Myths And Facts About Milk

Milk advertisements have so long proclaimed that milk is a healthy food, that

it is a “complete food”, that it provides an excellent source of calcium, and

that one should drink it for preventing osteoporosis that most people believe

all of this to be true. On one side, we have been exposed to endless TV

commercials with healthy-looking people displaying parts of their faces

smothered with milk, and parents have come to believe the dairy industry

marketing claims to such as extent that most children are forced to drink

milk or have it on their morning cereals. Bodybuilders and many athletes

have been convinced that various milk derivatives such as whey serve as an

unrivalled source of highly concentrated protein.

On the other side, from the anti-milk lobby, we have heard that milk

consumption is associated with a great increase in the incidence of allergy,

stomach disorders, heart disease, cancer and various other diseases.

Who is correct? Can we really accept the biased proof of the healthful

aspects of milk from the huge dairy industry with its vested interests

everywhere? Equally well, can we trust that the anti-milk activists have not

grossly exaggerated the dangers of milk? Haven’t many of us, especially in

the strength and sporting world consumed huge quantities of milk since our

earliest years, without any obvious ill-effects? Isn’t the greater incidence

of heart disease and allergy among those who drink milk not due to other

possible factors?

As a dedicated and passionate milk product lover, I was convinced for much of

my life that the anti-milk lobbyists were way off track and were probably a

bunch of skinny runts who never drank large quantities of milk to help in

their quest for size and strength. However, more recently I began to

discover that both factions may be correct. Yes, milk may be both good and

bad for you, whether you are “lactose intolerant” or not!

My first clues came when I noticed how differently I responded to drinking

raw milk and pasteurised milk back in S Africa, then later when I drank milk

in the USA. I always found that certified raw milk tasted better, was very

easily digested even in large volume, and never putrefied when left

unrefrigerated, but simply became pleasantly sour, like a good yoghurt. I

simply could not understand why I consistently could not tolerate milk in

amounts greater than a cupful in the USA, until I noticed that the milk that

I drank in S Africa separated into a thick creamy layer at the top, unlike

the far less palatable milk in the USA. Then I noticed that all the milk

that I bought in the USA was “homogenized” and also found out that the

pasteurization process here may not be carried out under the same heating

conditions as my sources in S Africa.

I also noted that the milk here does not and cannot go sour, but putrefies

and becomes impossible to drink after a few days out of the refrigerator,

suggesting that it contains none of the natural bacteria which allow it to

become sour and palatable.

My feint suspicions grew far stronger that milk of itself may not be the

problem. Instead the way in which it is prepared may be the real problem, as

is the case with all other foods. That would explain quite simply why and

others have responded so differently to raw milk, pasteurised milk and

*pasteurised and homogenized* milk – clearly the processing involved must be

playing a central role in the whole affair. That should be not at all

surprising, since we all know that other foods can be overcooked, dried out

when reheating after storage in the refrigerator, become tough by poor

preparation or marinating, taste very different when microwaved compared with

roasted, and so forth. Often the digestibility can also be profoundly

affected by the manner of preparation. Why should milk be any different?

Before I go any further, here are some technical details about pasteurisation

and homogenization:

Now, the major rationale behind pasteurisation is that it eliminates the risk

of contracting TB (tuberculosis), but the statistics have never shown that

pasteurised milk is any safer than certified raw milk. On the contrary,

studies have shown that pasteurised milk often contains a percentage of pus

from the cow’s udders (at least it is pasteurised!).

If one wishes to use certified raw milk in many States in the USA, you just

do not have that freedom of choice, because it is often legislated against on

the grounds of health risk. I cannot begin to understand or accept this

reasoning at all, because if the milk is certified, then it is TESTED for any

harmful bacteria. On the other hand, every single batch of pasteurised milk

is not tested, but merely ASSUMED to be bacteria-free after its heat

treatment. In the light of this, legislation against the sale of certified,

tested raw milk is illogical and suspect.

To help you understand more about the pros and cons of milk consumption, here

is a random collection of resources presenting myths and facts about milk in

its various forms:

———–

Review of book Cohen “Milk the Deadly Poison”

Enter Robert Cohen, with rich experience in biological research and a risk

taker-one of his pursuits is mountain climbing. …….. Cohen divulged his

suspicions that the FDA’s approval of the bovine growth hormone represented

not only collusion between Monsanto and the FDA, but a cover-up of epic

proportions by the scientific establishment. His three-year fact-finding

journey proved him chillingly right.

Reading this book, you will learn that milk contributes to heart disease and

increases your risk of breast cancer. You will learn that milk is a poor

source of calcium and why, and that milk is a prime cause of allergies and

much more. You will learn that milk can even kill your infant.

Cohen doesn’t expect you to accept these shocking findings on faith. He

takes you by the hand as he uncovers layers of scientific fraud perpetuated

by the FDA, with assistance from JAMA, Science News, and even the Cadillac of

scientific publications, Science. In digging for scientific facts, Cohen

found that the web of deception concerning the bovine growth hormone involved

not only key players- FDA and Monsanto -but reached members of Congress as

well as a respected medical authority turned Monsanto lobbyist. At times

this book reads like a detective story…….

——–

The Effect of Processed Milk on Calves

I am a retired Veterinarian; I doctored horses and cattle for 25 years and

then I did only the Small Animals. The article I read in Discover Magazine

on milk brought back many memories. When the farmers kept a milk cow on the

farm to feed the weaner calves, there were few digestive problems. But when

no dairy cows were available they went to the local store and got “Store

Bought” milk for the calves to drink. Soon the calves died with diarrhea. I

thought milk was milk but I soon found out that the Pasteurized and

Homogenized milk could not be digested by these calves. Homogenization broke

the fat globule into such a small bit that it wouldn’t curd in the stomach

and passed directly into the small intestine where it created severe

inflammation. I called it toxic enteritis. I learned to treat these cases

with Goats milk which has the largest fat globule of any milk found on the

farm. The calves made a quick recovery if the patient hadn’t gotten too

debilitated.

I too drank a lot of milk when we milked cows on the farm. I never had any

adverse effects from drinking a quart or more at one time. When I went on to

college and I was using “store bought milk” I got so I drank very little milk

and what I did drink reacted in my system like a poison. I was told I was

allergic to milk. Now 50 years later, a friend, who has a milk cow out in

the country, asked me if I could use some milk. I accepted and for three

years now I can drink milk like I did when I lived on the farm. I have no

adverse side effects. This milk is raw milk, also not Homogenized. The only

other question I have to answer has to do with the effect pasteurization has

on the natural enzymes. The destruction of these during the pasteurization

process could effect the digestibility of milk.

—–

Myths and Deceptions about Raw Milk:

Research and Other Articles on Raw Milk:

The Crime against Raw Milk

The Dangers of Processed Milk:

Milk – The Perfect Food?

———

MILK DECREASES HEART ATTACKS?

should create some interesting controversy among medical circles during the next several months. Peter Elwood, director of the Epidemiology Unit at Landough Hospital in Penarth, South Glamorgan, dropped a bombshell. His ongoing life-style study of 5000 men produced some startling and very unpopular findings. He discovered that men who drank the most full-fat milk and ate butter (rather than margarine) had a lower risk of suffering from heart attacks! (New Scientist 1991; 129(1759):17) …….. In 1929, Dr. J.E. Crewe with the Mayo Foundation reported “uniformly excellent” success using raw milk in treatment programs for high blood pressure, heart failure, diabetes, kidney disease, prostate problems and tuberculosis. He later stated that the only problem with using raw milk to treat these ailments was that it was too simple. As such, it didn’t appeal to the medical profession. Only raw milk seemed to be of benefit. Pasteurized forms seemed to make most conditions worse…> —— Top Ten Reasons why Milk is not the Perfect food: 1. It’s a great source of unwanted antibiotics. 2. Ditto for recombinant bovine growth hormone. 3. Eighty percent or more of the world’s people are lactose-sensitive or -intolerant. 4. The homogenization process (which allows the fat to stay in suspension, so that the cream, for example, doesn’t rise to the top) makes the fat and the cholesterol more subject to oxidation (and therefore free-radical generation). 5. The nations that consume the most milk also, incidentally, have the highest rates of oesteoporosis. 6. The top 10 reasons why you should drink it have been brought to you by the dairy industry, not by independent assessors. 7. It is very high in phosphorus, which is a calcium antagonist, so the calcium in it is not particularly well absorbed. 8. The calcium-magnesium ratio is not particularly good. 9. It is one of the top allergens, probably the number one allergen for children, and it is filled with (milk) sugar. 10. Calcium is not as well absorbed in the absence of some fat; hence skim milk is an even worse choice….. ——— FDA Cover-up about certain aspects of Milk Industry ——– This and many other sources have convinced me that the effects of milk on the body are very significantly altered by pasteurisation and homogenization, and that the understanding of and consumption of milk simply on the basis of its macronutrient and micronutrient analysis can be seriously misleading. It is high time that the public were educated about the difference between safe certified raw milk and the highly processed product that they buy from the average supermarket. It would appear that many of the adverse side-effects of milk consumption, even with a full fat content, have far more to do with the aggressive processing of the product than any inherent ‘unhealthiness’.

should create some interesting controversy among medical circles during the

next several months. Peter Elwood, director of the Epidemiology Unit at

Landough Hospital in Penarth, South Glamorgan, dropped a bombshell. His

ongoing life-style study of 5000 men produced some startling and very

unpopular findings. He discovered that men who drank the most full-fat milk

and ate butter (rather than margarine) had a lower risk of suffering from

heart attacks! (New Scientist 1991; 129(1759):17) ……..

In 1929, Dr. J.E. Crewe with the Mayo Foundation reported “uniformly

excellent” success using raw milk in treatment programs for high blood

pressure, heart failure, diabetes, kidney disease, prostate problems and

tuberculosis. He later stated that the only problem with using raw milk to

treat these ailments was that it was too simple. As such, it didn’t appeal to

the medical profession. Only raw milk seemed to be of benefit. Pasteurized

forms seemed to make most conditions worse…>

——

Top Ten Reasons why Milk is not the Perfect food:

1. It’s a great source of unwanted antibiotics.

2. Ditto for recombinant bovine growth hormone.

3. Eighty percent or more of the world’s people are lactose-sensitive or

-intolerant.

4. The homogenization process (which allows the fat to stay in suspension, so

that the cream, for example, doesn’t rise to the top) makes the fat and the

cholesterol more subject to oxidation (and therefore free-radical

generation).

5. The nations that consume the most milk also, incidentally, have the

highest rates of oesteoporosis.

6. The top 10 reasons why you should drink it have been brought to you by the

dairy industry, not by independent assessors.

7. It is very high in phosphorus, which is a calcium antagonist, so the

calcium in it is not particularly well absorbed.

8. The calcium-magnesium ratio is not particularly good.

9. It is one of the top allergens, probably the number one allergen for

children, and it is filled with (milk) sugar.

10. Calcium is not as well absorbed in the absence of some fat; hence skim

milk is an even worse choice…..

———

FDA Cover-up about certain aspects of Milk Industry

——–

This and many other sources have convinced me that the effects of milk on the

body are very significantly altered by pasteurisation and homogenization, and

that the understanding of and consumption of milk simply on the basis of its

macronutrient and micronutrient analysis can be seriously misleading. It is

high time that the public were educated about the difference between safe

certified raw milk and the highly processed product that they buy from the

average supermarket. It would appear that many of the adverse side-effects

of milk consumption, even with a full fat content, have far more to do with

Similar Posts:

• Raw Milk Health Benefits and Facts
• The Benefits of Raw Milk
• Read First Before You Switch Into A Vegan Lifestyle
• 8 Must-Have Ingredients for Your Homemade Cat Food Recipe
• How To Switch Into A Vegan Lifestyle