|
2005/10/14, 01:56 AM
what's so bad about drinking milk or eating something with caesin in it after a workout? also does the calcium in milk affect anything?
|
|
|
|
2005/10/14, 05:53 PM
casein will slow the absorption if you are taking a whey powder, which you want to get into your system as fast as possible. calcium is very vital to the body.. it strengthens bones, helps improve muscle relaxation, helps with fat metabolism, and helps transport creatine and amino acids, among other things.
|
|
2005/10/14, 07:14 PM
Oh thank God! I've been waiting for someone to ask this question! The funny thing about this is that I was thinking up ideas for articles today at work and this subject is numbre uno on my list....I HATE MILK! Pasteurized that is. Raw milk I personally have no problems recommending, that is if it's even possible to aquire in your particular area. Another point on raw milk, is this: it isn't necessary for survival, let alone health and vitality!
Why?
Let's look at the development of us humans for a second. When we are born, the health of our bodies depends alot upon the mothers milk that we're supposed to take in. In most uncivilized cultures, children breast feed up to the age of 5 and far more often than that of their "civilized" brothers and sisters. This lead researches (as well as the dairy industry) to surmise that we must NEED milk our whole lives because of breastfeeding. Sounds like a sound approach right? Well, before big food manufacturers had anything to do with the processing of raw milk, this theory may have had some validity. But let's look at their own research:
In the college level text book Understanding Nutrition 9th Ed., they state "lactase activity commonly delines with age" and "lactase activity is highest immediately after birth." It also goes on to show that the decline in lactase production happens around....5! Hmmm, didn't that age already come up somewhere?
Wait....let's back up for a second! I'm sure you're asking why are you talking about something called lactase now when you were talking about milk and stuff just a minute ago? This is because the lactase/lactose, milk intolerance issue is at the heart of the long list of problems inherent with pasteurized milk.
Lactase is an enzyme present in raw milk that's primary objective is to break the milk sugar, lactose, down into 1 glucose and 1 galactose molecule. If this important enzyme isn't present when one consumes milk, the milk sugar will not be able to be digested and will sit in the stomach until the body sends it's proper immune system response. This eventually, though a cumulative effect, create a food intolerance that can be seen in many of the populations around the "civilized" world. Sounds like everything is in order as long as the enzymes are present and performing their jobs correctly, right?
Pasteurization: The process of heating milk products to a certain temperature for a predetermined amount of time in order to "sanitize" the food. (paraphasing) Most milk products are heated to around 135 degrees F for around 30 minutes and in some cases up to 455 degrees F for 10 to 15 seconds. Can you imagine having any living organism attempt to survive for any extended period of time in these conditions? Well, since most enzymes are very temperature sensitive, this effectively kills most to all of them, depending on the type of pasteurization used! Not good news for the nutritional value of your milk.
Getting back to the beginning of this post/article, the stuff about development again. Why would our bodies stop producing lactase in the first place if milk was so needed? Not much literature is available on this theory, but one can surmise that mother nature knows a thing or two about what a human needs and doesn't need. Since the mothers' traditionally quit breast feeding at around the age of five, there must have been a damn good reason for it. My guess is that around that age most children began to eat more like their parents and no longer needed milk in order to not only survive, but also thrive. There's alot of history and logic behind this thought, but not alot of "peer-reviewed studies" which is fine with me anyway, since the august 15th Boston Globe reported that, "a new study has found that almost one-third of peer-reviewed research articles have been either contradicited or seriously questioned!" (hmmm, isn't that a study too...does it fall into the one-third:))
Part two of this in a bit.
|
|
2005/10/14, 07:48 PM
Part 2:
Some more of their own research tells us a little more about why you can't take their information as gospel. On the dairy councils' own website, they have a section that practically takes an entire tree to print off, proudly showing off all of the dairy industries nutrtional "facts." BUT, but, but, but if you look on the second page (after the cover page) you'll find a paragraph that is pretty amazing. It's on the bioavailability of their products (the bodies ability to digest a given nutrient). It states:
"With the exception of retinol and carotene, the figures shown DO NOT take nutrient bioavailability (ie the proportion of a nutrient in food that the body can absorb and use) into account."
Wow! So basically what you're saying is that I wasted all of this time and more importantly, PAPER on nutrient amounts that may or may not be present! Ok, I'll still drink your milk and just trust that this info is accurate. Yeah and I've got some ocean front property up here in Montana to buy from ya as well!
This ties into the previous points I'm trying make. If they say that this can "affect the absorption and utilisation" of nutrients, what other nutrients could be affected?
How about calcium, vitamin D, the protein, and the fat to name just a few? Researchers as far back as the turn of the century (not this one!) have known this, yet pasteurization of milk still occurs...WHY? In short, Money! While I won't get into that can-o-worms today, let's just say that because of the "bottom-line," the quality of milk is less than optimal and there are some pretty big consequences that come from this that concern your health.
While you may be saying to yourself, you know what Dave, all you've shown me is that if you drink milk, you could get the *hits! Well, I can go on and on about the degenerative effects of this "food product," as Noah Hittner says.
In part three I will explore these effects.
|
|
2005/10/14, 11:33 PM
Part 3
Does milk really do a body good, or like I eluded to early, does it cause more dysfunction and disease than anyone could have ever thought.
Long-term use of milk has been linked to many serious disorders and diseases along with other more "inconvenient" disorders like acne. Some of the other diseases and issues that have been linked to milk consumption are:
1)The Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine said that, "According to a study, children who drank more than three servings of milk a day were prone to becoming overweight. June 2005;159(6):543-550
2)"Middle-aged men who drink one or two glasses of pasteurized milk a day may double their risk of Parkinson's disease later in life," according to a study published by Neurology. March 22, 2005;64(6):1047-1051 (Personally I'm not one to read much into studies like this, but it's just another nail in the coffin.
3)Researchers believe that Crohn’s disease, a bowel disorder that causes inflammation of the intestine leading to diarrhea, pain, weight loss and fatigue, may be caused by a type of bacteria that is passed to humans through milk according to a study published by the Journal of Clinical Microbiology July 2003l;41(7):2915-23.
4)"Pasteurization was also found to affect the hematogenic and growth-promoting properties of the special milk (raw milk from specially fed cows, whose milk did not produce nutritional anemia--whereas commercially pasteurized milk did) ..."
Krauss, W. E., Erb, J.H. and Washburn, R. G., Studies on the nutritive value of milk II. The effect of pasteurization on some of the nutritive properties of milk," Ohio Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 518, page 11, January, 1933.
What's really amazing about these findings is that these are just a few of the literally hundreds of articles/studies published showing the ill effects of pasteurized milk.
In Part 4, I will jump into the processes and effects of pasteurization, homogenization, rBgh, antibiotics, the heating of the proteins and fats, the pussing effect (this one got my fiance off milk!) among a few other points that are important to understand behind the development of some of these processes.
Until then, your comments are much appreciated and welcomed...argue, debate, yell, scream...whatever, I'm ready! LOL :)
|
|
2005/10/22, 10:05 PM
I think you are totaly wrong. I have been drinking milk for years and have no side effects. Skim milk is a great way to gain some calories and protein as well as build good strong bones. As for the RAW milk thing go for it. Just because otehrs do so and are not dead from it is not enough for me to drink it.
--------------
Less Talk, More Chalk!
7707mutt@freetrainers.com
|
|
2005/10/22, 10:44 PM
Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! I spent so much time working on these posts!
Alright here we go!
As for you personally (and your family if I remember right from our last debate on this subject), whether processed milk has harmed you or not really is not sufficient enough to advocate it (just as how you state your point on raw milk). When milk is pasteurized and homogenized it's macro nutrients, vitamins and minerals are either destroyed or alterred in a way that is ultimately unhealthy. The proteins are alterred, the fats become rancid, the calcium is nearly impossible to absorb, ect.
Other factors are rBgh (recumbant bovine growth hormone), antibiotics, the feed that is shoved into their mouths and the pus factor.
rBgh is used by commercial dairy farmers to lengthen the milking times of their cattle. When the cattle become sick from this and the feed that is incorrectly made and fed to them, they begin to pus and become sick. So instead of taking them off of this "death diet," they inject them with tons of antiobiotics that make them so sick that they barely make it to slaughter (which is only around 18 months now, compared to the 3 to 5 years it took just a short time ago).
|
|
2005/10/22, 10:56 PM
Another interesting point to make concerning the process of pasteurization is that Louis Pasteur himself de-bunked his own patented process. He stated that (paraphrasing), "It is not the germ, it is the terrain that is most important." I'll get the exact quote if need be.
This basically means that the bacteria present in milk is not the enemy, it's the body (terrain) that determines whether or not someone becomes sick. If a person's immune system is compromised, it will be nearly impossible to always eliminate the harmful bacteria present in milk. But let's keep in mind that not all bacteria are harmful. So the pasteurization process which destroys ALL bacteria can and has (as early as 1908) been condemned.
As far as I know, there has never been a reported case of e.coli when drinking raw milk, so let me know if you've read about any. As far as pasteurized....a single case affected over 16,000 people in chicago a couple years ago!
|
|
2005/10/23, 01:13 AM
Lord have mercy Nellyboy. Take a breath. One may be able to live the nutritionsl life you advocate but it's difficult if one doesn't live in Montanna. I'd love to get milk straight from a cow tit but they don't have them in the Bi Lo or Winn Dixie.
--------------
Sometimes life is like herding cats.
Charlie
|
|
2005/10/23, 01:20 AM
Keeping in form with the post, I'd like to lasso chickens and slaughter a few cows and pigs that I raised on my all natural ranch but hell it took me 2 years to get a building permit for parking lot improvements. I'd hate to think what the dam city would make me pay to keep a slaughterhouse in the garage. Angry neighbors shot my rooster so we can't even breed birds now. I do wish there was a practical way though.
--------------
Sometimes life is like herding cats.
Charlie
|
|
2005/10/23, 12:12 PM
Actually you know what's funny about that is that raw milk is illegal in Montana! ILLEGAL! Most areas should have an organic co-op, so this makes it much easier to aquire the necessary items to eat healthier.
|
|
2005/10/23, 01:08 PM
I agree on the co-op. Most cities like mine have sources that enable you to buy organic but it really isn't practical and certainly is more expensive. We could all learn and benefit from the old ways but the knowlege to do so has been lost.
My mom was raised in a small rural fishing village. She like you is convinved that being raised on the food from the fields, meat from the "back yard and fresh seafood is the best way to grow up and stay healthy but she says this hasn't been possible since the 60's. There was a common sense involved with that lifestyle that comes from centuries of experience. What was commom place then would be rocket science now.
Mom told me she neither drank nor smoked while carrying me and my brother. This was the early 50's. There were no government studies advocating the evils of smoking. In fact, smoking was touted as a heathy thing to do back then. I'm convinved that my immune system is rock solid because of the choices she made for me when I had no choice.
For the most part, my wife and I eat alot of seafood and family grown produce. Still have lot's of farmers in the family. There is still no way I or any of my farming relatives would drink un-pasturized milk.
I've lived long enough to see nearly every position regarding health and nutrition change with the studies of the day. That's inarguable. What is said to be the "healthiest" chioce today will be proven to kill you tomorrow...not to mention that most studies are financially or agenda driven. I never know who to believe so I have to rely on my trusty old mind to make the right choices. Living on a boat 3 or 4 days a week or a rural setting makes it easy to control most of the food we eat. Most folks don't have the luxery.
I won't take a prescription that hasn't been on the market for less than 5 years. Many physicians have the same rule for their families. Our choices will bite us in the ass some day. I've lived long enough to see that. Our choices determine if it's a healthy bite or a shark bite.
--------------
Sometimes life is like herding cats.
Charlie
|
