out of the question, but if I’m going to drink a lot of milk.

In terms of whats better for you

Organic > Whole > 2%

Correct?

[/quote]

I will be touching on organic food soon so I only ask that you do not make up your mind on until you have read what I have to say.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 1:02pm

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]roybot wrote:

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:
Actually I have drunk it and probably a lot fresher then any of you have. Ã??Ã?Â Although that proves nothing. [/quote]

I doubt that since I had access to it for most of my childhood.[/quote]

That is why I used the word probably, it leaves it open to possibility. Now have you drunk that hydrogen cyanide yet. Or do you wish to construct a counter argument before I move onto organic food. [/quote]

It doesn’t leave it open to possibility when I already posted that I grew up on a dairy farm.

LOL @ comparing hydrogen cyanide to raw milk. [/quote]

It was a simple analogy you don’t need to drink HCN to know that is bad for you.[/quote]

It was a blatant attempt to strawman my post. Raw milk is not like hydrogen cyanide.[/quote]

In my analogy it fits relatively well, scientific evidence suggest both raw milk and HCN are dangerous, you do not need to drink them to find that out. Is that what everyone here has been trying to do to my posts? Discredit them with little explanation of any kind, except one post but I don’t remember who posted it.[/quote]

I’ve given you an explanation and you keep glossing over it. Raw milk is not remotely comparable to hydrogen cyanide. Saying ‘hydrogen cyanide is dangerous, therefore so is raw milk’ is one of the most ridiculous statements I’ve ever read.Ã??Ã?Â

Do you pop out on a crisp wintery Sunday morn for a newspaper and a bottle of fresh cyanide?

Most of your argument is cobbled together from various inconclusive sources, which all say that the risk of contamination in raw milk depends on hygiene standards. If raw milk was as bad as you claim, people would have stopped drinking it way before pasteurization was introduced (I’ve already explained why pasteurization became common practice), and they certainly wouldn’t be drinking it now.
[/quote]

Ok I’m sorry I have had enough of this stupidity.

Professor X could you possible put forth a request for a remedial T Cell. As this person obviously has no basic comprehension skills.

No raw milk is not like fucking HCN it was a joke you are fucking mornonic if you believe that that statement in question has any part in my argument.

And secondly Ã??Ã?Â there is no contradiction in that article that I posted. It said that the risk of the milk it’s self as it comes out of the cow is low but the risk of that milk becoming contaminated after is high and this is what the main risk involved is, and says that the difference between the two is little so isn’t worth any potential risk.Ã??Ã?Â

People doing something is not a good argument for something being ok. You have the fucking nerve to question my resources but show none of your own, your counter argument is pathetic, invalid and just fucking stupid so come back with a good argument or piss offÃ??Ã?Â you mong (don’t know if you have that word where you are but it describes you perfectly)

Some may be wondering why I would spend my time doing this. A few reasons it makes me read my notes and gives me practice on how to construct argument.

Secondly and more importantly people like your self are making a joke my future profession, making bullshit and sometimes dangerous claims so ether back it up with some evidence or fuck off.

I didn’t want this to degenerate into this sort of petty argument. So if we could get this back on track that would be great. I welcome other peoples views if they can back them up.Ã??Ã?Â

Science continually evolves if new evidence comes to light that says I am wrong I will accept it and change my views. Anyone that doesn’t conduct their beliefs on this system doesn’t believe in logic. You must stay open to change but do not accept it blindly. You should question me but do not dismiss my comments without viewing then unbiasedly.Ã??Ã?Â [/quote]

I regret that I wasn’t able to truly give the attention to this debate that it deserves, as I have been very busy with a work project today. But now that I’m home and off mobile I’d just like to say a couple of things.

Firstly, if you are truly “in training to be a scientist”, I do pray that its a long course of study. You have a long way to go in areas like spelling words correctly that you should have had nailed down before you matriculated into an undergraduate program. But I don’t believe you are in a professional program, or any program at all for that matter. I believe you just discovered Google Scholar because many of the “studies” ou posted have nothing to do with the topic. I think everyone knows by now that you are a grade B troll. But I’d still like to speak a little on the misconceptions of unpasteurized milk.

To the “it will kill you” accusation-

"Although raw milk, like any food, can become contaminated and cause illness, the dangers of raw milk are greatly exaggerated. In an analysis of reports on 70 outbreaks attributed to raw milk, we found many examples of reporting bias, errors and poor analysis resulting in most outbreaks having either no valid positive milk sample or no valid statistical association.

Based on data in a 2003 USDA/FDA report: Compared to raw milk there are 515 times more illnesses from L-mono due to deli meats and 29 times more illness from L-mono due to pasteurized milk. On a PER-SERVING BASIS, deli meats were TEN times more likely than raw milk to cause illness (Intrepretive Summary Ã¢?? Listeria Monocytogenes Risk Assessment, Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, Sept. 2003, page 17).

Due to high-volume distribution and its comparative lack of anti-microbial components, PASTEURIZED milk when contaminated has caused numerous widespread and serious outbreaks of illness, including a 1984-5 outbreak afflicting almost 200,000 people. In 2007, three people died in Massachusetts from illness caused by contaminated pasteurized milk.

Claims that raw milk is unsafe are based on 40-year-old science and century-old experiences from distillery dairy Ã¢??factory farmsÃ¢?? in rapidly urbanizing nineteenth century America. Compared to 30-50 years ago, dairy farmers today can take advantage of many advancements that contribute to a dramatically safer product including pasture grazing, herd testing, effective cleaning systems, refrigeration and easier, significantly less expensive, more accessible and more sophisticated milk and herd disease testing techniques."

I encourage you to read this response letter, which has many compelling facts about this issue.
http://www.realmilk.com/documents/ResponsetoMarlerListofStudies.pdf

The dairy where I purchase the raw milk for me and my friends was formerly a grade A dairy producer. Due to its small size and increased cost of regulation, they were being forced out of business and became raw milk producers. They still perform all the anti-microbial batch testing for all of the pathogens on the same schedule as they did when they were a certified grade A dairy and the results are available for the asking. I do not see how that drinking milk from 25 cows at a country farm who undergo antimicrobial testing is a scourge to society or dangerous in any way. I would not drink raw milk from the filthy shit swamp that commercial milk comes from. To that end, I agree with you that pasteurization is a necessity.

Now for some good things about raw milk:

Raw milk contains numerous components that assist in killing pathogens in the milk (lactoperoxidase, lactoferrin, leukocytes, macrophages, neutrophils, antibodies, medium chain fatty acids, lysozyme, B12 binding protein, bifidus factor, beneficial bacteria);
Preventing pathogen absorption across the intestinal wall (polysaccharides, oligosaccharides, mucins, fibronectin, glycomacropeptides, bifidus factor, beneficial bacteria) strengthening the Immune System (lymphocytes, immunoglobulins, antibodies, hormones and growth factors) (Scientific American, December 1995; British J of Nutrition, 2000:84(Suppl. 1):S3-S10, S75-S80, S81-S89).

Many of these anti-microbial and immune-enhancing components are greatly reduced in effectiveness by pasteurization, and completely destroyed by ultra-pasteurization (Scientific American, December 1995; British J of Nutrition, 2000:84(Suppl. 1):S3-S10, S75-S80, S81-S89).

Three recent studies in Europe found that drinking Ã¢??farmÃ¢?? (raw) milk protected against asthma and allergies (Lancet. 2001 Oct 6;358(9288):1129-33; J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2006 Jun;117(6):1374-8; Clinical & Experimental Allergy. 2007 May; 37(5) 627-630).

The effect of pasteurization on nutrient deggradation isn’t confined to cow milk, as this study suggests. Infants on pasteurized human milk did not gain weight as quickly compared to those fed raw human milk (J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1986 Mar-Apr;5(2):248-53) and premature babies given raw human milk had more rapid weight gain than those given pasteurized human milk. Problems were attributed to pasteurization’s destruction of lipase (J Pediatr Gastroenterol Nutr. 1986 Mar-Apr;5(2):242-7).

There is so much more for those that are interested. Raw milk is a viable, healthy alternative that offers some truly unique health benefits for those who have access to it. It is definitely worth attempting to include in the diet.

[/quote]

Thank you this is what I was looking for apart for the attacks on my person but if we could keep it to this standard I would appreciate it. Thank you for spending the time to reply.

Although if you still feel I am I troll then I will happily post a picture of my university Identity card.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 1:05pm

[quote]BONEZ217 wrote:

[quote]TORO wrote:
Because it is raw and has not been treated by large scale distributors or genetically altered by GMO’s; will it perish sooner than pasturized milk?[/quote]

Yes, for sure. You could ask the person you buy it from what the shelf life will be. [/quote]

Although true it doesn’t have a effect on the argument as if raw milk was better you could just buy it more often.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 1:08pm

[quote]Vicomte wrote:
But, while we’re on the topic, I would like to poke fun at a dyslexic calling people out on their reading comprehension skills.

That was funny.[/quote]

I realised that as I was posting it. Maybe he should get tested…

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 1:11pm

[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]TORO wrote:
Because it is raw and has not been treated by large scale distributors or genetically altered by GMO’s; will it perish sooner than pasturized milk?[/quote]

Raw milk will sour, then clabber before it outright spoils. Pasteurized milk actually becomes undrinkable sooner. The natural lactobacilli keeps the raw milk from being over-run by the invasive bacteria through competitive inhibition for a long period, in the process producing lactic acid as a metabolic by-product, leading to the souring. This actually makes the milk more nutritious, as the lower pH makes nutrient absorption a little more efficient once it is consumed.[/quote]
^Good info[/quote]

It sounds good wether it is or not… I will be back on this one.

NotaQuitta · January 31, 2012, 1:40pm

[quote]MODOK wrote:

Hello straw man, i was wondering when you would arrive. I have never discussed whey protein in this thread, and manufactured proteins and their application to sports nutrition have no bearing on raw milk and it’s nutritional value. If you are angling for hypocracy, it isn’t a viable argument. Milk protein drinks have limited application, primarily in sports nutrition, to produce a narrow goal ( positive nitrogen balance and net positive protein turnover). In pursuit of this goal, you must sacrifice nutrition quality…there is no other viable option for most people. That’s the skinny on whey protein.
[/quote]

Actually, it was never my intention to make a strawman argument, this information is news to me. Apologies if you were offended.

Thank you very much for the explanation.

[quote]MODOK wrote:

You are simply misguided if you think pasteurization makes milk cheap. Well…ignorant to the issue instead of misguided. Research the subject and you will understand. And you are the only person I’ve ever heard make a case the drinking milk straight out of a cows tit is elitist. i think it is probably much more a proletariat activity.
[/quote]

I beg to differ, strongly.

Actually, the wonders of treatment has made milk available to the vast majority of the earth’s population.

Not so much pasteurization, but UHT (Ultra High Temperature) treatment, which allows even unchilled milk to last for up to 30 days.

I live in Asia. It’s hot as hell here (summer temperatures all year round) and most nations barely have enough space for other people let alone cows. Most milk is imported. Unfortunately the majority of people are not so fortunate as to be able to live in the USA or Canada or Australia or NZ.

If UHT didn’t exist, most of the milk would have to be airflown here in huge chiller containers (as raw milk turns sour if the temperature is higher than 2-3 degrees celcius). The costs would be astronomical. The vast majority of us would never have been able to afford milk if not for UHT.

So it IS elitist in a sense.

therajraj · January 31, 2012, 1:47pm

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]therajraj wrote:
Though, in one of the books I own on nutrition, the author tries to make the case that raw milk gets unfairly singled out.

Setting aside safety, raw milk destroys pasteurized milk’s in terms of health/nutrition.[/quote]

Your post have been interesting thanks for getting this back on track but why do u believe that raw milk is better? The nutritional profile only slightly altered and the enzyme and probiotic argument seems to have little scientific backing.[/quote]

There are a couple of nutritionist who I think are consistently spot on when they write on the topic of nutrition as it relates to health. So I generally rely on their opinion when I am unsure about a certain food.

In one of the books I own, the author lists the following benefits:

-contains beneficial bacteria such as lactobacillus acidophilus

-contains beneficial enzymes which he says are a critical component in recovering from disease and establishing and maintaining health.

-Considers it the highest quality source of calcium available

-Most raw milk comes from grass fed cows, and milk from grass fed cows contains higher levels of CLA and omega3’s

The first 3 apply solely to raw milk, while the last one applies to all organic milk.

TITOV_BIG_BOY · January 31, 2012, 2:07pm

JESUS HAROLD CHRYSLER

Getting a bit off topic here girls.

Should we drink another Mammals Infant formula? YES, WE ARE HUMANS, WE’LL DRINK ANYTHING WE GOD DAMN PLEASE

Is Raw Milk Healthy? YES, IN FACT OUR SYSTEMS CAN SUCK NUTRITION OUT OF ALMOST ANYTHING WE CONSUME, INCLUDING TREE BARK

Is Raw Milk better than Pasturized? YES AND NO - THIS QUESTION HAS A THOUSAND VARIABLES, ALTHOUGH RAW MILK HAS A SLIGHT ADVANTAGE IN NUTRIENTS AND GODS PLAN

Will Raw Milk perish faster? - YES TORO, YOU ODD LOOKING SAMURAI, TRY POSTING A PICTURE OF YOURSELF, IT WILL ADD TO THE COMMUNITY HERE

Is Organic food “stupid”? - NO, ORGANIC FOOD IS NOT STUPID, ANYTHIONG THAT AVOIDS GMO’S IN ANY WAY IS A HUGE BENEFIT. GMO’S ARE TERRIYING, AND MAKE GOD ANGRY

NotaQuitta · January 31, 2012, 2:10pm

[quote]therajraj wrote:

-Most raw milk comes from grass fed cows, and milk from grass fed cows contains higher levels of CLA and omega3’s

The first 3 apply solely to raw milk, while the last one applies to all organic milk.[/quote]

That’s only mostly true for North America and Canada…

In Europe and New Zealand and Australia, all large dairy-producing nations, it’s grass- or combination of grass-and-grain even for non-organic.

Also, the vast majority of cattle in Argentina is grass-fed.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 2:36pm

[quote]TomKaminski wrote:

[quote]BulletproofTiger wrote:

[quote]MODOK wrote:

[quote]TORO wrote:
Because it is raw and has not been treated by large scale distributors or genetically altered by GMO’s; will it perish sooner than pasturized milk?[/quote]

Raw milk will sour, then clabber before it outright spoils. Pasteurized milk actually becomes undrinkable sooner. The natural lactobacilli keeps the raw milk from being over-run by the invasive bacteria through competitive inhibition for a long period, in the process producing lactic acid as a metabolic by-product, leading to the souring. This actually makes the milk more nutritious, as the lower pH makes nutrient absorption a little more efficient once it is consumed.[/quote]
^Good info[/quote]

It sounds good wether it is or not… I will be back on this one.[/quote]

This is not good info. This is exactly what I meen by you should question everything you read because this is stupid.

Them statement in question is:

“in the process producing lactic acid as a metabolic by-product, leading to the souring. This actually makes the milk more nutritious, as the lower pH makes nutrient absorption a little more efficient once it is consumed.”

This is a simple question of basic human physiology and very basic chemistry.

Let’s start with chemistry:

pH is a measure of concentration of hydrogen ions in solution.

Lactic acid has a higher pH and is therefore less acidic then HCL

Physiology next:

When you eat something it goes into your stomach. Your stomach has HCL acid in it so any food is acidified once it goes into you stomach. And as stated before lactic acid is much weaker then HCL.

The large majority of your nutrient absorption happens in the small intestine, the enzymes in your intestine the breakdown the food into the constituent parts work best around pH 7. Therefore your body release pancreatic juice that neutralise the pH of the food that now contains HCL from the stomach. This lows the enzymes to work effectively. Therefore no the pH of food doesn’t help the absorption of nutrients in the small intestines or at all. Unless there is another mechanism that the food is being absorbed via .

So I ask that you do not make statements as if they are facts.

TomKaminski · January 31, 2012, 2:39pm