|
2004/05/16, 11:33 PM
I read an advertisement in a magazine saying if you drink 24oz of milk a day it will help you lose weight. I wonder if this is true. I need to lose 10 pds. I drink nonfat milk always.
|
|
|
|
2004/05/17, 07:29 AM
While milk (skim) is good for you, the calcium in milk is usually the cause for the increased fat burning. For me, I only drink skim milk in the winter because milk gives me a somewhat bloated look. But, give it a try and see what happens.
|
|
2004/05/17, 11:07 AM
There are many things about milk that people do not know and milk actually isn't as good for you as many people think.
Your specific question was will milk help you lose weight. When the FDA passed the law that said all foods and beverages must list their nutrition breakdown in labels on the outside of packages, they gave the diary industry an exemption on how they list their fat content. The diary industry was allowed to list their fat content based on the fats weight in water versus what is actually in the carton. Well, fat weighs next to nothing in water, so what does that mean?
It means that 2% milk isn't actually 2% at all. If calculated like every other product has to, would be closer to 32% fat. Whole milk is scarier, and can go up to around 60%!? 60% of what you are drinking is pure fat.
Even skim or fat free milk is not actually fat free and can range anywhere from 5-15% fat.
If you would like more info on milk or this topic, check out the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, it is full of info. I believe it is www.pcrm.com
|
|
2004/05/17, 02:39 PM
Cygan,
Let's assume that what you have read is true and that indeed the amount of fat in the milk is not correct. Here is what I do know. There are four calories per gram of carb or protien and nine per gram of fat. This morning I drank 20 oz. of skim milk totaling (what the carton said) 30 grams carb, 21 grams protien, and a total of 1 gram fat. When calculated out this comes to be 213 Kcal, one off of what the carton says. Now you did not say that the company was allowed to give wrong carb or protein information and thus for your claim about fat to be true, then the entire label would have to be falsified.
The page address to PCRM is actualy www.PCRM.org. Although I could not find the particular article that you are referring to, it would appear to me that this organization is based to promote veganism. This may be good for some, but not for all.
Furthermore, I was able to find this article by the National Comittee Against Health Fraud that looks at some of PCRM's claims more indepth. Here is the opening paragraph and the web address.
The Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) is a nonprofit association that claims to promote "optimal diet for prevention of disease," says there is evidence that humans don't have a specific requirement for protein, and teaches that "too much dietary protein from animal sources is detrimental to health." PCRM's reference to "animal sources" is key to understanding its true purpose. Its leader, Neal Barnard, MD, has been identified as medical adviser to the radical animal rights organization People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA), and PCRM may be substantially funded by it. Animal activists are highly successful fundraisers. The combined budgets for 15 of the leading animal protection organizations exceeded $115 million in 1994 (PETA took in $12 million) . In NCAHF's view, PCRM is a propaganda machine whose press conferences are charades for disguising its ideology as news events.
http://www.ncahf.org/articles/o-r/pcrm.html
Let it be known that I am not saying that either of these non-profit organizations is better or right, but there is more information out there.
My main point is that the calories don't add up for the claims of milk fat to be true.
Daniel Love
|
|
2004/05/17, 03:29 PM
That is a good point. I am going to stand down on this as I don't like to bring up the milk/anti-milk arguments. It is really a topic that gets people excited. I in no way claim to be an expert on the topic, and I should have mentioned that in my first post. I should have been more descriptive and I'm glad you pointed that out.
However, there are many studies saying that it is bad for you. The fat content is very minor in comparisson with these other claims.
Opinions are very mixed on this topic. If you would like more info on research of negative effects of milk on the body, check a couple of these sites (just pulled up a few in google):
http://www.notmilk.com/
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=12002
http://www.jamesthecarman.com/milk.htm
http://www.worldveganday.org/html/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=417
I would never try to steer a fellow FTer the wrong way,
so I invite you to do the research for yourself and come up with your own conclusion.
|
|
2004/05/17, 03:38 PM
I can offer this I have been drinking about a gallon or so of milk per week for almost 33 years. I have no ill health, I have stronger bones than 99% of the people I know. I have no bad health problems that can be realted to dietary fat.....so is milk bad for you may be if you are lactose intolerant.
--------------
LIFT HEAVY! BECOME STRONG, LIKE BULL!
7707mutt@freetrainers.com
|
|
2004/05/17, 06:41 PM
I cut milk out of my diet during training for a show because lactose can store fat in VERY minimal amounts. To someone on a normal diet, this wouldn't matter because it would go unnoticed, but when my BF% is down low and I need to keep fat off for a show, I cut the milk out. Also, to the above post from DanielJLove...when PETA is involved in any type of research concerning animals and nutrition, they will say, 99.9% of the time, any type of animal consumption is detrimental to one's health. I respect PETA and what they stand for, but their research is not reliable because it is skewed by bias.
--------------
My diet sucks and so do my Mets
Jdelts@freetrainers.com
|
|
2004/05/17, 08:23 PM
All i have to say is wahtever.....every mammal gives milk to their young including humans.......and mamals seem to be the dominate specieises on the planet......they live in ALL hemispheres.........its worked for 1000s of years.....so somthing must be good about it huh?
--------------
.......adversity causes some to break, but others to break records!
......minds are not vessles to be filled, but fires to be enlightened
......Confucious once said ,DO NOT play leap frog with a unicorn
|
|
2004/05/17, 08:25 PM
check out www.2424milk.com
--------------
I am that
which must be feared, worshipped and adored. The world is mine
now and forever.No one holds command over me. No man. No god. I am ANIMAL! and that is enough.
|
|
2004/05/17, 09:57 PM
They sum it up right there. . the usual statement, in combination with healthy diet and exercise.. then, that lowfat/nonfat milk provides calcium and protein as part of that healthy diet.
There's nothing magical about the milk that increases your likelihood of weight loss.. it's just a way to get what you need.
Nothing we at ft don't already know.. you need protein and calcium.. milk is a source.
============
Quoting from mmaibohm:
check out www.2424milk.com
=============
--------------
: ] ~Danielle
The deepest rivers flow with the least sound.
|
|
2004/05/18, 01:23 AM
JDelts,
Your preaching to the chior. I was trying to point out that they might be involved. When looking at research you always have to look at who is funding it.
Daniel
|
|
2004/05/18, 05:32 AM
I read in a magazine recently about a study where 3 groups of women were compared to see who lost the most weight
group1 ate normal diet
group 2 ate normal diet + calcium supplement
group 3 ate 3 servings dairy (Ithink it was yoghurt) a day
all three groups ate the same number of calories
group 3 lost more weight than the other two.
HOWEVER
I have searched to find this research paper and I cannot find it. It may be my search is inaccurate or it may be that the research methods are too dodgy for it to have been published.
And, I don't know if it was funded by the milk marketing board!
so I'm keeping my dairy intake up to protect my bones at the moment and reserving judgement on the weight loss thing until I get more info.
|
|
2004/06/01, 11:17 PM
The PCRM is an extremely radical rights organization which is vitually an extension of PETA and has absolutely no credibility within the mainstream medical community. Both PCRM & PETA are opposed all forms of medical research using animals. PETA has also provided extensive funding to the Animal Liberation Front (ALF). The ALF is listed by the FBI as a terrorist orginization due to numerous firebombings of research laboratories.
|
|
2004/06/02, 12:00 AM
that was supposed to say 'extremely radical animal rights organization...'
Lots of quality info about what PETA is really about on the Americans for Medical Progress website;
www.ampef.org
|
